April O'Neil comes out as pansexual.

[sleeplessknight]

At least her actress does anyways. But I can see the character identifying as such as well. I can see her being able to fall in love with all genders... and certain purple bandanad turtles.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/mae-whitman-comes-out-pansexual-140740777.html

[Sumac]

Old joke, but I don't know what is so interesting about sex with kitchen utensils.

[TigerClaw]

At least her actress does anyways. But I can see the character identifying as such as well. I can see her being able to fall in love with all genders... and certain purple bandanad turtles.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/mae-whitman-comes-out-pansexual-140740777.html
I can totally see April being pansexual given how shes been hanging around mutants all the time.

[Andrew NDB]

"Pansexual" is really a strange thing. Since they're not bisexual (which they can't be, right? since whether we bring transgender people into the equation, we're supposed to look at them as one gender or the other, right?) the general definition seems to be "they're sexually attracted to/will f*** anything."

So... yeesh. Animals and small children, too? Where is the line, exactly?

[CyberCubed]

Here's the definition:

Pansexuality is sexual, romantic, or emotional attraction towards people regardless of their sex or gender identity. Pansexual people may refer to themselves as gender-blind, asserting that gender and sex are not determining factors in their romantic or sexual attraction to others. Wikipedia

I dunno, kinda sounds like the same thing as bisexual to me? Meaning attracted to both men and women?

[mrmaczaps]

Mae Whitman.

No one needs to click the link now. :tlol:

[IndigoErth]

I dunno, kinda sounds like the same thing as bisexual to me? Meaning attracted to both men and women?
Same I was just wondering. What's the difference then?

Unless they think bi people aren't "blind" enough...?

[neatoman]

"Pansexual" is really a strange thing. Since they're not bisexual (which they can't be, right? since whether we bring transgender people into the equation, we're supposed to look at them as one gender or the other, right?) the general definition seems to be "they're sexually attracted to/will f*** anything."

So... yeesh. Animals and small children, too? Where is the line, exactly?

Here's the definition:

I dunno, kinda sounds like the same thing as bisexual to me? Meaning attracted to both men and women?


Same I was just wondering. What's the difference then?

Unless they think bi people aren't "blind" enough...?


... How about this:

If you are a heterosexual male, you are attracted to female anatomical features (breasts, vagina, etc).
If you are a Homosexual male, you are attracted to male anatomical features (beard, penis, etc).
If you are a Bisexual male, you find both male and female features attractive.
If you are a pansexual, the features are neutral but you still have a sex drive and don't mind wheter your partner is male or female.


In practice there is no difference between a bisexual and a pansexual but the underlying psychology is different.

[CyberCubed]

Technically aren't bisexuals also only female? I've never heard of a male bisexual. If a man has sex with another man, he's gay for life. There's no going back.

[neatoman]

Technically aren't bisexuals also only female? I've never heard of a male bisexual. If a man has sex with another man, he's gay for life. There's no going back.

Are you talking about social perception here or is that something you really believe?

[CyberCubed]

I mean a man can sleep with both a woman and another man, but once he "goes gay" it's pretty obvious he's gay. Even if he dates another woman after. Then the bisexual aspect disappears and it becomes a gay man.

[Andrew NDB]

"Being pansexual myself, I wish I had such incredible characters like Amity and Luz in my life when I was growing up." - Mae Whitman.

But... why?

[The Deadman]

I mean a man can sleep with both a woman and another man, but once he "goes gay" it's pretty obvious he's gay. Even if he dates another woman after. Then the bisexual aspect disappears and it becomes a gay man.

Wait, what the f*ck? You honestly believe that if a man dates a woman after he's been with another man, he's still gay? UHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

You really are sheltered, jesus christ.

[neatoman]

"Being pansexual myself, I wish I had such incredible characters like Amity and Luz in my life when I was growing up." - Mae Whitman.

But... why?

In case anyone wants to know, neither of those characters are well written. The former completely changes personality after a few episodes, just so she can have a crush on the latter. The latter of the two has a really flimsy motivation for doing anything, though the show did eventually acknowledge that she does. The in general has this attitude of "we want this to happen, we're gonna make it happen wheter it makes sense or not". Eda, the witch Luz lives with is established to be a wanted criminal because she refuses to follow laws regarding magic specialisation, yet the show has no problem showing her walk around in public and several other characters just ignore the same laws without consequence.

The show can look nice and has decent voice acting but the character development and world building is nothing but contradictory garbage.

[Andrew NDB]

Wait, what the f*ck? You honestly believe that if a man dates a woman after he's been with another man, he's still gay?

He might be.

[sdp]

I think you guys are missing the bigger picture here, does this make Donnie x April canon now?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/RkscrVUvq-U/hqdefault.jpg

People always shrugged this scene off as being non-canon but I think this make sit canon. She wouldn't be the first either, the adult Ninja Turtles movie April is also pansexual (https://miscrave.com/articles/tmnt-xxx/)


https://uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/tmnt.jpg?w=650/ (https://miscrave.com/articles/tmnt-xxx/)

[Sumac]

Two minutes of being serious about retarded queer crap:

"Pansexual" is a meaningless term, since it mixes gender presentation and sexuality, which are not connected (i.e. tomboyish / butch woman is not necessarily Lesbian, effeminate man not necessarily Gay).

It means that you are attracted to people regardless of their sex and presentation, but the thing is, there is already a term for it "Bisexuality", which perfectly, and most importantly, without relying on stereotypes explains such attractions. Especially since nothing in "Bisexuality" specifically says anything about gender presentation.

Also, term itself, "Pansexual", hints that it ties to sexuality not a gender stereotypes. Thus it is inherently confusing in itself and contradicts its meaning.

Its basically another fictional term to confuse people and brainwash them into believing that queer stuff is real, when most of those terms and ideas are just obtuse and redundant terms, not based on reality, but on some "queer science experiments", which are as factual as studies about possible green people on Mars.

[Leo656]

Yeah, I'unno, to me "pansexual" just comes off as "Bisexual is old-fashioned and we need a newer, hipper label for it."

I mean maybe neatoman's onto something with the "underlying psychology" thing, but I'unno. To me it's still the same thing in practice. If you have sex with both chicks and dudes, the "why" isn't especially relevant. So I'm not sure why we need additional labels. Except for attention, of course.

I also agree with someone in the Comments section of that article: What would REALLY be "news" nowadays would be a person - especially a celebrity - "coming out" as Straight. Because THAT is something you just plain don't see or hear about anymore.
--------

Also, even though Cubed is just doing his usual sh*t-stirring gimmick, I did have to think about it for a minute, and y'know... just anecdotally, I am forced to admit that in my personal circle, most of the "bisexual" people I know are in fact women, whereas most of the guys who aren't straight tend to be "just Gay". I know a very small number of guys who would say they were bisexual (or "pansexual", I guess), but if you didn't know them and just met them for the first time, you'd just assume they were totally "gay" based on how they present themselves; you wouldn't know that they also liked girls unless you got into a conversation with them about it. I don't personally know any guys, I don't think, who are "quietly" bisexual, only "Flamboyant to the point where you'd assume they were Gay until proven otherwise." Whereas plenty of the girls I know who are bi don't exactly project it (although some do).

Very strange. I admit, this is entirely anecdotal, but it is something I realized the longer I thought about it.

I don't know. Cubed's assertation of "men can't be bisexual" is Obvious Bullsh*t, BUT, there's an asterisk next to it.

Men seem to adhere more strictly to labels than women do, so maybe that's part of it. Like they tend to see things in more black-or-white terms just in general, so perhaps it's simply that more men don't consider going both ways as an option and prefer the "simplicity" of either being one or the other.

Things are very confusing nowadays.

[mrmaczaps]

I think you guys are missing the bigger picture here, does this make Donnie x April canon now?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/RkscrVUvq-U/hqdefault.jpg

People always shrugged this scene off as being non-canon but I think this make sit canon. She wouldn't be the first either, the adult Ninja Turtles movie April is also pansexual (https://miscrave.com/articles/tmnt-xxx/)


https://uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/tmnt.jpg?w=650/ (https://miscrave.com/articles/tmnt-xxx/)

Proper term for this is bestiality...

[ABrown]

So I actually kind of agree with Cubed on this one. Girls are far more likely to go through experimental phases like in college, where they might date a girl. However, said girl isn't really gay. Just going through an experimental phase. Yet a guy is only gonna have sex with another man if he is definitively, unquestionably gay.

[Andrew NDB]

Yeah, and I've weighed in on this in other threads. While women seem able to "grow out" of lesbian stuff or at least compartmentalize it into light bisexual stuff (or like they'll say stuff like "I'm in a relationship with a man right now, but I'm still attracted to women" but you fast forward even 10-15 years, they never actually ended up dating any chicks), 9 times out of 10 for dudes once they go gay, it is a vortex of ass from which there is no return.

I honestly haven't ever heard of even 1 guy who ever went gay and then straight again. Never. I've heard of guys that went bi that went 100% gay later on, but that's about it.

[CyberCubed]

I think it's also because women can be attracted to other women even in a platonic sense, like you always see women say that other women are beautiful, attractive or pretty, and of course women get together to get their nails done, shop for clothing together, style their hair together at the hair salon...so they're with other women constantly doing things to make themselves look more attractive.

Men tend to not do that stuff. So for a man to *want* to sleep with another man or start finding men attractive, it's more likely they realize they're gay. They were just with women before because they assumed they had to be straight or that's what society told them to do, but then they got older and realized they liked men.

Also ALL women experiment with other women, if given the chance. If you tell two straight guys to kiss each other even as a prank/joke, a lot would refuse. But two women? They'll kiss each other no problem.

[Leo656]

One of my wife's friends on FB is apparently bisexual; he apparently prefers guys but still has sex with women often. So there's one.

Although that's an "internet person" and I generally only count people I know and/or have interacted with in Real Life when it comes to anecdotal evidence. BUT, it's an example, so there ya go.

[IndigoErth]

attracted...in a platonic sense
Cubed, hun, everyone can. That's called friendship.

Also ALL women experiment with other women, if given the chance.

No. We don't. Maybe some, but certainly not "all."

#NotAllWomenButYouPretendWeDon'tExistBecauseThatDo esn'tTurnYouOn


vortex of ass
:tlol:

[Vegita-San]

Two minutes of being serious about retarded queer crap:

"Pansexual" is a meaningless term

the real reason? People got used to bi-sexual, so it was no longer abnormal and people couldn't feel 'special' anymore. so, enter pan sexuality, or whatever lando is supposed to be in solo..

[Coola Yagami]

Proper term for this is bestiality...

Idk, the Turtles and other such fantasy fictional characters are kind of a gray area. The Turtles are technically green humans with shells. I'd only call it bestiality if April actually wanted to molest regular pet shop turtles.

[CyberCubed]

The Turtles don’t have a penis anyway, people mistake their tails in the Mirage comics for it and that’s why they axed them in all other media. It’s impossible for April and one of the Turtles to have sex. It doesn’t work that way.

[mrmaczaps]

The Turtles don’t have a penis anyway, people mistake their tails in the Mirage comics for it and that’s why they axed them in all other media. It’s impossible for April and one of the Turtles to have sex. It doesn’t work that way.

The fvck? Of course they have em. They're just not drawn cuz its a fvcking comic book & cartoons...

And yeah, its bestiality. They're animals mutated into humanoid form. She is human... in most versions.

[IndigoErth]

Oh they'd have 'em alright... but reptiles are just modestly convenient for family friendly media. :)


edit: If the TMNT wouldn't because they aren't drawn, then sorry April fans, but the same would apply because pants.

[CyberCubed]

They don’t have them because they’re Turtles, this isn’t the furry section of deviantart and tumblr. Fanart isn’t canon.

[IndigoErth]

Dear, dear Cubed... biology is as canon as you can get. :tlol:

[CyberCubed]

I’ve never seen a Turtle penis in real life and have no intention of ever looking it up.

[IndigoErth]

Don't worry, that's the sort of unseeable thing the internet forces on a person when the time is right.

The sort of thing people quickly try to scroll past, jump to the next page, hit the back button hard enough they end up five pages in their browser history's past... but it's too late, you can not reclaim the innocence you once had before seeing it.

Few go hunting for it. For most the internet simply says "it's time."







Tick... tick... tick...

[Papenbrook]

Congratulations. I know that coming out is a difficult process.

[Andrew NDB]

Congratulations. I know that coming out is a difficult process.

Who are you congratulating, exactly?

[Coola Yagami]

Honestly wouldn't count Donnie boning April as beastiality. He's about as human as she is. Ironically, Raph boning Mona Lisa or Alopex would also be beastiality since Raph is neither a fox or a space salamander, but no one seems to care cause 'theyre both freaks, let the freaks ****'. That an almost racist xenophobic way of looking at things if all of these fictional characters actually existed.

People that can't tell the difference between a talking humanoid turtle and normal pet shop turtle are a certain kind of something. It's like the same people that would bone Lola Bunny would not also want to **** real rabbits. At least not all of them.

[Sumac]

Er...there is still a major difference between humans and humanoid animals.

Even if for all intents and purpose Turtles have more common with humans than with turtles, they still are humanoid turtles, i.e. not humans. Which is a breaking point for majority of people, since most people are attracted and want to have sex with only with their own species. Which is perfectly normal, I must add.

Ironically, Raph boning Mona Lisa or Alopex would also be beastiality since Raph is neither a fox or a space salamander, but no one seems to care cause 'theyre both freaks, let the freaks ****'. That an almost racist xenophobic way of looking at things if all of these fictional characters actually existed.
It is neither "racist" or "xenophobic" to look at things this way: mutants are not a race and there is a difference between being wary of people from different cultures and creatures, who are not humans. And some of them don't even have the same organs as humans.

If mutants want to bone each other, even if its kind of fruitless, fine by me. If they want to bone humans - only with human consent, but they should no be surprised that some people might find it icky.

Also, consider than in real world those mutants won't look so cuddly or humanized-pretty as in comic books.

[IMJ]

Only on the Technodrome forums could a thread like this be made, let alone last several pages..... :lol:

Congratulations. I know that coming out is a difficult process.

Who are you congratulating, exactly?

Actually yeah, who are you congratulating exactly?

[Sumac]

I think she is projecting.

[Leo656]

It's like the same people that would bone Lola Bunny would not also want to **** real rabbits. At least not all of them.

For one thing, real rabbits can't dunk a basketball, or rock a crop top and booty shorts. At least not very well.

[Coola Yagami]

Also, consider than in real world those mutants won't look so cuddly or humanized-pretty as in comic books.

I'm thinking more of a Who Framed Roger Rabbit deal when they're be cartoon characters, being just as cuddly as they are in the cartoons/comics.

To be honest in the real world, if such a thing were possible, the Turtles would look more like Tokka than anything else. If you notice, most of other mutant characters like Leatherhead or so mostly look like oversized animals standing upright. Not even the BayTurtles faces look like what we would consider turtle faces. Even the Mirage Turtles look 'bad-ass' and whatever rather than hideous creatures from hell.

Like literally, remove the shells from any version of the turtles and they just look like weird green guys. Maybe lizards, idk, but def not turtles. But Tokka though, he'd still look like a turtle missing his shell.

[Andrew NDB]

Actually yeah, who are you congratulating exactly?

I think she is projecting.

Or the bot is starting to glitch.

[IMJ]

Or the bot is starting to glitch.

If she's hot, I want to watch or help. But if she's standard TMNT fare, then no thanks. :o

[mrmaczaps]

Honestly wouldn't count Donnie boning April as beastiality. He's about as human as she is. Ironically, Raph boning Mona Lisa or Alopex would also be beastiality since Raph is neither a fox or a space salamander, but no one seems to care cause 'theyre both freaks, let the freaks ****'. That an almost racist xenophobic way of looking at things if all of these fictional characters actually existed.

People that can't tell the difference between a talking humanoid turtle and normal pet shop turtle are a certain kind of something. It's like the same people that would bone Lola Bunny would not also want to **** real rabbits. At least not all of them.

I used to have a dog that would hump my cat. Thats two animals. No one cares.

Donnie shagging April would likely be quite painful for her, if not for him. The point being Donnie is still more turtle than he is human. Jamming his likely 2.5/3 foot staff into any of April's ports of entry.... :teek:

[Andrew NDB]

The point being Donnie is still more turtle than he is human.

Which in universes like the source material's is to say... not at all human. Not even a little bit.

[Coola Yagami]

I used to have a dog that would hump my cat. Thats two animals. No one cares.

Donnie shagging April would likely be quite painful for her, if not for him. The point being Donnie is still more turtle than he is human. Jamming his likely 2.5/3 foot staff into any of April's ports of entry.... :teek:

I mean, there's also the possibility Don and the gang actually have more human-like junk. I mean they got human like limbs don't they? They even have somewhat regular fingers and lost their flipper/claws thing real turtles have.

Like that is the literally the argument everything always brings up whenever Don and April are brought up. Yet somehow everyone assumes Mona Lisa/Alopex aren't expected to have the same problem April will? Yeah right.

[Andrew NDB]

I mean, there's also the possibility Don and the gang actually have more human-like junk. I mean they got human like limbs don't they? They even have somewhat regular fingers and lost their flipper/claws thing real turtles have.

Like that is the literally the argument everything always brings up whenever Don and April are brought up. Yet somehow everyone assumes Mona Lisa/Alopex aren't expected to have the same problem April will? Yeah right.

But is that "more human" or just "evolved turtle"?

[newfan]

But is that "more human" or just "evolved turtle"?

Well, in two versions they are supposed to be half human (and reincarnated from human in IDW?), but I've never seen what difference that makes to them.

Depends how you see them. You could do a poll, course you can imagine the conversation in the thread.... pretty much what has become of this one seen as there can only be so much chat about a person's sexuality.

[Andrew NDB]

Well, in two versions they are supposed to be half human (and reincarnated from human in IDW?), but I've never seen what difference that makes to them.

Depends how you see them. You could do a poll, course you can imagine the conversation in the thread.... pretty much what has become of this one seen as there can only be so much chat about Mae Whitman's sexuality.

A poll is meaningless. It would just come down to a popularity contest of who likes Fred Wolf over whatever.

The source material (Mirage), the original film trilogy, 4Kids... 0 human DNA in there. None. If they appear "human-like" it is incidental and just a byproduct of the mutation/hyper-evolution courtesy of the ooze. Period.

[newfan]

A poll is meaningless. It would just come down to a popularity contest of who likes Fred Wolf over whatever.

The source material (Mirage), the original film trilogy, 4Kids... 0 human DNA in there. None. If they appear "human-like" it is incidental and just a byproduct of the mutation/hyper-evolution courtesy of the ooze. Period.

Oh that suggestion was meant for how people see them generally/over all (going on some of the convo) rather than which background people like. Still, not really a much needed poll with the conversation coming up often anyway.

[Coola Yagami]

But is that "more human" or just "evolved turtle"?

Whatever makes April and Alopex grin widely, I suppose.

[IndigoErth]

:lol: Oh my.

[Sumac]

Whatever makes April and Alopex grin widely, I suppose.
Gooooooooooood one! :tcool:

[sdp]

most people here didn't even watch the show or liked it but they have to be sure to make their opinions be known. And yet my image was "so wrong" mods had to delete it.

[The Deadman]

They don’t have them because they’re Turtles, this isn’t the furry section of deviantart and tumblr. Fanart isn’t canon.

Are you trying to say that turtles dont have penises?

[mrmaczaps]

I mean, there's also the possibility Don and the gang actually have more human-like junk. I mean they got human like limbs don't they? They even have somewhat regular fingers and lost their flipper/claws thing real turtles have.

Like that is the literally the argument everything always brings up whenever Don and April are brought up. Yet somehow everyone assumes Mona Lisa/Alopex aren't expected to have the same problem April will? Yeah right.

Sure, but I'm not giving a sh!t about a mutant & another mutant hooking up. I'd actually prefer to never hear ever again in any form the relationship stuff about ninja mutants of any species... or really, any comic book character. Leave it to the readers that want to speculate to do so and then everyone can be happy because onces it "cannon", its bound to piss off one fraction or the other...

[Sumac]

Sure, but I'm not giving a sh!t about a mutant & another mutant hooking up. I'd actually prefer to never hear ever again in any form the relationship stuff about ninja mutants of any species... or really, any comic book character. Leave it to the readers that want to speculate to do so and then everyone can be happy because onces it "cannon", its bound to piss off one fraction or the other...
Agreed.
Leave it in the background or completely out of the story.