new member questions

[quote author=blak9 link=board=meetgreet;num=1034545281;start=0#12 date=10/17/02 at 09:20:10]Maybe its a regional thing. Where I'm from (the South) if you actively seek out someone of the same sex for any type of sexual relationship, then you are homosexual.[/quote]

Don't feel bad. I'm not calling you narrow-minded; you, after all, are a social product of the environment in which you live, and if your learned meanings of homosexuality derive from involving yourself in those type of experiences, so be it.

Being that guy who's had more than enough talks on what it's like to be not-so-straight, the biggest barrier to overcome is that limited, taught knowledge. Society pigeonholes sexuality into poles: straight OR gay, no middles, no real opportunities. If you're not the standardized conception of straight (whether man or woman), you're gay. End of story. And that's really not the case -- since I'm one of MANY who aren't to be classified in such a black-and-white manner.

You're educating yourself. That's a hell of a lot more than I can say for most narrow-minded people out there.

meathose10: If a guy's eager enough I'll let him throat me. Truth be told i think men are better at suckjobs - they're athletic about it or something , and their esophaguses are bigger. But I like it from a woman better, if she can get her mouth around me. I like to reach down and play with her tits , stroke her hair and so on. Men just sort of tackle it like sports.

cobeardad: I think that, as usual, DMW has the right idea. Having a homosexual (adjective) expereince does not make a person a homosexual (noun). Homosexulaity is much broader than anatomical acts. It includes being predominantly physically and emotionally attracted to the same sex. (I won't say same gender, because that really opens up a can of worms.) One can even be a homosexual without having sex, simply by being predominantly attracted to..., etc.

Now the difference between homosexual and gay, that's another story. Gay is culturally defined, but let's not go there.

jccs: The dictionary definition of a homosexual is somebody who is attracted to and has sexual relationships with members of the same sex,which I don't think many people would argue with.But as I think,most people know there are very few people who have never ever been attracted to a person of the same sex.So you have to say that by that definition most people are homosexuals in thought if not in deed.
It still doesnt work if you redefine a homosexual as someone who exclusivly has sex with people of the same sex,because thereare lots of people who would say that thay are homosexual who have had sex with people of the opposite sex.
So I really don't know the answer to your question I just try to avoid labling people.

norseman: I've gotten very tired of a binary world. Why must it be on or off, black or white, gay or hetero ? In a world in search of labels, the only one I could be comfortable with is "bi"-sexual. If one must have a label for one's sexualtity, this is the only one that encompasses the shades of gray. I think sexuality is, and should be a very fluid thing (no, not necessarily THAT kind of fluid...). For example: when an old friend and I were hanging out sitting in and around my hot tub one evening, just casually talking about whatever and he reached over and sucked down my dick, saying "I've dreamed about this for a long time". I was amazed, flattered and aroused. Was I "gay"? for that moment in time. HELL YES.(And yes, I did reciprocate. Seemed only fair.) Now, I'm not ready to go out and find some guy and start choosing drapes.

For me, I also find that the men/women sexual experiences are incredibly different. I've never "made love" with a guy. I've "had sex" (intense sex) with guys. I've "made love" with a woman. Each type of experience has left me enormously satisfied, but the experiences for me are very different.

I believe they'd be a lot less hatred (tho perhaps a lot more confusion...) if we were all a lot more open to the realm of possibilities in our sexualities.

Norseman

drrionelli: If I may, I'd like to suggest to blak9 that, although I can see where your suggestion that a person's homosexual experience would make him a homosexual, that is not, for better or worse, the case. Here's why:

Consider that if you were to attend a church service at a place of worship other than your own. Doing so would not, de facto, make you an adherent to that faith.
Surely, Catholics may attend Mormon services, can they not? Likewise, if a person (say, a politician, for example) were to navigate a vehicle around a race track (for, let's say, publicity purposes) that would not make him a race-car driver, in the connoted sense.

As per yourself, I trust that you will not consider this response to be baiting, for, indeed, it is not. Your input here has always been edifying (to me, anyway), and instrumental in many thought-provoking threads. I respect your thinking.

balls: I think having a homosexual experience is more comparable to getting your ass baptized Mormon or Catholic. Just attending service is comparable to watching The Crying Game, listening to Disco, or occasionally saying, “Fabulous!”

queenie: [quote author=norseman link=board=meetgreet;num=1034545281;start=15#19 date=12/10/02 at 07:04:57]I've gotten very tired of a binary world. *Why must it be on or off, black or white, gay or hetero ? *In a world in search of labels, the only one I could be comfortable with is "bi"-sexual. *[/quote] Perhaps the most accurate label is "tri-sexual" ... if it is sexual, most people will try it.... ;)

It's a damn shame, really. I've only met a handful of people who really understood the bisexual thing, and even then, they themselves proclaim to be bi. One of those, "takes one to know one" ordeals. But, in all seriousness, I'm not a big fan of the labels anyway. In my personal opinion, I think it's really silly to talk about sexuality in any sort of "label" way beyond those implied definitions. Straight, bi, or gay insofar as you want to make it known who you like to sleep with, date, etc., and that's fine, but beyond that, it's a waste.

Me... I've done some 180s these past few years. Pretty straight until I went to college, experimented with men, got some pussy too... dated a bit, had my fun. Dated a guy. And now, I'm single and pretty much interested in -- sad to say -- myself. Too busy to stay in a relationship and enjoying the single life. I can fnd men and women attractive in their own ways, but "bisexual" doesn't exactly explain all these nuances.

kyle: I agree with Dee. *The terms just don't do it for me. *So when I mention my boyfriend to people for the first time and they ask, "Are you gay?" I simply reply, "For all intents and purposes, at this time, yes."

Funny how no one ever asked if I was straight when I dated girls.

I find it strange that when I say something about my boyfriend people ask, "Oh, are you gay?" I would think the mention of a boyfriend would make that point obvious. So now my stock answer is, "No; I have a boyfriend for the sake of appearance!" ;D

Mighty_Joe: That's a great answer! Reminds me of the time a so-called "friend" asked me if I was "Queer"? I replied, "no, I don't date girls".