7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
No that could classify you as bisexual.
-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Homosexuality & Politics in the 21st Century
- Thread starter CSolarstorm
- Start date
No that could classify you as bisexual.
BJPalmer85
Well-Known Member
Exactly...From there though an interesting question comes to mind....
If you experience sexual urges or attraction to both sexes but choose only to act on those of the same sex and only the same sex, does that mean you choose to be gay? This is a legitimate question, and looking at it from the perspective of someone who considers being gay a choice ( i do not think this way, just thinking outside of what i believe), I can see where that would fit.
That brings up another question though...
Does what you are attracted to classify you as gay? or is it the attraction that you act on? For example, lets say that I am attracted to both men and women, but i choose only to be with men, is it me being with another man that would make me gay or is it what I am attracted to? What about the other way, i only decide to be with women, does that mean I am straight? This only applies to people that are attracted to both sexes...
But....arguing against myself....someone that is attracted to both sexes but only acts on one of those is obviously, on a subconscious level, more attracted to that sex, so therefore they are not choosing but rather doing what is natural...
I know this is a little spastic but i was trying to get everything down so that i didnt forget, if you need clarification just ask...
B
Last edited:
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
Then you would be attracted to both males and females. It would still mean you are bisexual. The thing is your sexual orrientation makes you gay, straight, bi. Not necaserily who you end up with. (You can lie to yourself etc.)
Psychic
Really and truly
Just need to put this out there, but the fact that you think being attracted to mature, consenting adults VS being attracted to children/animals/objects is somehow the same thing doesn't actually make it true. By definition, they are entirely different things in entirely different categories. You can't say otherwise and just assume you're automatically right and that everyone will have to agree, especially when every single scholarly source says you’re wrong. The definitions have already been established. You are wrong, plain and simple, and the fact that you never have any proof of your statements doesn’t help your argument.
Regardless, these are all outside one's control. You cannot suddenly decide to now be magically attracted to horses sexually. You can decide to get up and have sex with a horse, but you cannot suddenly make yourself be aroused by horses. Desire and action are not one and the same.
...Let me Google that for you.
This should be self-explanatory, but you don’t understand what sexuality is if you’re asking this kind of question. Sexuality isn’t defined by what you do – it’s defined purely by attraction. If a man gets raped by a man it does not somehow mean he is now homosexual, or even bisexual. That’s not what defines sexuality.
Not necessarily in the least. For instance, it’s seen as more socially acceptable to have sex with members of the opposite sex, so a bisexual individual may be more compelled to have sex with members of the opposite sex. Alternatively, maybe they just had more opportunities to have sex with one sex than the other. That isn’t an automatic indication that they lean more one way than the other.
~Psychic
Last edited:
BJPalmer85
Well-Known Member
Honestly the little animation was a bit much and kind of a ***** move, a link would have been just fine....but I ain't mad
To prove i know what sexuality is...
The bolded goes against the definition of homosexuality that you just provided since it states that it is note just attraction
also..
to get technical sexuality is defined as the quality of being sexual or possessing sex - so who you are attracted to plays no part, it is the fact that you are attracted to something that gives you sexuality
even if we look at human sexuality, which is defined as the capacity to have erotic experiences and responses - can also refer to the way someone is sexually attracted to another person - which is determined by their sexual orientation
even there is points out that it is not purely who you are attracted to that defines you as gay but also which sex you do it with...
Say i am attracted to men but i am married, have kids and only have sex with my wife...am I still gay?
Not to rude but the comment about rape has no place in this argument. Consensual sex should have been stated on my part, sorry, but i did not feel that it was necessary to make such a statement. Obviously if you cross into the realms of forced sex other questions can arise but I am talking purely about consensual adults
B
Last edited:
Sadib
Time Lord Victorious
Are you attracted to your wife? If you are, then you're bisexual. If not, you're just gay. This is really a stupid question, a really stupid question. Your sexual orientation is not determined by who you have sex with. I'm a virgin. Does that make me asexual?
While we are on the subject of rape: People say that rape is about power, but is that completely true? If a man rapes another man in prison, couldn't it also be because the rapist just wanted to have sex with another man? How could he even "get it going" if he wasn't attracted to that man? While the whole power thing is true, a man also has to somewhat gay to rape another man.
Psychic
Really and truly
Admittedly yes. It's a pet peeve of mine when people don't just use Google. My apologies for coming across rudely.
Apologies again - I was referring specifically to sexual orientation, which I assumed went without saying.
I don't really see how that changes anything in your example. There have been many cases of men who married heterosexually and had families, and turned out to be gay the whole time, sometimes even without their families knowing. Some have had homosexual sex on the side, some didn't, and some stayed married all their lives while others couldn't live the lie forever. As I understand it, there are also cultures that don't really care if individuals are homosexuals so long as they go on to marry heterosexually and have families. It doesn't change who you are.
It was merely an example, and I'm sorry if it came off as offensive. Obviously consent is the biggest factor, but my point applies to consensual sex as well.
To take a silly example, you have young women who will kiss one another for attention or due to peer pressure, sometimes (but no necessarily) while inebriated. This doesn't automatically make them bisexual, or even bi-curious. In some cases they may very well be, but it's not every case. Participants in a threesome also do not suddenly have their orientations altered - if all participants identify as straight and are limited to straight urges and desires, the two participants of the same sex do not suddenly have their orientation altered as a result of the encounter. Not all actors in homosexual pornographic films are actually attracted to the same sex, as another example. Or, simply put, you can experiment with a member of the same/other sex, but that doesn't mean your sexuality is now changed. I hope that's a little more clear.
~Psychic
Last edited:
As a homosexual myself, I define being gay as having both a sexual and romantic attraction to the same sex exclusively, and wanting to pursue a deeply romantic and mutually fulfilling relationship with said person of the same sex.
The latter being the most critical aspect of this definition as having sex with a dude or just experimenting on any level is not enough to constitute as 'gay'.
I'd also like to add that it's also a matter of identity -- meaning consciously aware of ones emotional desires and needs, and must be reflected consistently over time both in practice and personality.
The latter being the most critical aspect of this definition as having sex with a dude or just experimenting on any level is not enough to constitute as 'gay'.
I'd also like to add that it's also a matter of identity -- meaning consciously aware of ones emotional desires and needs, and must be reflected consistently over time both in practice and personality.
Last edited:
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
I had the idea to qualify it as 'predominantly same sex urges' rather than 'exclusively same sex urges', because honestly my parents raised me believing that people occassionally cross the aisle and then come back and identify as purely gay or straight again. Both of my parents had boyfriends when they were young. I'm not gay so I can't pretend to have any personal authority on the matter, but my best guess is that's the entire point of it, that it varies, and some people are exclusively gay or straight, and then some people explore the other side and then go back to identifying as gay or straight, and whether during that time they still identify as gay or straight or they say they've become something else for a short time, I don't think it really matters. The individual's own interpretation of the classifications and how they apply to them - is *often* what matters.
This passage on Bisexuality also kind of supports my understanding of it, but not completely:
Meaning, there's also a possibility they might not identify as bisexual.
This passage on Bisexuality also kind of supports my understanding of it, but not completely:
Meaning, there's also a possibility they might not identify as bisexual.
Last edited:
BJPalmer85
Well-Known Member
Like i said, I aint mad. I kind of guessed that it was a pet peeve
This is where the confusion comes, if the man is married and lets say for this example that he is entirely faithful and has had no sexual relations with another man but has a very strong sexual attraction to men, how can he be considered gay?
From all outwards appearance he is not gay and I would bet money that if he brought it up that he was people would have a very difficult time believing him.
My main argument: Your sexual orientation is not determined entirely by who/what you are attracted to, i cant understand how it could be (i am trying though)
good example and i get where you are coming from
Since we have discussed who you are attracted to determines orientation, what about pedophilia?
I am not referring to someone that has committed such an atrocity but instead to someone who recognizes what he is feeling and seeks help. There is an episode of the show Private Practice where this exact thing occurs.
Is that man still considered a pedophile even though he has not acted on the urges and instead has sought help and treatment?
This is a little OT but it is still in the realm of what you feel or are attracted to and I feel that there are some intelligent people in this thread that will be able to weigh in with some goon insight on this topic.
B
I agree with much of this, but I tend to take a more conservative approach to the definition, since I feel that any emotional (esp. sexual) attraction to the opposite sex (beyond familial) invalidates the term 'gay' in the strictest sense of the word.
But yea, it really depends on the individual. xD;
Last edited:
BJPalmer85
Well-Known Member
I like this.
Putting a definition on it or say it is this or that really isn't good and it comes to do each individual person. That sounds a much better way to approach it
B
True, but even among LGBT there is a certain hierarchy, so to speak, and I can't believe I'm actually saying this, roflmao.
Some gay men/women have never touched or shown an interest in the opposite sex their entire lives, we like to call them "gold star homos" -- as they set the standard of the most gay of gays.
While others like myself have been with women/men to only to help confirm their identities, and to discover after the fact that they want nothing to do with it, which would be a "silver star homo" -- being of slightly lesser gay quality than that of the gold variety having been with a man/woman at least once.
And bisexual men/women among certain homosexual circles are called just plain, "greedy." xDDD
So there is a kind of system of classification depending on who you're talking to and how much they know about gay culture and jargon.
Last edited:
BJPalmer85
Well-Known Member
Ok the "gold star homo" thing made me spit coffee out of my nose! That was some funny ****....
I have always wondered about how the gay community view people that classified themselves as bi, that is interesting. What about transsexual/transgender? Are they viewed or seen in a different light by the rest of the gay/lesbian community?
B
Lol, well it's true. xD
It's like the difference between a normal pokemon and a shiny one, so on this forum it's more appropriate to say, "shiny homo." LMAO!
As far as the transsexual/transgender goes, I can't say that I have met or been well acquainted with hardly any both personally and professionally, but I would imagine it would depend on whether or not they identified as gay or straight after their transformation -- as there are instances where a man who becomes a woman could easily identify themselves as a lesbian, and vise versa, and the other being if a man becomes a woman and then identifies as a straight woman even after first being a gay male, etc...
I just don't happen to know of any of the amusing nicknames they are called, or even if they have any. xD;;;
The rest of the LGBT community generally tends to accept being that we're such a small minority and we understand that certain people don't like to be put into catergories, but yea, depending on who you're talking to there is a system of sorts. xD
Last edited:
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
7 tyranitars
Well-Known Member
True. This could prove to be a turning point in history, or set the fight for mariage equility back for years.
CSolarstorm
New spicy version
XD You can't go wrong with the highest gay quality!
But that is very interesting. I've never heard of that hierarchy before, but it must add some very much needed perspective to the whole scene.
I imagine it must be hard to be conservative about LGBT ideas and values though, because there's probably a lot of pressure on this new establishment to keep changing to include this and that perspective from parts of the Western world who haven't been open to homosexuality as long as everyone else. There must be some dissenters who tend to reject the entire current order of things and use the terms in a way that makes them personally comfortable, which sounds like it would be frustrating to members of the LGBT community who already feel comfortable with the established order.