We're Human

[...]

.

Edited May 16, 2010 by AZSquid

[Nephylim]

I would never ever ever turn down sex or a relationship with someone purely because of their sex... or even their sexual preference. I mean at that time their preference was me so what's the big deal?

 

 

I agree wholly... we are all human and as I keep saying and you must be bored of by now... love comes so seldom don't turn it down because of the way it's packaged

[...]

.

Edited May 16, 2010 by AZSquid

[Skyline]

While I see what your getting at to a sense, I dont entirely agree with the logic and reasoning you used to get there. What you said is akin to saying you're lying to yourself if you say you dont like grapefruit, only oranges, because from certain distances and in certain scenarios they look different and may be mistaken for each other.

 

People are largely similar, and there is much give and take between genders. Common social standards are what are usually the defining factor for what is discinctly male or female (ala long head hair and zero body hair being female, short head hair and hairy being male), but of course, like any gradient, there is cross over. Some people may align with their gender physically, and some may not. What it comes down to is personal preference. Someone who is male, might possess traits which another male finds attractive, and this is just where physiology, and preferences might intersect.

 

However, I do agree with you that there are many more people whom hold some kind of physical and emotional attraction to people of their own sex (ie. are bisexual to some degree) than most would have you believe. The desire to fit into the mold created by previous and present generations of social normality is a much stronger force than the one to be true to yourself for most. Unless ignoring that part of yourself is ignoring what the individual considers a substantial part of themself (which could mean anything, as I said, its what the individual considers substantial, what is substantial to some, might not be to others) most will live that part of their life as it fits the mold. What this also means however, is that there are people who simply are not attracted to people of the opposite sex, just as there are those who are not attracted to people of their own. Some people like ONLY oranges, some ONLY grapefruit. Most PREFER one, but will try both at some point in their life.

 

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder as they say, but whether or not you communicate those feelings of beauty and lust and such is a product of far more environmental factors.

 

So I think anyways

[Skylights]

You're over-simplifying it. Beauty is separate from sexual attraction. You can find someone/something beautiful without wanting to (to put it bluntly) f**k it. Many factors contribute to sexual attraction to the opposite sex. It isn't a matter of choice.

 

Let's face it, no guy can say he doesn't enjoy his own so anyone who claims to be straight is simply a liar & is in denia

 

C'mon. Really? This is like saying...well you enjoy your green bike a lot so if you say you don't like every other green bike because it just doesn't appeal to you and prefer the black bikes instead...you are a liar and in denial. People KNOW what they like. Frankly, a person likes their genitals because it gives them pleasure and whatever gender's genitals appeal to them is based on many factors. One of them being what holes they'd like filled or would like to fill. Sure there may be suppressed desires or very small subconscious gestures a person has in response to the same-sex but if it isn't strong enough to make an impact it really doesn't matter. People ARE straight. This is proven. There ARE males who have no sexual attraction whatsoever to other males. same for females. Similarly there ARE males who have reactions to both males or females. The levels vary. In the end it comes down to how individuals identify themselves and that is everyone's own prerogative.

 

You cannot possibly be saying that everyone is Gay. If you are, I suggest you read something like a study or just look around you.

 

I'm sorry if this has come across as vehement, I've just been annoyed with this particular argument as of late. I frankly, do no like sexual labels but i'm not saying that everyone should stop doing so. I personally don't want to label myself. I too agree with Nephy, love to ME is good in whatever form it comes in but I can be honest with myself. I mainly like guys. The attraction to women is there too but to a degree. I think this goes for everyone. But for some this degree may be too small to make a difference.

 

In the end, we ARE human. But love and sex, while love and sex together is wonderful, the two also exist by themselves. You can love a person you don't want to have sex with and you can have sex with a person you don't love. Usually when you can both love and be sexually attracted to an individual, the money lies there

 

 

[...]

.

Edited May 16, 2010 by AZSquid

[Nephylim]

I'm glad you came out of the posting closet and hope to see you around more now you're out

 

 

[Skyline]

I really don't care for labels either, they lead to stereotyping & prevent people from getting to know the real person.

What I'm seeing is we actually agree with each other but are placing more stress on certain aspects of what I apparently should have worded a little differently.

I had only ever made similar statements like that to two people before in my life. One was a guy in a motel room in Redmond, CA. who had admitted he was Bi... the other was a in my car after growing frustrated with my nephew who was repeatedly calling everyone Gay & expressing his distaste for them... It's what he learned from his Father. So, I told him he was a victim of society & has been taught to feel that way... I related some of what I posted here & noted that I think it was L. Ron Hubbard in Dyanetics (though I'm not positive because I don't have a current copy) who stated children of Cannibals will grow up to be Cannibals, just to try to get him to think. Because he certainly wasn't thinking at the time.

I was trying to illustrate that these people were capable of being attracted to the other person because they were initially... one of them in Hawaii, related a story how he was on the beach in Waikiki & came across this hot babe, they proceeded into a heavy make out session on a bench until he, as he put it "reached down & grabbed a handful".

So, by looking around is one of the ways I came to that conclusion & I have read a few studies but have never placed complete faith in them because as everyone is aware tomorrow another study will be published that'll contradict the ones before it. The only constant is change.

 

Of course, this is my opinion... there was a time I'd frequently begin with "I think" or "In my opinion" until a teacher marked my paper off because of it... she told me "you don't have to say that because everyone knows whatever you say is your opinion". I don't think she had ever attended an AA meeting

 

As far as not liking one thing or the other I've found often times if things are approached with an open mind & given time I learn to appreciate things I once didn't care for... try living in Texas... you'll learn to like Country Music or you'll go nuts

 

Anyway thanks for the input I do appreciate it & agree with a lot of what you all are saying... this post was more somewhat of a public acknowledgement on my part because I've never done that before... I had always just kinda remained quiet when people discussed things like this & tried to change the subject or I'd just leave.

 

 

Well I assumed as much, but that still doesnt clarify what you meant.

 

Were you saying that indeed, you dont believe there is such a thing as straight? Because by that admission there also is no such thing as gay either

 

Or were you saying, that more people are bisexual, then they let on? Which is something I can agree with. The bit you posted about the children of cannibals will be cannibals leads me to believe that you were trying to convey this idea, versus the idea that single sex attraction is a nonexistent phenomenon. If this is the case I'd suggest re-wording you initial post, because it seems apparent it doesnt accurately reflect your ideas on the matter

 

Edit: I guess I should add, that just because the case of those two people you talked to proved that someone might be more into guys then they let on, certainly doesnt prove that the entirety of mankind is that way

Edited May 13, 2010 by Skyline

[Skylights]

Lol, Mods, I suggest a move to the soapbox for this one

[Camilo]

Lol, Mods, I suggest a move to the soapbox for this one

 

I'm getting a boner.......

 

 

There, I dumbed it down, no need to move it now

[Graeme]

Lol, Mods, I suggest a move to the soapbox for this one

If it becomes overly heated, we may move it, but there is nothing wrong with having discussions like this in The Lounge Please don't think that The Soapbox is the only place for debates. If the subject is a hot-button issue (eg. politics, abortion, religion, Kylie Minogue) then it's appropriate for The Soapbox. If it's just an interesting topic that people probably won't get hot-under-the-collar about, then it's fine to stay here.

[jon-jon]

Well I assumed as much, but that still doesnt clarify what you meant.

 

Were you saying that indeed, you dont believe there is such a thing as straight? Because by that admission there also is no such thing as gay either

 

Or were you saying, that more people are bisexual, then they let on? Which is something I can agree with. The bit you posted about the children of cannibals will be cannibals leads me to believe that you were trying to convey this idea, versus the idea that single sex attraction is a nonexistent phenomenon. If this is the case I'd suggest re-wording you initial post, because it seems apparent it doesnt accurately reflect your ideas on the matter

 

Edit: I guess I should add, that just because the case of those two people you talked to proved that someone might be more into guys then they let on, certainly doesnt prove that the entirety of mankind is that way

 

I've always pictured it as a continum on a scale from 1 to 100, with one being straight and 100 being gay. People fall all along the scale, some being totally straight, some being totally gay and some being a little of one or the other. Wherever you fall on the scale you are still human and still sexual. It is just a matter of degree. Either way, I don't think it matters at all as long as you are true to your self, have fun and play safe.

[Skyline]

I've always pictured it as a continum on a scale from 1 to 100, with one being straight and 100 being gay. People fall all along the scale, some being totally straight, some being totally gay and some being a little of one or the other. Wherever you fall on the scale you are still human and still sexual. It is just a matter of degree. Either way, I don't think it matters at all as long as you are true to your self, have fun and play safe.

 

Yup, this is generally what I was getting at.

[Mark Arbour]

I've always pictured it as a continum on a scale from 1 to 100, with one being straight and 100 being gay. People fall all along the scale, some being totally straight, some being totally gay and some being a little of one or the other. Wherever you fall on the scale you are still human and still sexual. It is just a matter of degree. Either way, I don't think it matters at all as long as you are true to your self, have fun and play safe.

 

I read an interesting article about "What Men Really Fantasize About." It was probably in one of the more esteemed journals, like Cosmo or Men's Health. In the top 10 fantasies, one of them was having a sexual experience with another guy. Reading the finer print (such as it was), I found that this "experience" was basically having another guy blow him. So does that make most guys bisexual? I'm not sure that having a fantasy about having another guy blow you is enough to move you into the bisexual category. I think I'll go read The National Enquirer now.

[jon-jon]

I read an interesting article about "What Men Really Fantasize About." It was probably in one of the more esteemed journals, like Cosmo or Men's Health. In the top 10 fantasies, one of them was having a sexual experience with another guy. Reading the finer print (such as it was), I found that this "experience" was basically having another guy blow him. So does that make most guys bisexual? I'm not sure that having a fantasy about having another guy blow you is enough to move you into the bisexual category. I think I'll go read The National Enquirer now.

 

No. It probably puts him in the 5-10 range at the straight end of the spectrum. He likes women but he likes his fantasies too! Did they say anything about their fantasies about two women together? That always seems to come "up" when guys fantasize! Where would that put them on the scale?

[Mark Arbour]

No. It probably puts him in the 5-10 range at the straight end of the spectrum. He likes women but he likes his fantasies too! Did they say anything about their fantasies about two women together? That always seems to come "up" when guys fantasize! Where would that put them on the scale?

 

I think wanting to be with two women at once is worth at least negative 5-10 points on the "Gay Scale, so that wipes away the fantasy about having another guy suck his dick.

[...]

.

Edited May 16, 2010 by AZSquid

[*HJ*]

I would never ever ever turn down sex or a relationship with someone purely because of their sex... or even their sexual preference. I mean at that time their preference was me so what's the big deal?

 

 

I agree wholly... we are all human and as I keep saying and you must be bored of by now... love comes so seldom don't turn it down because of the way it's packaged

 

Couldn't have said it better myself Nephy.