Savage Love Podcast
Check out the all new Savage Lovecast site!
Got a question for Dan Savage?
Call the Savage Love Podcast at 206-201-2720
or email Dan at mail@savagelove.net.
Savage Love Archives
-
May 15
Shorties -
May 8
Reading Comprehension Fail -
May 1
Move On -
Apr 24
No Problem -
Apr 17
Dick Holes
More from Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Need to Be Stoned to Share
-
SL Letter of the Day: Seconded
-
SL Letter of the Day: Not A Prude... And Not Just Not That...
-
Great Moments In GOP Outreach to Women
-
Usually When I'm Sent a Photoshopped Image of a Gun Pointed At Me...
Books by Dan Savage
American Savage
It Gets Better: Coming Out, Overcoming Bullying, and Creating a Life Worth Living
The Commitment: Love, Sex, Marriage, and My Family
Things I've Learned from Women Who've Dumped Me
Skipping Towards Gomorrah
The Kid: What Happened After My Boyfriend and I Decided to Go Get Pregnant
Savage Links
- Babeland
- Fleshbot
- Good Vibrations
- Joe Newton/Savage Illustrations
- Planned Parenthood
- Spreading Santorum
- Planned Parenthood's Teen Wire
- Kinsey Confidential
- Carnal Nation
- Tiny Nibbles
Want a Second Opinion?
Contact Dan Savage
Savage on YouTube
Loading...
Secrets and Lies
February 8, 2012
+ Enlarge this Image
Joe Newton
I'm a 21-year-old gay male. My friend "Marcelo" is friends with "Chad." Everyone who meets Chad assumes he's gay. Never had a girlfriend, a dance major, dyes his hair blond/green/purple, got up at 2 a.m. to watch Kate marry William—I could go on. Over four years at college, this situation has gone from funny to sad as we realize he may never come out and could pull a Marcus Bachmann and live a miserable life with a miserable wife. Last night, Marcelo was on Grindr and got a message from a guy who turned out to be Chad! Chad sent a face pic, Marcelo sent a faceless one back, they chatted. It turns out that Chad is experienced enough to know his homosex likes and dislikes and carry on a detailed conversation about them with a guy on Grindr. Should we say something to Chad? Would letting him know he's been outed be the best course of action? Should we have a gayvention?
Closet Case Confusion
Chad hasn't "been outed," CCC, Chad outed himself.
Before Al Gore invented the internet and ruined everything for everyone forever, a college-age closet case had to work up the nerve to visit the campus gay bar if he wanted some dick. (Or visit the cruisey bathroom in the undergraduate library, but let's leave that one alone for now.) The closet case knew he was running a risk—even at the gay bar three towns over—but it was the only way to get some dick. So the pre-Grindr college-age closet case would slip into a gay bar and, after pounding shots in a wildly successful effort to self-medicate against his inhibitions, wind up shirtless on the dance floor making out with some random dude.
There was a code of conduct for friends of closet cases when I was in college—which was, I'm sorry to say, just a couple of years before Grindr came along (cough, cough)—and a section that dealt with dance-floor make-out sessions: If you saw a guy who told you he was straight in class on Friday morning making out with some random dude on the dance floor of the campus gay bar on Friday night (or in the gay bar three towns over), you had a right—no, you had a responsibility—to tap him on the shoulder, smile, and say, "Welcome out, dude."
And if you had engaged in a little subterfuge—if you, say, ducked behind a post when you saw the closet case come in so he wouldn't spot you and flee the gay bar pre–shots/shirtless-make-out-session—that was an understandable impulse and forgivable sin.
What Chad is doing on Grindr—sending out face pics, chatting about his homosex preferences—is the Grindr-era equivalent of making out with a random dude on the dance floor of a campus gay bar. What Marcelo did was the Grindr-era equivalent of ducking behind a post. And now Marcelo has a right—no, a responsibility—to tap Chad on the shoulder and, without any sense of malice or triumph, say, "Welcome out, Chad."
I'm an 18-year-old male who is weird in the way of a bit of crossdressing and pegging. My girlfriend endorses these interests, and I love her for that. Recently, a hot 22-year-old gay guy told me he was interested. I tried to tell him I was in a relationship, but we kissed. It sucked ass. His stubble hurt, he used too much tongue, and I got nothing out of it. Do I tell my girlfriend? I worry that telling will make her worry, and the worry will cause distrust, and that distrust will ruin a great three-year run.
Now Over Transient Bisexual Interests
First, after reading your letter, NOTBI, I was left wondering what would've gone down (you perhaps?) if the gay dude you made out with—after you tried so very, very hard to tell him you were in a relationship—didn't have a rough beard and use too much tongue.
Second, a girlfriend who endorses your interest in crossdressing and pegging is a girlfriend who might have endorsed your interest in a boy-on-boy make-out session. (Particularly if she could watch.) If you'd had the decency to ask for her permission, NOTBI, you wouldn't now be in the position of having to ask for her forgiveness.
Third, I think you should discuss this with your girlfriend, but I don't think you must. You're 18, you're not married, you (briefly) kissed a boy, and you didn't like it. If you think coming clean would destroy your relationship and you're sure it's never going to happen again, stuff this one up your memory hole.
Fourth, if you do talk with your girlfriend, NOTBI, you might not wanna emphasize the beard/tongue details. Not unless you want your girlfriend wondering the same thing I did after reading your letter: Maybe if it had been a different guy, with a different tongue, a lot more than his tongue would've wound up in your mouth.
I (middle-aged, married, straight guy) recently attended a boring business conference where I ran into an old friend (middle-aged, married, straight guy). He came to my room for a moment, noticed a camera on a small tripod on the desk, and asked what I was shooting. Emboldened by a few beers, I told him about my hotel room routine: shoot myself naked and masturbating then upload pics to an amateur exhibitionist website. Since I had shared my little secret, he shared his: He gets naked in hotel rooms and masturbates while spanking himself with his belt. You can see where this is going. I whacked his ass while he took photos of me. There was no sucking or fucking—no physical contact at all—but his Catholic guilt came out afterward, and he started going on about how he had just had gay sex and cheated on his wife. To me, it was masturbation with a few toys (camera, belt, and, okay, person). So here's the question: Did we have gay sex and cheat on our wives? Or was this just a wank with a few toys?
Spank And Wank
Two guys beating off in a hotel room? Sounds pretty gay to me. I mean, if a woman offered to help me out with my solo hotel room routine—mostly blogging and watching MSNBC, I'm sad to report—I'd take a pass, as that scene would be entirely too straight for me to get aroused.
Now, it's possible that your enjoyment of exhibitionism is so pure that the gender of the person or persons involved is irrelevant. That's not the case with my kinks, SAW, nor does it appear to be the case with your new spank buddy. And considering your friend's kink (punishment) and his faith (Catholic), I'm thinkin' the odds that your buddy has a few forbidden desires—perhaps gay ones—that led to his erotic obsession with being punished seem... oh, I dunno... kinda high. It may not have been gay for you, but it was gay for him.
As for whether what went down in that hotel room constitutes cheating, SAW, show your wife the pictures and ask her.
CONFIDENTIAL TO KOMEN: Nice to see that Karen Handel's out, but you need to get rid of Nancy Brinker, too. And to my readers: Planned Parenthood is under relentless political attack, and even a small, symbolic donation makes a difference: tinyurl.com/ppsavlove.
Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.
@fakedansavage on Twitter
Share via
1
Great article Dan! Peeps, PP is under attack because women's autonomy is being questioned by crazy men. Kindly vocally, proudly & loudly support a woman's right to her own body any and everywhere - paper, online, to friends and fam. Thanks :)
2
Don't agree on the first letter. The Internet isn't a bar. You don't expect as much anonymity in a bar as on the Internet. It's a bad analogy.
3
@2 people who expect anonymity from the Internet shouldn't sent out face pics. Duh.
Re SAW, if he wants to be unrecognizable on the internet, I guess beating the photographer while he takes the photos is a good way to achieve that!
Re SAW, if he wants to be unrecognizable on the internet, I guess beating the photographer while he takes the photos is a good way to achieve that!
4
@1, While Nancy Brinker might appear to be a transvestite, I have been told she is, in fact, a woman. PP is not being attacked by crazy MEN but by crazy men and women.
9
I wanna know if Chad is doing anything that constitutes actively trying to pretend that he is straight. From the description, it sounds like the answer is no, he isn't trying to be anything except be Chad. In that case, shut up and mind your own business. Maybe he hasn't brought up the subject of anything sex- or orientation-related in your presence simply because you aren't a candidate participant.
11
In re CCC: Dan, you could mention the background of the old gay etiquette. When you tapped him on the shoulder, you were more revealing that YOU were at the gay bar. So the tap on the shoulder was along the lines of "we're in this together", because you were handing him as much life-threatening blackmail material as you had had on him. Weapons of Mutually Fabulous Destruction, as it were, except that outing was not fabulous even when I did it in the 1980s.
So if you're going to follow the old etiquette all the way, "Marcelo" would out "Chad" in gay private, but when around him in public, keeps a straight face and doesn't out "Chad".
But in these enlightened times, and God's teeth and toenails! a dance major of all things!, later trying a gayvention at need does sound tempting.
So if you're going to follow the old etiquette all the way, "Marcelo" would out "Chad" in gay private, but when around him in public, keeps a straight face and doesn't out "Chad".
But in these enlightened times, and God's teeth and toenails! a dance major of all things!, later trying a gayvention at need does sound tempting.
12
@9 excellent point. It's one thing if Chad talks all the time about his girlfriend in Canada ("her name is Alberta, she lives in Vancouver")...it's another if he just doesn't like talking about his sex life with his friends. Though either way, there's not much harm in letting him know he inadvertently came on to his friend.
13
@Confidential to Komen: Done! Thanks, Dan. And Brinker's GOT TO GO- talk about "uptight xtian face"! Yikes- too scary.
14
I think NOTBI can pretty legitimately question his attraction to guys if stubble is that big of a turn off. I mean most men get it hours after shaving, it's not some rare condition. Seems like it's kinda part of the package.
15
I get the idea behind wanting rid of Brinker but come on. She founded the organization. It's named after her dead sister. I don't think kicking her out is the right thing.
18
@Confidential to Komen: I'd settle for them at least doubling, if not tripling, their annual grants to PP. Every bit helps but $700K is nothing compared to their total revenues and what they pay themselves in salaries.
19
@9 I disagree. I think Dan's advice for was spot on. Chad's friends shouldn't have to pretend that they don't know what they already know (and have suspected for a long time). Since Chad already outed himself by sending a picture of his face, CCC and Marcelo could simply let the Chad know they know he's gay and they support him anyway. This might be the push he needs to finally be honest with himself and his friends.
20
Chad might not actually be out, but it's not like he's been living a lie and pretending to be straight. He hasn't been leading anyone on. He hasn't been using a girlfriend or wife. He sounds like a nice young man, only in his early 20s, taking his time about his sexuality and going at his own pace. For that reason, I don't think anyone else has any business invading his privacy and outing him in any big public way. A tap on the shoulder? A pleasant conversation? Sure, friends do that, and if that's what's meant by outing someone, nothing wrong with that. But draw the line at presuming to know more about someone than he knows himself. I'm disturbed by this note coming from a third person. CCC wrote, not Marcelo, which means that CCC and Marcelo have been talking about Chad behind his back and discussing what they think would be best for Chad. This may not be nasty gossip, but it is gossip, and that's generally not good for relationships.
21
I sent this as an email to Dan, but I thought I would share it with the comments section as well. This is one of the trailers I saw at a major theater in Bangkok before they showed Underworld. And if any movie fits with the theme of it gets better...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u96W4iKb3…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u96W4iKb3…
22
@12, I'm with you, maybe Chad doesn't want to talk about his sexual exploits. Never understood why guys did that, we all know it's 90% bullshit.
24
I would like to take this time to apologize for MN letting Santorum anywhere near Washington. MN has a caucus system that is just plain exclusive and only draws true believers. I don’t know any Republicans that actually went and I know a lot of politically minded individuals. My Republican friends don’t feel enough passion for anyone to spend 4+ hours on a weeknight; except the anti-abortion crowd.
We may be the state that elected Bachman and are actually voting on banning gay marriage soon (so embarrassing), but most of us are well educated, common sense, hard workers who believe in the American dream. More women vote in MN than men so Santorum with his 1512 beliefs about birth control and gays will never win. Also, MN hasn’t voted Republican for president since Reagan’s first term. But thanks, Republican party for making sure that Obama will definitely get his 2nd term to finish what he started, now that he is finally standing his ground.
We may be the state that elected Bachman and are actually voting on banning gay marriage soon (so embarrassing), but most of us are well educated, common sense, hard workers who believe in the American dream. More women vote in MN than men so Santorum with his 1512 beliefs about birth control and gays will never win. Also, MN hasn’t voted Republican for president since Reagan’s first term. But thanks, Republican party for making sure that Obama will definitely get his 2nd term to finish what he started, now that he is finally standing his ground.
25
There's no where else to really announce this on The Stranger (for now), but I'd like to state for the record that I've never been embarrassed to acknowledge that I grew up in Colorado, until this morning. Colorado Springs, alas.
I had no idea the frothy mixture would be such a hit in my home state. Ugh, the state's GOP caucus is covered with santorum.
I had no idea the frothy mixture would be such a hit in my home state. Ugh, the state's GOP caucus is covered with santorum.
27
Great article, I laughed a lot. News flash folks: If you have to ask Dan if you cheated on your sig. other, you cheated on your sig. other!
28
For the first time since around 1998, Dan posted three responses to three letters and I actually agree with all of them! Mazel tov Dan; we must finally be aligned with the stars or sumthin!
I just have 2 questions: if NOTBI wasn't interested in kissing a dude, why did he?
And: I don't understand Dan's Al Gore reference; could someone please explain it? Thanks!
I just have 2 questions: if NOTBI wasn't interested in kissing a dude, why did he?
And: I don't understand Dan's Al Gore reference; could someone please explain it? Thanks!
29
Dan is spot on about cheating being in the eye of the partner, regarding SAW, but I think the orientation of any sex is determined almost exclusively by what's going on inside the heads of the participants, not by any external factors. This does allow for a situation where it is possible SAW's friend had gay sex, while SAW did not.
I do think the more interesting question is, given where SAW's friend's head is at, what happens next, and what should SAW be doing to best manage any further ramifications of his trip.
I do think the more interesting question is, given where SAW's friend's head is at, what happens next, and what should SAW be doing to best manage any further ramifications of his trip.
30
@28: Al Gore was one of the earliest and most vehement congressional supporters of high-speed communications technology, including ARPANET, the defense precursor to the Internet. He didn't literally invent it, but he could justifiably be one of the midwives.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore#Hou…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore#Sec…
Dan is jokingly referencing the idea that "Al Gore invented the Internet," but he could just as easily have said "Before the Internet was invented" without a name attached.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore#Hou…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore#Sec…
Dan is jokingly referencing the idea that "Al Gore invented the Internet," but he could just as easily have said "Before the Internet was invented" without a name attached.
31
Ah, Colorado. It would be nice to say I expected better of the Republicans here, but it would be a lie. Sorry, world!
33
PP is not the only pro-choice organization out there fighting for reproductive freedom and other rights! Support your LOCAL OR STATEWIDE NARAL office if you want to ensure your $$ is going towards the political fight to elect progressive legislators and keep anti-choice, anti-gay, hateful law off the books.
prochoicemissouri.org.
prochoicemissouri.org.
34
I think all those posting here (wondering if "Chad" is out of the closet, but just doesn't like talking about his sexual exploits) are missing the point. He's telling his friends that HE ISN'T GAY! That's not the same thing as not talking about who he's having sex with or what he does it bed; it's lying about who he is! Very strange, especially if the people he's lying to are supposedly his friends. For the record, you can say "I'm gay," without adding "I got gang-banged by the soccer team last night."
36
I'm with # 20. Good lord, maybe Chad just thought he didn't have to out himself to his already gay friends. Sounds like this 3rd party someone is trying to stir an empty drama pot. Get over it, Chad is.
37
Kind of surprised you didn't suggest to NOTBI that maybe he's...not bi. I expect you may be gunshy of backlash from the oh so jumpy bi audience who always accuse you of bi denial, but it's not inconsistent that a light crossplay and pegging fan can be hetero ;) Instead you cautioned that it might just have not been the right guy.
Maybe he's just a straight dude who likes frilly things and anal stimulation. It happens.
Maybe he's just a straight dude who likes frilly things and anal stimulation. It happens.
38
How likely is it that someone ganked Chad's photo to use on their Grindr? Did Marcelo verify that it was him? Either way. Marcelo needs to talk to Chad, though.
39
@37, if NOTBI were totally straight, I would think he would have said "I'm straight" to the hot gay guy. But he didn't. He kissed him. He also never says in his letter that he's straight. He sounds bi-curious, to me, despite his claim to be over it and "NOTBI."
41
@19: "Chad's friends shouldn't have to pretend that they don't know what they already know (and have suspected for a long time)."
You and I agree on this. I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends. I don't see that an "ZOMG, you are so out, finally! It's about time you admitted it!" conversation is going to accomplish anything. It's not like he's trying to pretend he is straight.
"Since Chad already outed himself by sending a picture of his face, CCC and Marcelo could simply let the Chad know they know he's gay and they support him anyway."
I also agree with you on this, to a point. If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business. He might still say that it was him on Grindr, even if he doesn't want to play. But I don't see anything in the letter that would warrant a gaytervention.
"This might be the push he needs to finally be honest with himself and his friends. "
What do you mean, "honest?" What exactly has he done to be anything other than "honest?" Be specific. Letter writer clucks about "miserable life with a miserable wife." Hello? CHAD ISN'T DATING GIRLS. He's not bloody likely to make one miserable that way, now is he?
You and I agree on this. I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends. I don't see that an "ZOMG, you are so out, finally! It's about time you admitted it!" conversation is going to accomplish anything. It's not like he's trying to pretend he is straight.
"Since Chad already outed himself by sending a picture of his face, CCC and Marcelo could simply let the Chad know they know he's gay and they support him anyway."
I also agree with you on this, to a point. If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business. He might still say that it was him on Grindr, even if he doesn't want to play. But I don't see anything in the letter that would warrant a gaytervention.
"This might be the push he needs to finally be honest with himself and his friends. "
What do you mean, "honest?" What exactly has he done to be anything other than "honest?" Be specific. Letter writer clucks about "miserable life with a miserable wife." Hello? CHAD ISN'T DATING GIRLS. He's not bloody likely to make one miserable that way, now is he?
42
CCC here. Dunno if it's normal for writers to add comments, but I'd like to clarify a few points. 1) Chad is actively lying. He tells people he's straight if he's asked, and talks about wanting to date/sleep with girls in a "have I mentioned I'm heterosexual today" sort of way. He might be bi, but he's definitely not straight. 2) At no point were we ever going to publicly out him. I was talking about whether we should even mention to him that we know.
43
Tell Planned Parenthood to get Paypal on their donation page, and they will get much more. People are sick of giving out their credit card everywhere, and Paypal works well. I'm not associated with them except as a customer, and I have skipped making donations and even buying things when Paypal is not offered.
44
@ 41, avast: Well said, what you wrote:
"I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends."
And
"If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business."
I agree fully. Coming out is totally a personal decision. All it really is is just allowing yourself to not have to suffer with internal unease anymore. Honesty is honesty, it's a big wide world.
I also agree about the matter-of-fact thing and how it shouldn't have to matter who is or who isn't this or that. No one ever really asks a straight person if they're straight, and if so, why should it matter (unless Marcelo wants to hook up with Chad. Talk to Chad *privately*, and *with respect* to his feelings and current place in life. A little listening and empathy goes a long way :-) .)
"I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends."
And
"If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business."
I agree fully. Coming out is totally a personal decision. All it really is is just allowing yourself to not have to suffer with internal unease anymore. Honesty is honesty, it's a big wide world.
I also agree about the matter-of-fact thing and how it shouldn't have to matter who is or who isn't this or that. No one ever really asks a straight person if they're straight, and if so, why should it matter (unless Marcelo wants to hook up with Chad. Talk to Chad *privately*, and *with respect* to his feelings and current place in life. A little listening and empathy goes a long way :-) .)
45
@ 41, avast: Well said, what you wrote:
"I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends."
Exactly. Thank him for being honest, if it goes there, and congratulate him on his bravery and commitment to himself to want more as a quality of life.
"If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business."
I agree fully. Coming out is totally a personal decision. All it really is is just allowing yourself to not have to suffer with internal unease anymore. Honesty is honesty, it's a big wide world.
I also agree about the matter-of-fact thing and how it shouldn't have to matter who is or who isn't this or that. No one ever really asks a straight person if they're straight, and if so, why should it matter (unless Marcelo wants to hook up with Chad. Talk to Chad *privately*, and *with respect* to his feelings and current place in life. A little listening and empathy goes a long way.) :)
"I just think that his friends should treat it with the same matter-of-fact lack of concern that they would any of their straight friends."
Exactly. Thank him for being honest, if it goes there, and congratulate him on his bravery and commitment to himself to want more as a quality of life.
"If Marcelo wants to let him know that was him on Grindr, go for it. Might be the start of something great. On the other hand, if he doesn't want to be a participant in Chad's sex life, he should mind his own business."
I agree fully. Coming out is totally a personal decision. All it really is is just allowing yourself to not have to suffer with internal unease anymore. Honesty is honesty, it's a big wide world.
I also agree about the matter-of-fact thing and how it shouldn't have to matter who is or who isn't this or that. No one ever really asks a straight person if they're straight, and if so, why should it matter (unless Marcelo wants to hook up with Chad. Talk to Chad *privately*, and *with respect* to his feelings and current place in life. A little listening and empathy goes a long way.) :)
47
CCC @42 - Yes, letter writers sometimes contribute to the discussion, and the extra information is generally helpful, so, welcome!
One issue in your letter is that you write: "Should we say something to Chad?...Should we have a gayvention?"
Since Marcelo is friends with Chad, and Marcelo is the one who got Chad's face pic, it makes sense for Marcelo to tell Chad what happened. I don't see how this involves you.
One issue in your letter is that you write: "Should we say something to Chad?...Should we have a gayvention?"
Since Marcelo is friends with Chad, and Marcelo is the one who got Chad's face pic, it makes sense for Marcelo to tell Chad what happened. I don't see how this involves you.
48
@47 You're absolutely right. It doesn't. None of this involves me directly. The reason why I know about it at all is because Marcelo asked me to weigh in. I've been out longer than he has (he's bi and private, it's why he would never think of outing anyone) and have more experience with the tumultuous experience of coming out and all the emotions that go along with it.
Maybe some backstory on Marcelo would be helpful. Marcelo and I are very good friends, and lived together (platonic) for two years, though we don't anymore. He told me he was straight (he never lied, but he did actively omit information) the entire time I knew him, and I never doubted his word, though plenty of people thought I was crazy for believing him. I heard he occasionally hooked up with guys through the grapevine, and when I asked him about it, he confirmed it. There was no crazy confession or big emotional scene, it was me saying "I know" and him saying "Ok that's great". So I have some experience with the gentle confrontation that went really well, and that's all he or I is thinking about doing with Chad.
Whatever happens, I doubt I'll be a part of the conversation. And no one thinks Chad should start singing "A Chorus Line" from the rooftops. All of his friends, myself included, just want to let him know that we're here and we support him, whatever he chooses to do.
Maybe some backstory on Marcelo would be helpful. Marcelo and I are very good friends, and lived together (platonic) for two years, though we don't anymore. He told me he was straight (he never lied, but he did actively omit information) the entire time I knew him, and I never doubted his word, though plenty of people thought I was crazy for believing him. I heard he occasionally hooked up with guys through the grapevine, and when I asked him about it, he confirmed it. There was no crazy confession or big emotional scene, it was me saying "I know" and him saying "Ok that's great". So I have some experience with the gentle confrontation that went really well, and that's all he or I is thinking about doing with Chad.
Whatever happens, I doubt I'll be a part of the conversation. And no one thinks Chad should start singing "A Chorus Line" from the rooftops. All of his friends, myself included, just want to let him know that we're here and we support him, whatever he chooses to do.
49
@ 47, Hi EricaP: I agree with what you said, especially this part:
"Since Marcelo is friends with Chad, and Marcelo is the one who got Chad's face pic, it makes sense for Marcelo to tell Chad what happened. I don't see how this involves you."
Indeed. Marcelo and Chad should just talk privately and be delicate about it, if need be. Just listen, be a friend and be supportive, no matter what. Even if Marcelo should wind up having some sort of fling with Chad.
Yeah. I'm with you about the sense of Marcelo approaching Chad 'cos Chad sent a face pic. It levels the playing field much more for the subject to be broached, carefully and with respect.
"Since Marcelo is friends with Chad, and Marcelo is the one who got Chad's face pic, it makes sense for Marcelo to tell Chad what happened. I don't see how this involves you."
Indeed. Marcelo and Chad should just talk privately and be delicate about it, if need be. Just listen, be a friend and be supportive, no matter what. Even if Marcelo should wind up having some sort of fling with Chad.
Yeah. I'm with you about the sense of Marcelo approaching Chad 'cos Chad sent a face pic. It levels the playing field much more for the subject to be broached, carefully and with respect.
50
@34: "He's telling his friends that HE ISN'T GAY!"
Really? Where does the letter say that?
"For the record, you can say "I'm gay," without adding "I got gang-banged by the soccer team last night."
For the record, I don't recall ever having told my friends "I'm straight," let alone anything about last night's sex positions. It just doesn't come up in conversation.
In his case, he acts stereotypically gay, and everyone he comes in contact with assumes he is gay. In other words, people's perceptions are in alignment with reality. So, what exactly needs announcing?
Really? Where does the letter say that?
"For the record, you can say "I'm gay," without adding "I got gang-banged by the soccer team last night."
For the record, I don't recall ever having told my friends "I'm straight," let alone anything about last night's sex positions. It just doesn't come up in conversation.
In his case, he acts stereotypically gay, and everyone he comes in contact with assumes he is gay. In other words, people's perceptions are in alignment with reality. So, what exactly needs announcing?
51
Conservative Wall Street Journal columnist/blogger James Taranto has been liberally using Rick's last name in humorous ways, even though he has never mentioned (i don't think) he internet meaning of the name.
Everything's Coming Up Santorum
http://goo.gl/pXDtV
Everything's Coming Up Santorum
http://goo.gl/pXDtV
52
CCC @42,
How would you treat Chad if he were out?
Treat him that way, and don't stress him out by asking. You can talk about how much better it is to be open in your sexuality, and how you are always available to help him if he needs it. Lead by example.
Peace.
How would you treat Chad if he were out?
Treat him that way, and don't stress him out by asking. You can talk about how much better it is to be open in your sexuality, and how you are always available to help him if he needs it. Lead by example.
Peace.
53
Conservative Wall Street Journal columnist/blogger James Taranto has been liberally using Rick's last name in humorous ways, even though he has never mentioned (i don't think) he internet meaning of the name.
Everything's Coming Up Santorum
http://goo.gl/pXDtV
Everything's Coming Up Santorum
http://goo.gl/pXDtV
54
@50 via @42: "Really? Where does the letter say that?"
Whoops. Says that in comment 42. I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification.
Now I want to know what Chad's reasons for hiding are, if you know them. Reason being that even intending to never publicly out someone, once a group of people know something, word gets out if you are not exceedingly careful. Be very wary of saying or doing something that might come back to bite Chad, like maybe get his college funds cut off.
Bottom line, however, is I think Dan's last line of advice still applies. If anybody needs to mention anything, it's Marcelo. Marcelo can go a little further if he wants, and mention that as far as the friends are concerned, not only is it a complete non-issue, it's non-news. But I wouldn't subject him to a group "intervention" of any sort.
Whoops. Says that in comment 42. I stand corrected. Thanks for the clarification.
Now I want to know what Chad's reasons for hiding are, if you know them. Reason being that even intending to never publicly out someone, once a group of people know something, word gets out if you are not exceedingly careful. Be very wary of saying or doing something that might come back to bite Chad, like maybe get his college funds cut off.
Bottom line, however, is I think Dan's last line of advice still applies. If anybody needs to mention anything, it's Marcelo. Marcelo can go a little further if he wants, and mention that as far as the friends are concerned, not only is it a complete non-issue, it's non-news. But I wouldn't subject him to a group "intervention" of any sort.
55
btw, I don't know if this has been posted elsewhere, but I like this headline on CBC:
Santorum tops in 3 Republican caucus votes
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/…
Santorum tops in 3 Republican caucus votes
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/…
56
Regarding kissing the guy and he didn't like it: when I was in my late teens/early twenties, things went like this: I made out with a girl around the same time as a boy, had crushes on other girls, but decided I was straight (I don't remember this too well, but have a copy of the letter I wrote her where I said this). Then a couple of years later, in college, I felt attractions to gals and slept with a guy who did nothing for me and decided I was gay (Also, I was at a college where it was cool to be gay--the LUG thing). Then, maybe a year later, I realized I kept thinking, dreaming, fantasizing about cock, and hooked up with a bi guy and started having sex with guys again. Slept with both girls and guys. Married a man, now for 20 years. Crushed on and made out with girls since then, even a brief relationship with a woman on the side. Now, about 30 years later, I have enough accumulated experience to declare myself bisexual. But in the beginning, I generalized from one experience, when that reaction did not predict the future. Now, the LW may simply be straight, but one experience may not be enough to be sure.
57
....please Dan do something the stupid and
politically UNFIT people south of our border
still think that MR. Santorum is presidential
material! It would be a total shame for the
whole world and a " don't make me laugh..."
chorus for the Russians and Chinese!!!
It's hard to believe he is in the race, even harder
to hear that he won some support!!
politically UNFIT people south of our border
still think that MR. Santorum is presidential
material! It would be a total shame for the
whole world and a " don't make me laugh..."
chorus for the Russians and Chinese!!!
It's hard to believe he is in the race, even harder
to hear that he won some support!!
59
It's official. I'm reading Dan Savage's column more than ever these days for one simple reason. The comments are the best fracking part!
60
Can anyone even IMAGINE what would happen to this country (and, come to think of it, the entire globe) if Santorum were president? As Penny on "Big Bang Theory" would say, Holy crap on a cracker...
61
I said originally that Chad wasn't living a lie by presenting himself as straight. CCC corrected me (all of us) by saying that no, Chad regularly says he's straight and says he'd like to date girls. So let me rethink this and .... nope, same conclusion.
If a gay man is enough of a hypocrite as to make gay-hating remarks while having sex with guys under (supposed) anonymity, then out him. Expose him for the cheat and fraud that he is.
If a gay man has targeted a particular woman for dating, a relationship, or marriage, then do the kind thing and tell her what you know so she can make an informed decision about the future of the relationship.
If a young man is saying one thing, fantasizing about another, getting on a (supposedly) anonymous online venue, and dyeing his hair mardi gras colors, then let him think about and explore his sexuality at his own pace, in his own time. Don't tell him what you've decided about his sexual orientation. If you're friends and decide to open a discussion about coming out in general or about how you personally came out, or about how you knew you were gay, or about some of the doubts you had, or about how you sometimes thought about a life married to a woman, or about anything else that's true, fine. Talk about that. But don't presume to know more about him than he knows himself. It's not nice.
If a gay man is enough of a hypocrite as to make gay-hating remarks while having sex with guys under (supposed) anonymity, then out him. Expose him for the cheat and fraud that he is.
If a gay man has targeted a particular woman for dating, a relationship, or marriage, then do the kind thing and tell her what you know so she can make an informed decision about the future of the relationship.
If a young man is saying one thing, fantasizing about another, getting on a (supposedly) anonymous online venue, and dyeing his hair mardi gras colors, then let him think about and explore his sexuality at his own pace, in his own time. Don't tell him what you've decided about his sexual orientation. If you're friends and decide to open a discussion about coming out in general or about how you personally came out, or about how you knew you were gay, or about some of the doubts you had, or about how you sometimes thought about a life married to a woman, or about anything else that's true, fine. Talk about that. But don't presume to know more about him than he knows himself. It's not nice.
62
@60 It couldn't be any worse than the turn the country took under Obama. I'm not a Santorum supporter by any stretch.
@24. Ditto for MO. Our primary meant nothing yesterday. GOP will caucus in a few weeks and assign delegates. I suspect the majority will be for Romney.
@24. Ditto for MO. Our primary meant nothing yesterday. GOP will caucus in a few weeks and assign delegates. I suspect the majority will be for Romney.
63
I tuned into Savage Love today just to see what was being said about Santorum leaking all over 3 states. Thanks for the laughs, unfortunately we need to get rid of this Bigot. So for all those outside of MO, I'd like to apologize for our states vote. Most of us did not vote because our primary means nothing. GOP will caucus in a few weeks and assign delegates. But keep the Santorum jokes coming, it gives me hope this guy will be flushed
64
@11: Tim, I love that you refer to "the old gay etiquette" of "the 1980's". Dude, I'm so old, (but young at heart), I think the 1980's are still in the future. You made me lol! Thanks!
Dan, Congratulations on your 1,OOO,OOOth. comment!
Dan, Congratulations on your 1,OOO,OOOth. comment!
65
SAW -- "Is it cheating?"
Dan's reply is dead on, but it's a bit uninformative for someone so clueless. Whether you cheated on your wife has nothing whatsoever to do with what anyone thinks except for your wife.
What is it with monogamists? Far too often you guys assume that The Rules are universal, you don't bother to negotiate, you don't talk with your partners about what each of you wants, you can't put in the effort to learn what matters to your partners, and then you act all surprised and look for absolution when you go outside the relationship for something that you (against all of human experience and knowledge) expected never to do or want. Why on earth do you think Dan would know what matters to your wife?
Also, if you don't know for sure that it isn't cheating, then you chose to be a CPOS. Start begging for forgiveness (which, incidentally, is not only the only ethical course of action, but also your best negotiating tool).
Dan's reply is dead on, but it's a bit uninformative for someone so clueless. Whether you cheated on your wife has nothing whatsoever to do with what anyone thinks except for your wife.
What is it with monogamists? Far too often you guys assume that The Rules are universal, you don't bother to negotiate, you don't talk with your partners about what each of you wants, you can't put in the effort to learn what matters to your partners, and then you act all surprised and look for absolution when you go outside the relationship for something that you (against all of human experience and knowledge) expected never to do or want. Why on earth do you think Dan would know what matters to your wife?
Also, if you don't know for sure that it isn't cheating, then you chose to be a CPOS. Start begging for forgiveness (which, incidentally, is not only the only ethical course of action, but also your best negotiating tool).
66
Good Morning, Everyone :) .
@ 52, Married In MA: I love what you wrote:
"Treat him that way, and don't stress him out by asking. You can talk about how much better it is to be open in your sexuality, and how you are always available to help him if he needs it. Lead by example.
Peace."
Absolutely true. Just being at peace with yourself and the world around you, really.. Personally, it doesn't matter to me whatsoever what someone's sexuality is. I take people on a one-on-one basis in making character assessments.
People, especially the bigots and lowly douches of the world coughahemsantorum, forget how fucking brave, tough and intense it always somehow is to step up and take your life back in your own hands.
No matter what anyone's truth is, I always pay props to someone who is honest, succinct about it and then keeps it moving. The way it should be :) . It's the tension in the air of unease that is ammeliorated once you find self-resolution.
Hey: it's cool to take the road less traveled and have the strength-constructing mojo you get from giving yourself the best you deserve: peace, truth and happiness.
I'm totally with you Married In MA.
Thanks.
@ 52, Married In MA: I love what you wrote:
"Treat him that way, and don't stress him out by asking. You can talk about how much better it is to be open in your sexuality, and how you are always available to help him if he needs it. Lead by example.
Peace."
Absolutely true. Just being at peace with yourself and the world around you, really.. Personally, it doesn't matter to me whatsoever what someone's sexuality is. I take people on a one-on-one basis in making character assessments.
People, especially the bigots and lowly douches of the world coughahemsantorum, forget how fucking brave, tough and intense it always somehow is to step up and take your life back in your own hands.
No matter what anyone's truth is, I always pay props to someone who is honest, succinct about it and then keeps it moving. The way it should be :) . It's the tension in the air of unease that is ammeliorated once you find self-resolution.
Hey: it's cool to take the road less traveled and have the strength-constructing mojo you get from giving yourself the best you deserve: peace, truth and happiness.
I'm totally with you Married In MA.
Thanks.
68
I think Dan focused too much on the tongue and stubble issues. It's just as likely that NOTBI was turned off by the stubble and tongue because he wasn't attracted to the guy in the first place, as that he wasn't attracted to the guy because of the stubble and tongue. After all, we all overlook all sorts of things that would be awkward, unpleasant, or outright gross without the component of sexual attraction - invasion of our personal bubbles, getting other people's sweat rubbed all over our bodies, prolonged exposure to body odor, etc. *Any* amount of tongue in your mouth is too much if you're not attracted to the person it's attached to.
Let's keep in mind that NOTBI is only eighteen years old and the fact that he wasn't attracted to this one guy doesn't mean that much about his orientation one way or the other.
Let's keep in mind that NOTBI is only eighteen years old and the fact that he wasn't attracted to this one guy doesn't mean that much about his orientation one way or the other.
69
God, I hope so (@67). Santorum's just fucked-up. I *get it* that anyone who lost a young child would exhibit peculiar coping behaviors, but this whole no-homo thing is just beyond retarded.
If he wasn't such a Poindexter in high school.. Trying to make up for lost time by being a political bad-ass (emphasis on the words bad and ass: whole lol).
Let him have his little bits of press. He won't get as far as any of us tends to worry about. Sooner or later, he'll say or do something stupid that pulls him out of the running. Think George Allen, when he said that dumb thing about macacas.
I'd love to figure out how big someone's ego needs to be to begin starting to think you can save the world politically by being a turd-merchant (Santorum) going into it.
Sorry you lost a child tragically, Rick Santorum. Other than that, you're a douche. Good luck with your campaign (not)!
If he wasn't such a Poindexter in high school.. Trying to make up for lost time by being a political bad-ass (emphasis on the words bad and ass: whole lol).
Let him have his little bits of press. He won't get as far as any of us tends to worry about. Sooner or later, he'll say or do something stupid that pulls him out of the running. Think George Allen, when he said that dumb thing about macacas.
I'd love to figure out how big someone's ego needs to be to begin starting to think you can save the world politically by being a turd-merchant (Santorum) going into it.
Sorry you lost a child tragically, Rick Santorum. Other than that, you're a douche. Good luck with your campaign (not)!
70
@ 68, Not the name of a registered user: I Wish I could just put duct tape on my semi-bearded face and just rip the frickin' roots of my facial hair clean off of me! I hate facial hair on me (it looks like cowlicked butthair growing in on me lol) and I too would prefer to kiss someone who is either shaven well or has little facial hair altogether. It just feels weird: like you're in shop class using sandpaper, instead of making out with your babe of choice :-) ! I say that now, but I suppose I'd prefer to leave my options open. Who knows? Maybe my man likes an occasional sprouting of facial hair on me. I could totally do without facial hair on me. Shaving in general is a pain in the ass, but a necessary one.
71
@70 - see, I love stubble. I love when it's scratchy, and I can rub my cheek against it and feel it prickling. I love the contrast when he just shaved before dinner, and he's so smooth, but I know that by the time we fuck, it'll be a little scratchy already...
72
The guy in the first letter must know perfectly well that he is the subject of gossip among his acquaintances for being Such A Huge Queen, and that people like to tell one another that his sexuality "has gone from funny to sad."
And the guy is already out getting his freak on on Grindr - he is apparently not all that out of touch with his own basic drives.
The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years.
And the guy is already out getting his freak on on Grindr - he is apparently not all that out of touch with his own basic drives.
The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years.
73
The guy in the first letter must know perfectly well that he is the subject of gossip among his acquaintances for being Such A Huge Queen, and that people like to tell one another that his sexuality "has gone from funny to sad."
And the guy is already out getting his freak on on Grindr - he is apparently not all that out of touch with his own basic drives.
The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years.
And the guy is already out getting his freak on on Grindr - he is apparently not all that out of touch with his own basic drives.
The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years.
74
OK, we need to chill with the Komen-bashing already.
They made a mistake, and they corrected it, quite publicly, and the person responsible for said mistake is gone.
I was very vocal in my opposition to what Komen did, but now that they reversed course, what purpose does continuing to bash them serve?
It makes leftward-leaning folks seem as political and vindictive as the right-to-lifers were in the first place.
They made a mistake, and they corrected it, quite publicly, and the person responsible for said mistake is gone.
I was very vocal in my opposition to what Komen did, but now that they reversed course, what purpose does continuing to bash them serve?
It makes leftward-leaning folks seem as political and vindictive as the right-to-lifers were in the first place.
75
Oops - sorry for the double-post, I thought the original got canceled when it made me register.
In other news, I'd lay dollars to donuts that post-orgasmic weeping and self-recrimination is all part of the usual hotel fun for Mr. "Is that a webcam? Spank me!" guy in letter #3.
In other news, I'd lay dollars to donuts that post-orgasmic weeping and self-recrimination is all part of the usual hotel fun for Mr. "Is that a webcam? Spank me!" guy in letter #3.
76
I think for the last LW, the wisdom of 4chan prevails: on a scale of gayness, 0/10, the balls aren't touching.
77
about NOTBI. I agree with you about the too much tongue & the rough stubbles. Had a menage-a-trois with another guy and girl thinking we were just going to have some fun with the girl. Surprise!!!!! He seemed to have more of an interest in me. I wouldn't say It wasn't fun at the time, but I certainly prefer smoother skin and to start off gentler and less tongue. Now this is from a straight guy, but I do wonder from time to time, what if........
78
@ 71, EricaP: Yeah. You're right. Especially when, as you say, you've shaven that morning, but by the time nighttime rolls around, you've got that awesome patch of 2:00 shadow growing in, and who has time to wanna shave when you're about to make some love..
I would never grow a Grizzly Adams sort of beard, let alone ever try wearing one from a Halloween costume shop. I'd rather put a woodchuck on my upper lip and walk around like that. I'd rather look like an asshole than someone whose soup never seems to quite make it in his mouth when he goes out to eat lol.
I would never grow a Grizzly Adams sort of beard, let alone ever try wearing one from a Halloween costume shop. I'd rather put a woodchuck on my upper lip and walk around like that. I'd rather look like an asshole than someone whose soup never seems to quite make it in his mouth when he goes out to eat lol.
79
@77 if you had fun kissing a guy (even if next time you want it to be gentler (guys can be gentle!))... why call yourself straight? Is that because you didn't go down on him?
80
@ 73, DistingueTraces (How 'Bout This Tongue;-)~Traces...): If I may quote you generously, thanks:
"The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years."
Well said! I've never been a herd-mentality person -- especially when it came to how I publically identify as what preference, or whatever anyone chooses to call one's inherent, true nature.
I never was a college drone, I never was a stooge waving a flag for a cause I chose to know nothing or little about and I sure as fuck never have cared for lame, uncool, depressing, universally-free-of-mojo kinds of music.
I like to rock. I may be gay, but I like to think of myself as being more rock and roll than anything else.
Music unifies, man. Growing up in a musical family (and with my best friend's family also a family of musicians) taught me that it's still possible to grow up in the early '80's as a gay boy and *still turn out cool, and your own person*.
I identify with music sometimes more than I do any one person's lead-me-to-the-promised-land-eternal sorts of bullshit.
Music helped raise me. It makes you inspired to think and feel for yourself: herd-mentality be damned.
I'm never down with public outings. Fuck that. How would any of us feel being thrown into the deep end like that? Especially so if you've been a quieter type and you've been just doing the best you can?
I hate mobs, I hate protests and I can't stand sign-waving bullshit. I get it, but I just can't stand it. The only good thing about any of that sort of thing invariably is the piles of horseshit strewn in the streets after the drunkards and rowdies finished promising the second coming of the first revolution, or something ;-) .
More...
"The fact that he doesn't choose to officially out himself to the campus bitch squad may have less to do with shame or repression, and more to do with a perfectly natural wish to guard his privacy from people who have been treating him as a figure of pity and mockery for four years."
Well said! I've never been a herd-mentality person -- especially when it came to how I publically identify as what preference, or whatever anyone chooses to call one's inherent, true nature.
I never was a college drone, I never was a stooge waving a flag for a cause I chose to know nothing or little about and I sure as fuck never have cared for lame, uncool, depressing, universally-free-of-mojo kinds of music.
I like to rock. I may be gay, but I like to think of myself as being more rock and roll than anything else.
Music unifies, man. Growing up in a musical family (and with my best friend's family also a family of musicians) taught me that it's still possible to grow up in the early '80's as a gay boy and *still turn out cool, and your own person*.
I identify with music sometimes more than I do any one person's lead-me-to-the-promised-land-eternal sorts of bullshit.
Music helped raise me. It makes you inspired to think and feel for yourself: herd-mentality be damned.
I'm never down with public outings. Fuck that. How would any of us feel being thrown into the deep end like that? Especially so if you've been a quieter type and you've been just doing the best you can?
I hate mobs, I hate protests and I can't stand sign-waving bullshit. I get it, but I just can't stand it. The only good thing about any of that sort of thing invariably is the piles of horseshit strewn in the streets after the drunkards and rowdies finished promising the second coming of the first revolution, or something ;-) .
81
@77
WTF was that about? "I'm straight man but the last guy I had sex with...maybe the next time I have sex with another man..."
WTF was that about? "I'm straight man but the last guy I had sex with...maybe the next time I have sex with another man..."
84
@NOTBI: light crossdressing + pegging = HAWT!!
Your letter made me horny. And reminded me I need to get some new stockings...
Your letter made me horny. And reminded me I need to get some new stockings...
85
Hey, Dan and everybody:
I guess I don't have much to comment on the letters in Dan's column for this week. But I do have one question, however off topic: am I truly a nut for loving my car (NO, I'm NOT fucking my car! Geez)?
Okay, you all know I'm a nut. It's just that he's got a truly awesome personality, automotively speaking!!! Hey--a lot of guys love their pickups, SUVs, rods, etc., right? Why can't us gals?
I guess I don't have much to comment on the letters in Dan's column for this week. But I do have one question, however off topic: am I truly a nut for loving my car (NO, I'm NOT fucking my car! Geez)?
Okay, you all know I'm a nut. It's just that he's got a truly awesome personality, automotively speaking!!! Hey--a lot of guys love their pickups, SUVs, rods, etc., right? Why can't us gals?
86
Hi Dan, I love listening to your show. I was recently struck by an idea that i thought worth sharing.
given that Gay marriage is not yet legal Wa. IF the referundum is put to a vote this season, which looks to be the case.
I see an interesting connection, between Gay marriage legalization AND the question of Abortion on Demand as provided by different services here in the US.
Here goes. There is no doubt in my mind (a married man), that children strengthen the commitment of two people to their beloved union.
and while physically it is impossible for two men or two women to make a baby. they can and should be able to adopt. this adoption fits into the natural progression assumed, that from the marriage will come offspring.
So,if proponents of Gay marriage wish to solidify the legitmacy of Gay marriages, by adoption of unwanted children.....then aborting unwanted potential children would undermine the opportunity to have children to care for and to grow into society in decent ways.
I think, and find it reasonable to discuss, the value of Gay Marriage not only to the indviduals involved, but to society, by way of child rearing, care, and growth of unwanted babies....it would naturally call forth a common sense desire to reject abortion, unless it falls into the time honored catagories of , Rape, incest or health of the mother.
In other words, proponents of gay marriage , who wish to adopt,who wish to strengthen their marriage through parenthood and shared growth.... would promote the logic that there is a place for the unwanted children and babies in their homes and hearts, It is one more alternative to Abortion.
If gay marriage proponents , link up to Abortion critics, with this common purpose, both have valuable situations that help each other. Strange bedfellows for sure, but when it comes to the value of life, the sanctity of it, and respect and recognition of it, we can all work together, we can all play a part.the world is an interesting place.
No need to respond Sir, it's just an idea that seems to be worth discussing.
Best to You and Yours.
More...
given that Gay marriage is not yet legal Wa. IF the referundum is put to a vote this season, which looks to be the case.
I see an interesting connection, between Gay marriage legalization AND the question of Abortion on Demand as provided by different services here in the US.
Here goes. There is no doubt in my mind (a married man), that children strengthen the commitment of two people to their beloved union.
and while physically it is impossible for two men or two women to make a baby. they can and should be able to adopt. this adoption fits into the natural progression assumed, that from the marriage will come offspring.
So,if proponents of Gay marriage wish to solidify the legitmacy of Gay marriages, by adoption of unwanted children.....then aborting unwanted potential children would undermine the opportunity to have children to care for and to grow into society in decent ways.
I think, and find it reasonable to discuss, the value of Gay Marriage not only to the indviduals involved, but to society, by way of child rearing, care, and growth of unwanted babies....it would naturally call forth a common sense desire to reject abortion, unless it falls into the time honored catagories of , Rape, incest or health of the mother.
In other words, proponents of gay marriage , who wish to adopt,who wish to strengthen their marriage through parenthood and shared growth.... would promote the logic that there is a place for the unwanted children and babies in their homes and hearts, It is one more alternative to Abortion.
If gay marriage proponents , link up to Abortion critics, with this common purpose, both have valuable situations that help each other. Strange bedfellows for sure, but when it comes to the value of life, the sanctity of it, and respect and recognition of it, we can all work together, we can all play a part.the world is an interesting place.
No need to respond Sir, it's just an idea that seems to be worth discussing.
Best to You and Yours.
87
@73 said basically exactly what I came in here to say. Before I had a boyfriend on campus, I was, like Chad, a guy who any of the other already out campus gays were probably pretty sure I was gay but would have thought of me as "not out." But what was really up was that I didn't care to be out to them. It's quite possible that he doesn't consider them as much a "friend" as they do him.
(I was hooking up with guys from the Internet too... but that was *cough* 15+ years ago so it was a whole lot harder than Grindr. But as Marcello and Chad have shown, the more things change...)
(I was hooking up with guys from the Internet too... but that was *cough* 15+ years ago so it was a whole lot harder than Grindr. But as Marcello and Chad have shown, the more things change...)
92
Yes, it was meant to be humourous.
Most people in my demographic are actually quite fond of beards. They're what you call "in".
Most people in my demographic are actually quite fond of beards. They're what you call "in".
93
Dan. You went to U of I and know damn well that the cruisy bathroom was in the GRADUATE library, right at the end of the tunnel.
94
I am squicked out by hotel rooms, and the third letter is a big reason why. I even hate to touch the remote control.
95
Dan, you know that "Al Gore invented the internet" reference is quite unfair. What Al Gore actually said was quite justifiable.
96
When Marcello got the face pic of Chad, he should have replied with "Oh, hey, Chad! Didn't realize I was flirting with a friend. 'Sister sex is sick' and all that. See you at SL's party/dance class/church" and then logged off. That way Chad would know that at least one person in his social circle knew his secret, but he wouldn't know which one. Maybe that would have been the nudge for him to quit his pathetic charade around his friends.
Or have CCC or another friend use the Grindr to find Chad in public, and then do a "shoulder tap" in person.
Or have CCC or another friend use the Grindr to find Chad in public, and then do a "shoulder tap" in person.
99
@auntie - I think you'd know if anyone were mad at you; personally I just don't have much to say about cars, though I'm glad you're happy.
100
@auntie(@85), I'm glad you enjoy your car's personality... I react this way to computers (Sony VAIO's have an allure that I think even Apple PowerBooks will never reach), but not to cars. Like so many nerdy types, I only learned to drive when I was 26-27, and I don't enjoy it... So there isn't much I can tell you about loving cars other than: by all means enjoy it!
(You don't have to want to fuck your car, but you might enjoy fucking in your car. Never tried it myself, but from those who enjoy cars I gather there's an allure to it that the car lover may pick on. :-)
(You don't have to want to fuck your car, but you might enjoy fucking in your car. Never tried it myself, but from those who enjoy cars I gather there's an allure to it that the car lover may pick on. :-)
101
mydriasis(@90), I actually wanted to grow a beard at one time (I also thought it looked like the kind of thing an intellectual would want to sport), but I couldn't -- the hair would grow thick in some places but thin in others, and I ended up looking like a toilet brush. And it took forever: as with your favorite type, my facial ahair grows slowly (I can go 3-4 days without shaving before people notice) and I have almost no body hair at all (a few scattered hairs here and there, but that's it).
Are there really many women who really like hairy masculine bodies? Curiously, most women I slept with found near-hairlessness nice, often even sexy. My wife loves it. (Of course, they're probably not a random sample; I may have been selected by women who, consciously or unconsciously, liked men with little body hair.)
Are there really many women who really like hairy masculine bodies? Curiously, most women I slept with found near-hairlessness nice, often even sexy. My wife loves it. (Of course, they're probably not a random sample; I may have been selected by women who, consciously or unconsciously, liked men with little body hair.)
102
RICK SANTORUM = GOP= NEWT(LIZARDHO)G.,..HOW BOUT MITT, THEN, WOW WAS THAT A REPUBLIPOTTY FLUSHING?
103
@101
Bingo. :)
I don't think I've ever heard a woman say she liked back hair or any of the like. But some of my friends are kind of hipsters and hipster guys are really into the lumberjack/fisherman trip right now. Ironically of course.
Or maybe that's just in Canada? Although I doubt it. Ask Williamsburg and get back to me. :p
Bingo. :)
I don't think I've ever heard a woman say she liked back hair or any of the like. But some of my friends are kind of hipsters and hipster guys are really into the lumberjack/fisherman trip right now. Ironically of course.
Or maybe that's just in Canada? Although I doubt it. Ask Williamsburg and get back to me. :p
104
Just to set the record straight (HAW HAW HAW) men with wacky hair colour often like females. I have blonde hair at the moment, I've had purple hair recently and I'm heterosexual.
105
@ 101: I love a naturally-smooth, hairless, *adult* male chest. (Emphasis on adult :-) )
Everyone has a physical fetish. That happens to be mine. I tend to shave my own chest, 'cos I have that knarly, silly-looking Austin Powers-like hair-bra lol. Hairy on my breasts. It looks pretty stupid, actually: hence why tend to shave it off. I wouldn't mind zappin' that shit off of me permanently.
Or something ;) .
Everyone has a physical fetish. That happens to be mine. I tend to shave my own chest, 'cos I have that knarly, silly-looking Austin Powers-like hair-bra lol. Hairy on my breasts. It looks pretty stupid, actually: hence why tend to shave it off. I wouldn't mind zappin' that shit off of me permanently.
Or something ;) .
106
Tanned skin, or, someone with skin that naturally tans well, and looks awesome...
THAT'S What I Like!
;-)~
THAT'S What I Like!
;-)~
107
I'd like to suggest a friendly competition, or a new thread, or somesuch. Let's all contribute the best Santorum headlines we find around the web. The only hitch is, it has to be a real, linkable headline, because dawg knows what we all could make up.
I'll start out by cheating, i.e., no link. Saw one the other day about Santorum's momentum. Ewwww.
I'll start out by cheating, i.e., no link. Saw one the other day about Santorum's momentum. Ewwww.
108
Marcelo is being a drama queen here. He doesn't show his face on Grindr even when his friend does and instead tells his friend all about it.
Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face.
Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face.
109
Re hairy chests, there may be an age factor as well. When I was in college, and most guys didn't have hairy chests, I thought hairy chests were as gross as hairy backs. But as I've aged, and my lovers have aged, now I have a thing for hairy chests (within reason, not popping out at the neckline)...
110
By way of introduction, I'd like to suggest a new thread or comment line or somesuch. Let's contribute the best Santorum headlines we find on the web. The only rule is the headline has to be real and linkable. I'll start by cheating, i.e., by not providing a link:
"Santorum Momentum Grows"
"Santorum Momentum Grows"
111
@ 107: I'd do that, as long as Dan and the site moderators aren't averse to us putting links up to direct the masses to sufficiently curtail the campaign of toxic terror that is operation santorum.
@ 108: Yeah, Marcelo did kind of rip off Chad by not giving him a facial pic, too! I don't relate to the part about Marcelo having to crow about to his friends that he saw Chad in there.. Either boink Chad or leave him be! And be a sport and send a facial pic of yourself in return. Maybe a nice 69 is in your future if you comply lol;).
@ 108: Yeah, Marcelo did kind of rip off Chad by not giving him a facial pic, too! I don't relate to the part about Marcelo having to crow about to his friends that he saw Chad in there.. Either boink Chad or leave him be! And be a sport and send a facial pic of yourself in return. Maybe a nice 69 is in your future if you comply lol;).
112
Marcelo is being a drama queen here. He doesn't show his face on Grindr even when his friend does and instead tells his other friend all about it.
Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face.
Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face.
113
@ 109, EricaP: Hi. I wouldn't mind my own hairy chest so much if it didn't look so silly in general! Seriously: think of a much less denser version of Austin Powers' hairy manboobs from the movies. I kinda look like that. No hair on the chest or sternum: just titty hair. I may as well be a witch with wiry nipple hairs that are as cold as the tundra winds ;) . Now I just need a crooked, wart-infested schnozz, a few sprinkles of dried toad skin, a raven's feather and some bubbles and ghouls in a simmering pot over a homefire within a cave, as my broom-and-handle vehicle is surgically attached to my inner backside for all of time... Making my witch's brew, with my wart-ridden schnozz and colder than a witch's bitch's tit, with wiry nipple hairs and Austin Powers hairy titties.
Gee, there's a real hard sell at work there, eh?
;-D
Gee, there's a real hard sell at work there, eh?
;-D
114
@ 108 & 112: That's good! To quote you:
"Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face."
The *real;)* exchange could also go:
Chad, To Marcelo: "Seriously, dude, lick my balls and let me cum on your face!" :)
"Seriously, dude, grow some balls and show your face."
The *real;)* exchange could also go:
Chad, To Marcelo: "Seriously, dude, lick my balls and let me cum on your face!" :)
115
@79 &81 First of all, I did say what if.......... I also didn't say we had sex, I said I thought we would have some fun with the girl. Straight? Well I guess that has somewhat to do with being attracted to woman. However gay men do seem attracted to me. I'm flattered but not interested. Why do people have to read into what others say?
116
@ 115: Were you guys taking Ecstacy or something? It *does* happen: straight guys on 'E' experimenting on one another...
Why do people have to read into what others say?
What else is there to in a site like this one?
;)
Why do people have to read into what others say?
What else is there to in a site like this one?
;)
117
Also, @ 115: Some gay guys can find you attractive or be drawn to you, and you wouldn't have to gay for it to happen. I can see that. Also, an edit for the last line of the last thing I posted. I meant to say, "What else is there to do within a site like this one?" :) Thanks!
118
Damn, did I pick the right name! Nothing like posting casually that you had a typo in your last post, when you again create a typo by forgetting a word. I also meant to say, "...you wouldn't have to be gay for it to happen..." . Peace!
119
@ 112: Marcelo just doesn't know enough to shut up and be cool about what he saw with Chad's pic on Grindr. I hate telling anyone else stuff I know of of people *they* also know of. It's bad karma and it bums me out, voluntarily betraying a confidence to liven up a hang-out with other friends. It's not worth undermining someone else's privacy for. Marcelo should either put up (or out lol) or shaddup. He owes Chad a b.j. at the very least, for the drama he created!
+~Electric Mombies Rule Always!! Come To 'Pigeon Park': They Await You...~+
+~Electric Mombies Rule Always!! Come To 'Pigeon Park': They Await You...~+
120
@115, in your earlier post @77 you said you kissed a guy, and "I wouldn't say it wasn't fun at the time," which sounds like it was kinda fun, if a little too rough for you.
Your "what if" also made it sound like you've been thinking about it since then, and maybe you're a little turned on by the idea.
But if you're not at all excited by the thought of sometime fooling around with a guy again, then I guess I did read too much into your original post. Apologies.
Your "what if" also made it sound like you've been thinking about it since then, and maybe you're a little turned on by the idea.
But if you're not at all excited by the thought of sometime fooling around with a guy again, then I guess I did read too much into your original post. Apologies.
121
Hmm. @ 120 Re: @ 115 Re: @ 77:
It is part of reality that sometimes people you hang out with: even people of the same sex - can sometimes entice you or turn you on, despite yourself.
Like, during a poon-tang drought, a guy who knows another guy friend of his who somehow possesses the kind of personality or presence the other guy is normally attracted to in his girl of choice..
In other words, when there's no good women around, and a male friend of yours somehow;) has the right mix of charm, discretion and naughtiness to go there with you.. That, and sometimes men do get annoyed with some women, for that age old claim of talking too much and not fucking enough. Who knows? People are weird, man. If you're a bird, I'm a bird.
;)
Perhaps the paint on my forehead has absorbed into my plumage, hence, affecting my better, objective judgement.
It is part of reality that sometimes people you hang out with: even people of the same sex - can sometimes entice you or turn you on, despite yourself.
Like, during a poon-tang drought, a guy who knows another guy friend of his who somehow possesses the kind of personality or presence the other guy is normally attracted to in his girl of choice..
In other words, when there's no good women around, and a male friend of yours somehow;) has the right mix of charm, discretion and naughtiness to go there with you.. That, and sometimes men do get annoyed with some women, for that age old claim of talking too much and not fucking enough. Who knows? People are weird, man. If you're a bird, I'm a bird.
;)
Perhaps the paint on my forehead has absorbed into my plumage, hence, affecting my better, objective judgement.
122
@121 Someone who is willing to go along with a little same-sex activity during a threesome, or during a drought (as you suggest), I'd call heteroflexible.
Someone who also fantasizes about same-sex activities, I'd call bi (or, I'd say they were "somewhere on the bi spectrum").
Dan says it's okay for such people to round up to straight...I think maybe they'd have more fun if they didn't...
Someone who also fantasizes about same-sex activities, I'd call bi (or, I'd say they were "somewhere on the bi spectrum").
Dan says it's okay for such people to round up to straight...I think maybe they'd have more fun if they didn't...
123
@99 EricaP and & @100 anklosaur: Thanks! It's great to hear from both of you. I guess I'm kinda "quirky nerdy" in an automotive-humanizing sort of way.
125
@ 122, EricaP: See? I remain unhip on the jargon! Heteroflexible..See? I could have known that word and saved us all a few paragraphs ;-D lol. Also, a hearty and warm welcome to Auntie Grizelda, EricaP, Anklylosaur as well as any of the other possible permuatations of my screennames. Cheers, One + All! Have A Great Weekend :) .
126
Nice to see people showing happiness here. Nice weekend to all, also from the Netherlands.
I could possibly count myself as heteroflexible solely on theoretical grounds, though I've never actually had sex with a man, since I think I wouldn't mind doing a guy as long as a woman is also involved; if I like him I might perhaps even kinda enjoy giving him pleasure; but I certainly don't fantasize about doing that.
I could possibly count myself as heteroflexible solely on theoretical grounds, though I've never actually had sex with a man, since I think I wouldn't mind doing a guy as long as a woman is also involved; if I like him I might perhaps even kinda enjoy giving him pleasure; but I certainly don't fantasize about doing that.
127
Beware Closet case may shut down for awhile so don't be surprised.
I like beard stubble and tongue...lots of it.
I like beard stubble and tongue...lots of it.
128
@121
That's a truly conflicted depiction of being straight. If you sometimes have sex with other guys (fear not: we'll keep in mind your gigantic rationalizations for what motivates your behavior!) you are by definition not straight. You describe this as business as usual, right? This as opposed to an isolated period of experimentation.
Are you afraid your dick will fall off if you admit to being bisexual? It can't be that you haven't heard of bisexuality so it must be an unwillingness to apply the word. "Heteroflexible" seems like a euphemism to me. Or maybe splitting hairs.
That's a truly conflicted depiction of being straight. If you sometimes have sex with other guys (fear not: we'll keep in mind your gigantic rationalizations for what motivates your behavior!) you are by definition not straight. You describe this as business as usual, right? This as opposed to an isolated period of experimentation.
Are you afraid your dick will fall off if you admit to being bisexual? It can't be that you haven't heard of bisexuality so it must be an unwillingness to apply the word. "Heteroflexible" seems like a euphemism to me. Or maybe splitting hairs.
129
@122 EricaP
It's the drought half of the equation where I draw the line. Guys who have sex with other guys just as a matter of routine-- what was the reason? women are difficult? women are not there at that precise moment of horniness?-- are bisexual. Serial temporary insanity as described in @121 will not be bought by the jury.
It's the drought half of the equation where I draw the line. Guys who have sex with other guys just as a matter of routine-- what was the reason? women are difficult? women are not there at that precise moment of horniness?-- are bisexual. Serial temporary insanity as described in @121 will not be bought by the jury.
130
Mr J - Colour me confused. Didn't you refuse to pin the B word on Mr Savage recently for remarkably similar behaviour, even with a qualifier that it was past behaviour?
131
@130 Mr V
Hello, Sir! I must say I don't recall. But do you see the distinction I'm making? Many people experiment at some point in their lives and they may well be straight. That may be the route by which they come to understand their orientation. Many people may have incidental homosexual contact during a 3 way and still be straight.
Yeah, Mr. Savage strikes me as a big, giant homo. Not bi. I often admire you, Sir, in your war against presumption. There seems to be an assumption here (though not by you) that a certain amount of gymnastics to avoid the "bi" label is a worthy goal. I must question whether that's an insult to me. No matter. A man who plans to have sex with other men on an ongoing basis with no timeline for withdrawal (yes,I crack myself up) is not straight.
Hello, Sir! I must say I don't recall. But do you see the distinction I'm making? Many people experiment at some point in their lives and they may well be straight. That may be the route by which they come to understand their orientation. Many people may have incidental homosexual contact during a 3 way and still be straight.
Yeah, Mr. Savage strikes me as a big, giant homo. Not bi. I often admire you, Sir, in your war against presumption. There seems to be an assumption here (though not by you) that a certain amount of gymnastics to avoid the "bi" label is a worthy goal. I must question whether that's an insult to me. No matter. A man who plans to have sex with other men on an ongoing basis with no timeline for withdrawal (yes,I crack myself up) is not straight.
132
Calling all straight men: Read @121. He's saying that's what you all do. Can I hear a little, "NO WE DO NOT!"?
133
@Mr J., I think a lot of straight men, if they were honest and self-aware, would admit that if they were in prison and had no access to women for years on end, they might seek out male sexual companionship.
That's a bit like Dan having a girlfriend in high school so no one would think he was gay. (Or the many gay men who married, and occasionally fucked, their wives.)
I reserve "bisexual" for people who fantasize about both men & women, and who think it likely that they would act on those fantasies if given an appealing & ethical opportunity. Me, I fool around with women during threesomes and sex parties, but they don't enter my fantasies unless I work really hard at it to prove to myself that it's possible. And even then, when I'm actually getting off, I'm thinking about what they're doing with a strap-on...
That's a bit like Dan having a girlfriend in high school so no one would think he was gay. (Or the many gay men who married, and occasionally fucked, their wives.)
I reserve "bisexual" for people who fantasize about both men & women, and who think it likely that they would act on those fantasies if given an appealing & ethical opportunity. Me, I fool around with women during threesomes and sex parties, but they don't enter my fantasies unless I work really hard at it to prove to myself that it's possible. And even then, when I'm actually getting off, I'm thinking about what they're doing with a strap-on...
134
@133 EricaP
I won't hold my breath waiting for straight men to be honest and self-aware.
You cite some extraordinary circumstances in which people engage in sexual behavior outside of their orientation. The example at hand is clearly normal life, not extraordinary circumstance. I would like to understand that if a person rejects a label it's because the label fails to communicate some essential fact, not because they think poorly of some kinds of people. I see the distinction you make between bi and heteroflexible. I don't understand it though because you're saying that a commonplace component of your sex life doesn't creep into your fantasy life. That's beyond me.
I won't hold my breath waiting for straight men to be honest and self-aware.
You cite some extraordinary circumstances in which people engage in sexual behavior outside of their orientation. The example at hand is clearly normal life, not extraordinary circumstance. I would like to understand that if a person rejects a label it's because the label fails to communicate some essential fact, not because they think poorly of some kinds of people. I see the distinction you make between bi and heteroflexible. I don't understand it though because you're saying that a commonplace component of your sex life doesn't creep into your fantasy life. That's beyond me.
135
@134 how many people have you interrogated about their fantasy lives? Turns out that people are very different -- for me, there's always an element of creepiness/violence/power, and there's always cock & penetration. Some guys' fantasies are super fantastical with body parts morphing, weird creatures, or things happening in outer space or underwater... I've met a guy who can only fantasize about things that are part of his real life (so he imagines ex- or current girlfriends, in places where he has fucked them, and using condoms if he was using condoms with them). That's incredible to me. But he was surprised that I was so different from him (ie, that my fantasies are almost always about things I wouldn't want to experience in real life).
So anyway, no, to clarify: things from my actual sex life almost never show up in my fantasies. (They're more stranger-on-plane; mechanic-fixing-car, kids'-soccer-coach, FedEx-delivery-guy, that sort of thing - but acting super inappropriate and overpowering me or manipulating me...) The women I've fooled around with in real life don't exude any sense of menace... so there's really not much way for them to creep into my fantasies...
So anyway, no, to clarify: things from my actual sex life almost never show up in my fantasies. (They're more stranger-on-plane; mechanic-fixing-car, kids'-soccer-coach, FedEx-delivery-guy, that sort of thing - but acting super inappropriate and overpowering me or manipulating me...) The women I've fooled around with in real life don't exude any sense of menace... so there's really not much way for them to creep into my fantasies...
136
Thinking on this more, I think the problem comes down to the fact that who we'll have sex with (either in fantasies or in real life) is contingent on so much more than gender, that people feel weird with almost any of the existing labels. "Bi" really sounds like one is in the middle, and doesn't express the idea that, say, someone goes for people who are tall and strong, who are usually male, but the occasional tall, strong woman can also arouse them.
My claim to being hetero-flexible comes partly out of my inexperience with women, so I haven't come on to them much, and I tend to feel like I'm going along with what they want, out of (almost) politeness, rather than desire. As I get more comfortable at the sex parties, I'm initiating a bit more -- but, honestly, that's really my exhibitionism speaking, more than any attraction to these women. And I'm still uncomfortable going down on them, due both to my inexperience and because their smell doesn't arouse me.
So -- go ahead and call me bi if that term seems useful to you. But please don't take it as an insult when I say that I really don't feel an internal attraction to women, so it's hard for me to feel bi, regardless of my actions.
My claim to being hetero-flexible comes partly out of my inexperience with women, so I haven't come on to them much, and I tend to feel like I'm going along with what they want, out of (almost) politeness, rather than desire. As I get more comfortable at the sex parties, I'm initiating a bit more -- but, honestly, that's really my exhibitionism speaking, more than any attraction to these women. And I'm still uncomfortable going down on them, due both to my inexperience and because their smell doesn't arouse me.
So -- go ahead and call me bi if that term seems useful to you. But please don't take it as an insult when I say that I really don't feel an internal attraction to women, so it's hard for me to feel bi, regardless of my actions.
137
To be clear, my own sexual identity feels more like "kinky" than like hetero, bi, or hetero-flexible.
138
Dan's a dick. If Chad wants his privacy, whose right is it to violate that? And, if he jumps off the GWB the day after Marcelo outs him, I guess it was his own fault. Everybody likes Chad. Chad's not a homophobic jerk, so what's to gain by outing him? And, if Marcelo truly cared about him, he'd take him aside, assure him his secret was safe, but emphasize that thare was a caring, supportive community if he ever decided to come out. Instead, he blabbed to everybody. Some friend. Some community. All a bunch of dicks.
139
@EricaP
I was speaking about the more general than the specific, i.e. not particular sexual encounters but male or female. Your general behavior is to have sex with both men and women yet your fantasies involve only the men. That suggests that your experience with women is unpleasant or indifferent so it makes me wonder why you keep doing it. Fantasy is something you can actively construct but it also happens by itself. Sex with women is apparently unpleasant enough to keep it from popping into your involuntary fantasies.
You give a lengthy description of your sexual orientation and activity above. It's interesting to read but it's bogged down in details specific to one person. When asked about your orientation you might as well reply, "EricaP." That's not very useful in conversation. I don't have a problem with you calling yourself heteroflexible. That's a term that can be applied and understood generally by lots of people, and you don't use it to specifically avoid or shun "bisexual."
I was speaking about the more general than the specific, i.e. not particular sexual encounters but male or female. Your general behavior is to have sex with both men and women yet your fantasies involve only the men. That suggests that your experience with women is unpleasant or indifferent so it makes me wonder why you keep doing it. Fantasy is something you can actively construct but it also happens by itself. Sex with women is apparently unpleasant enough to keep it from popping into your involuntary fantasies.
You give a lengthy description of your sexual orientation and activity above. It's interesting to read but it's bogged down in details specific to one person. When asked about your orientation you might as well reply, "EricaP." That's not very useful in conversation. I don't have a problem with you calling yourself heteroflexible. That's a term that can be applied and understood generally by lots of people, and you don't use it to specifically avoid or shun "bisexual."
140
@139
"Your general behavior is to have sex with both men and women yet your fantasies involve only the men. That suggests that your experience with women is unpleasant or indifferent so it makes me wonder why you keep doing it."
I can't speak for Erica but what you just said applies to me also and I have to disagree.
I have had encounters with women before, but I'm not really 'sexually attracted' to women, nor do I fantasize about them ever.
Why do it? Because sex is sex, and I'm not down with celibacy. Also, I guess my shallowness transcends my orientation since I'd pick a good looking woman over an "average" looking man any day. (I'll admit I'm picky, guys most people call 'average' I consider unattractive)
My policy with women was always a selfish one, as in, I'd be good with being on the receiving end but not the giving end (I guess I indentify as straight rather than bi because I really don't have any interest in eating pussy).
You'd be surprised how many bi/lesbian women are good with that deal.
I "round up to straight" because female anatomy doesn't get me going, I've never felt sexual or romantic feelings for any woman, and I will probably never go down on one.
Or to put it a different way. Do you fantasize about masturbating? If you don't would you wonder why you keep doing it?
"Your general behavior is to have sex with both men and women yet your fantasies involve only the men. That suggests that your experience with women is unpleasant or indifferent so it makes me wonder why you keep doing it."
I can't speak for Erica but what you just said applies to me also and I have to disagree.
I have had encounters with women before, but I'm not really 'sexually attracted' to women, nor do I fantasize about them ever.
Why do it? Because sex is sex, and I'm not down with celibacy. Also, I guess my shallowness transcends my orientation since I'd pick a good looking woman over an "average" looking man any day. (I'll admit I'm picky, guys most people call 'average' I consider unattractive)
My policy with women was always a selfish one, as in, I'd be good with being on the receiving end but not the giving end (I guess I indentify as straight rather than bi because I really don't have any interest in eating pussy).
You'd be surprised how many bi/lesbian women are good with that deal.
I "round up to straight" because female anatomy doesn't get me going, I've never felt sexual or romantic feelings for any woman, and I will probably never go down on one.
Or to put it a different way. Do you fantasize about masturbating? If you don't would you wonder why you keep doing it?
141
Oh, mydriasis @140 -- thank you! the line about masturbation is right on target!
Mr. J,
a) sex can be good and yet not enter my fantasies. Everyone fantasizes in different ways; mine are always creepy, so good sex is not likely to show up there.
b) yes, I'm fairly indifferent to sex with women.
c) but I like having sex in public, and at the parties I attend, that leads to having sex with women.
d) public sex does enter my fantasies, quite a bit (in creepy ways).
Any clearer? If not, just go back and reread mydriasis' last two sentences again.
Mr. J,
a) sex can be good and yet not enter my fantasies. Everyone fantasizes in different ways; mine are always creepy, so good sex is not likely to show up there.
b) yes, I'm fairly indifferent to sex with women.
c) but I like having sex in public, and at the parties I attend, that leads to having sex with women.
d) public sex does enter my fantasies, quite a bit (in creepy ways).
Any clearer? If not, just go back and reread mydriasis' last two sentences again.
142
Mr. J @139 "Fantasy is something you can actively construct but it also happens by itself."
Nope. Fantasy doesn't happen by itself, to me.
Unless you count weird, non-sexual, fears of falling down the stairs I'm on, or that the phone will ring with bad news, or that I'll embarrass myself in some way.
What's it like when sexual fantasies just show up?
Nope. Fantasy doesn't happen by itself, to me.
Unless you count weird, non-sexual, fears of falling down the stairs I'm on, or that the phone will ring with bad news, or that I'll embarrass myself in some way.
What's it like when sexual fantasies just show up?
143
@Erica
What's it like when they just show up?
Irritating!
It usually happens to me when I'm in lecture.
What's it like when they just show up?
Irritating!
It usually happens to me when I'm in lecture.
144
do you get specific images of sex with people in the room with you? or is it more like remembering sex you've had recently? Or just body parts?
145
Sometimes the first two, not the third, but most frequently it's more future tense. Like if I have plans that night/afternoon or etc.
146
@142 & @143: I seem to get fantasies of me and Brad Pitt in a cheap motel room every now and then. For some reason this seems to hit me while I'm eating chocolate. MMMMMMMMMMM!
147
@142 EricaP
Okay, I've never heard of that before. Again, that's beyond me.
@140 mydriasis
What do you mean by "sex is sex?"
Yes, I get around to fantasizing about masturbating just as I do ever other thing that my brain categorizes as sexual. Maybe I include more of my thoughts under the heading of fantasy than you guys do. They might be just memories or flashes of possibility to you. I don't know. Then again it's unfathomable to me that a blowjob is not sex to a lot of folks. I suppose if less of my sex life took place only in my head things would look different to me. Walter Mitty strikes again.
Okay, I've never heard of that before. Again, that's beyond me.
@140 mydriasis
What do you mean by "sex is sex?"
Yes, I get around to fantasizing about masturbating just as I do ever other thing that my brain categorizes as sexual. Maybe I include more of my thoughts under the heading of fantasy than you guys do. They might be just memories or flashes of possibility to you. I don't know. Then again it's unfathomable to me that a blowjob is not sex to a lot of folks. I suppose if less of my sex life took place only in my head things would look different to me. Walter Mitty strikes again.
149
@147
It means what I went on to say, which is - it's better to hook up with an good looking girl who's talented in bed and fun to be around than it is to not have any sex at all. Even if I'm not into women.
It means when you're actually in the middle of getting off, you're typically not pondering the gender of the person who's making that possible.
I'm pretty surprised you fantasize about masturbation, to be honest. Everyone's different eh?
It means what I went on to say, which is - it's better to hook up with an good looking girl who's talented in bed and fun to be around than it is to not have any sex at all. Even if I'm not into women.
It means when you're actually in the middle of getting off, you're typically not pondering the gender of the person who's making that possible.
I'm pretty surprised you fantasize about masturbation, to be honest. Everyone's different eh?
150
I don't "think of" blowjobs as sex even though I know objectively they are a "type" of sex.
But again... I grew up in the 90's. Blowjobs were sort of metaphorically pitched as sort of the I-can't-believe-it's-not-butter of the sex world.
"I can't believe it's not sex!" If you will.
You get to have sex without having "sex". Very conveinient loophole when you're young.
But again... I grew up in the 90's. Blowjobs were sort of metaphorically pitched as sort of the I-can't-believe-it's-not-butter of the sex world.
"I can't believe it's not sex!" If you will.
You get to have sex without having "sex". Very conveinient loophole when you're young.
151
@148 Mr J: I guess I'm just lucky. The scenerio of filling in for Geena is my favorite fantasy; usually "Kick the Stones" by Chris Whitley plays in the background. Like Wild Turkey, he goes down smooth!
152
CCC and Marcelo.
Why are you two fairies ganging up on Chad? The appropriate, friendly, casual thing to have done was for Marcelo to have simply typed, "Hi, Chad, how's it going?" Instead, M maintained his own mask of anonymity, and later shared the experience with CCC. The two of you are secretly picking apart Chad and feeling superior to him because he's maintaining some thin hetero veneer. It just sounds all so gay. Let it go.
Why are you two fairies ganging up on Chad? The appropriate, friendly, casual thing to have done was for Marcelo to have simply typed, "Hi, Chad, how's it going?" Instead, M maintained his own mask of anonymity, and later shared the experience with CCC. The two of you are secretly picking apart Chad and feeling superior to him because he's maintaining some thin hetero veneer. It just sounds all so gay. Let it go.
153
Griz,
We want to know more about your auto-erotic lovelife. Do you masturbate while driving? Have you soiled his seat?
We want to know more about your auto-erotic lovelife. Do you masturbate while driving? Have you soiled his seat?
154
@149 mydriasis
it's better to hook up with an good looking girl ... I'm not into women.That's a contradiction to me. Mrs. J fits my definition of straight: no homosexual activity ever. Never. Not interested in any way. Repulsed by the idea of it.
155
@142 EricaP
You appear to have a level of control over your thoughts that I've never heard of. You have exclusively controlled sexual fantasy.
What's it like when sexual fantasies just show up?It depends on the context. Sometimes when you're having sex you fantasize about other partners or situations. That may or may not be welcome/helpful. You can consciously steer your thoughts to some other fantasy or attempt to be more in the moment but some fantasies can be hard to push away. Good ones can come at inappropriate times or bad ones can stubbornly keep coming back. You can be making coffee and start fantasizing randomly. It's background noise to some extent.
You appear to have a level of control over your thoughts that I've never heard of. You have exclusively controlled sexual fantasy.
156
@154
Yes, but what little I know about Mrs. J from your posts - she's not bothered exceedingly bothered by periods of celibacy.
I am.
Some women use vibrators. Are they "attracted" to vibrators? No. But it'll get you off. And that's the point.
So the difference between me and Mrs. J is not attraction (we both share a lack of it) but rather repulsion. She has it and I don't.
In my books orientation is defined by a presence of attraction, not a lack of repulsion.
I guess I could claim to be bi, but I feel it would be misleading. Straight feels way closer to what I actualy am. So I "round up to straight", I guess. Or down, if you prefer.
Yes, but what little I know about Mrs. J from your posts - she's not bothered exceedingly bothered by periods of celibacy.
I am.
Some women use vibrators. Are they "attracted" to vibrators? No. But it'll get you off. And that's the point.
So the difference between me and Mrs. J is not attraction (we both share a lack of it) but rather repulsion. She has it and I don't.
In my books orientation is defined by a presence of attraction, not a lack of repulsion.
I guess I could claim to be bi, but I feel it would be misleading. Straight feels way closer to what I actualy am. So I "round up to straight", I guess. Or down, if you prefer.
157
@156 mydriasis
Vibrators are not people so they are irrelevant to me when talking about orientation. If I ask what your orientation is I'm probably most interested in understanding who you sleep with or fall in love with. We find lots of variations among people here when it comes to sex and love and bisexuality. I don't take issue with that. Round yourself anyway you like. I think it would be clearer for you to say bisexual than it would be to say straight if you bed both men and women, regardless of whether you treat the ladies as sex toys instead of as people. I think that's even more squarely in the bisexual category than someone who behaves exclusively heterosexually yet has bisexual feelings. We can always debate the seriousness of someone's fantasies, i.e. whether they should be acted on or not, but as soon as you try homo and hetero sex, and then decide to keep at both of them, then that's bisexual.
Sorry to quibble but Mrs. J is in fact exceedingly bothered by the thought of celibacy. A low libido is not the same thing as resolving to not have sex at all.
Vibrators are not people so they are irrelevant to me when talking about orientation. If I ask what your orientation is I'm probably most interested in understanding who you sleep with or fall in love with. We find lots of variations among people here when it comes to sex and love and bisexuality. I don't take issue with that. Round yourself anyway you like. I think it would be clearer for you to say bisexual than it would be to say straight if you bed both men and women, regardless of whether you treat the ladies as sex toys instead of as people. I think that's even more squarely in the bisexual category than someone who behaves exclusively heterosexually yet has bisexual feelings. We can always debate the seriousness of someone's fantasies, i.e. whether they should be acted on or not, but as soon as you try homo and hetero sex, and then decide to keep at both of them, then that's bisexual.
Sorry to quibble but Mrs. J is in fact exceedingly bothered by the thought of celibacy. A low libido is not the same thing as resolving to not have sex at all.
158
@155 how many people have you talked to about their fantasies? I doubt I'm all that odd, at least among women.
To me, fantasies are narratives whose purpose is to get me to orgasm. They don't jump unbidden into my head. If my mind is wandering idly during sex, it'll turn to errands or anxieties -- not sex. In order to stay on track towards orgasm, I have to consciously direct the flow of my thoughts along narrative lines.
Now, if you count all thoughts and memories as fantasies... sure, I think about sex a fair amount. But my emotional state is more likely to be anxiety, not arousal.
I sometimes see an attractive person and think to myself "he's hot!" or "she's hot!" But that's as far as it goes, no image of sex acts comes unbidden to my mind. It's like seeing a beautiful sunset -- my mind turns to sharing the moment with my husband, rather than to what I could do to that stranger if given the chance.
I'd love to have a thread about fantasy and see what other people do. We talk about dreams to some extent, as a culture ("Oh, I've had that dream" "Oh, you can fly in yours? Cool!") Much more than we share what it's like to fantasize...
To me, fantasies are narratives whose purpose is to get me to orgasm. They don't jump unbidden into my head. If my mind is wandering idly during sex, it'll turn to errands or anxieties -- not sex. In order to stay on track towards orgasm, I have to consciously direct the flow of my thoughts along narrative lines.
Now, if you count all thoughts and memories as fantasies... sure, I think about sex a fair amount. But my emotional state is more likely to be anxiety, not arousal.
I sometimes see an attractive person and think to myself "he's hot!" or "she's hot!" But that's as far as it goes, no image of sex acts comes unbidden to my mind. It's like seeing a beautiful sunset -- my mind turns to sharing the moment with my husband, rather than to what I could do to that stranger if given the chance.
I'd love to have a thread about fantasy and see what other people do. We talk about dreams to some extent, as a culture ("Oh, I've had that dream" "Oh, you can fly in yours? Cool!") Much more than we share what it's like to fantasize...
159
"fantasies are narratives whose purpose is to get me to orgasm" - and to stay on topic, if a woman shows up in the narrative, she's wearing a cock.
160
@159 EricaP
But she's still a she in your mind, right?
@158 Yeah, my mind races in a way that other people's generally do not. That may just be a component of hypomania. There is a seamless quality to it. It was mostly a gift when I was working in research (I have worked at world class institutions where I was described as brilliant) and a curse pretty much all of the rest of the time. Too fucking crazy now to work and play with others;-)
But she's still a she in your mind, right?
@158 Yeah, my mind races in a way that other people's generally do not. That may just be a component of hypomania. There is a seamless quality to it. It was mostly a gift when I was working in research (I have worked at world class institutions where I was described as brilliant) and a curse pretty much all of the rest of the time. Too fucking crazy now to work and play with others;-)
161
@160, she's a woman, but she's there for affirmative-action purposes, not because I'm honestly aroused by her woman-bits. Yes, I feel guilty for not fantasizing about women, so I sometimes cast them in my fantasies. I know, I'm weird.
163
@161 EricaP
FWIW I understand you to be scrupulously honest in your dealings with them so there's no need to feel guilty.
FWIW I understand you to be scrupulously honest in your dealings with them so there's no need to feel guilty.
164
@Hunt: Yes, actually I do, and have! He and I can't get enough of each other!
We especially love "top down" days with the wind in our hair!
We especially love "top down" days with the wind in our hair!
165
@J
1. Periods of celibacy - not life-long celibacy. To me, that's essentially what a low libido is.
2. If I were willing to go down on a woman or was aroused by them then I'd say I was more bi than straight, but because I find the female anatomy completely uninteresting, I consider myself more straight.
As someone brought up before, do you consider a man who's in prison and resorts to sleeping with men (but would go back to women the second he gets the chance) "bi"? Or straight.
I'd say he's straight.
1. Periods of celibacy - not life-long celibacy. To me, that's essentially what a low libido is.
2. If I were willing to go down on a woman or was aroused by them then I'd say I was more bi than straight, but because I find the female anatomy completely uninteresting, I consider myself more straight.
As someone brought up before, do you consider a man who's in prison and resorts to sleeping with men (but would go back to women the second he gets the chance) "bi"? Or straight.
I'd say he's straight.
166
My mind works in a way intermediate between EricaP's and Mr J's, it seems. I do have to consciously direct most fantasies (they are often elaborate and necessitate some narrative/conflict/background work, as D/s stories often do). I haven't had fantasies unexpectedly come to my mind: they usually need at least prompting from something external (I see someone who arouses me, and then suddenly I want to cast her as a character in one of my favorite fantasies). It has occurred to me to have sexual thoughts pop into my mind at unexpected moments (curiously enough, like mydriasis, that happened mostly when I was giving a lecture), but they usually do have an obvious prop in the environment: an attractive person, some object that suggests a situation I find hot, something. I don't think I have had a fantasy 'suddenly pop into my head' out of nowhere and with no textual coherence with what was going on before or with the surrounding environment.
What does sometimes come to me unexpectedly is arousal, i.e. the desire to engage in fantasizing, which is like suddenly feeling hungry. I may indulge, or I may suppress the desire; but either way, I'll have to start the narrative and take several minutes of storytelling to get to the really juicy parts, and that is all a conscious process.
Mr.J, it is interesting to wonder whether labels (like bi) have to do with who you bed, or with who you fantasize about. Mydriasis does make a strong point that sometimes you may have sex with a certain kind of partner just because it isn't so terribly icky to you ('sex is just sex'), and I do have to agree that this would feel very different from actively being aroused by the thought of having sex with said partner. If you're a guy who doesn't get physically sick by the idea of having sex with another guy and might sort of enjoy it with a sigh while fantasizing about a woman, it would seem you'd be very different from a guy who would enjoy fantasies/masturbation about sex with another guy.
Perhaps there is a difference between 'wow-bi' people who do fantasize about both men and women and 'meh-bi' (= heteroflexible?) people who fantasize only about one sex, even though they wouldn't throw a member of the other sex out of bed if s/he were attractive and happened to be lying beside and ready for action.
More...
What does sometimes come to me unexpectedly is arousal, i.e. the desire to engage in fantasizing, which is like suddenly feeling hungry. I may indulge, or I may suppress the desire; but either way, I'll have to start the narrative and take several minutes of storytelling to get to the really juicy parts, and that is all a conscious process.
Mr.J, it is interesting to wonder whether labels (like bi) have to do with who you bed, or with who you fantasize about. Mydriasis does make a strong point that sometimes you may have sex with a certain kind of partner just because it isn't so terribly icky to you ('sex is just sex'), and I do have to agree that this would feel very different from actively being aroused by the thought of having sex with said partner. If you're a guy who doesn't get physically sick by the idea of having sex with another guy and might sort of enjoy it with a sigh while fantasizing about a woman, it would seem you'd be very different from a guy who would enjoy fantasies/masturbation about sex with another guy.
Perhaps there is a difference between 'wow-bi' people who do fantasize about both men and women and 'meh-bi' (= heteroflexible?) people who fantasize only about one sex, even though they wouldn't throw a member of the other sex out of bed if s/he were attractive and happened to be lying beside and ready for action.
167
@165 mydriasis
Do we want to define things by the exception or by the norm? Prison? What people do on the battlefield is subject to the same analysis. What you do in your daily life matters. So does what you think about it. Call yourself bisexual if you want to because you have sex with both men and women, or even because you simply aspire to do so. But rationalizations like "sex without having sex" (blowjobs) don't change reality. The fact of one's having sex with both men and women is not somehow negated by anything that might be going on in their mind while they're doing it.
Do we want to define things by the exception or by the norm? Prison? What people do on the battlefield is subject to the same analysis. What you do in your daily life matters. So does what you think about it. Call yourself bisexual if you want to because you have sex with both men and women, or even because you simply aspire to do so. But rationalizations like "sex without having sex" (blowjobs) don't change reality. The fact of one's having sex with both men and women is not somehow negated by anything that might be going on in their mind while they're doing it.
168
@166 ankylosaur
Yes, we certainly all have our unique variations of desires and enthusiasms. "Gay" and "Straight" are absolutes though. Slice up the middle ground however you like, but reserve those other words for the extremes so that we don't end up with "very unique."
Regarding fantasy, perhaps I should clarify that it's not only that the process is seamless, but that it is also very rapid. Creativity is something of a fire hose for me. There isn't a lot of stopping to think which way to go next. There always seem to be multiple ideas instantly available. You could look up bipolar hypomania if this phenomenon interests you. You should see the thousands of words I delete just trying to post comments here.
Yes, we certainly all have our unique variations of desires and enthusiasms. "Gay" and "Straight" are absolutes though. Slice up the middle ground however you like, but reserve those other words for the extremes so that we don't end up with "very unique."
Regarding fantasy, perhaps I should clarify that it's not only that the process is seamless, but that it is also very rapid. Creativity is something of a fire hose for me. There isn't a lot of stopping to think which way to go next. There always seem to be multiple ideas instantly available. You could look up bipolar hypomania if this phenomenon interests you. You should see the thousands of words I delete just trying to post comments here.
169
Komen had every right to stop funding Planned Parenthood. Their mission is against breast cancer and if they decide that the $600K can go to better places (e.g. research, other community clinics, mammogram subsidies, self-exam info, etc.) it is perfectly their right. You people act like PP has a natural right to annual Komen funding for eternity.
170
Sure, Komen had every right to do what they did. And by the same token the public had every right to tell them they were a bunch of phonies for doing so, and to direct their donations elsewhere. Freedom of action does NOT mean freedom from consequences.
Back on topic: Sex is nice. So are fantasies about sex.
Back on topic: Sex is nice. So are fantasies about sex.
171
@162 :-)
@168 Most of us find it misleading to use the word 'bi' for everyone in between Kinsey 0 and Kinsey 6. I think most people use it for Kinsey 2s, 3s, and 4s.
Will heteroflexible and homoflexible work to refer to Kinsey 1s and 5s? Or we could use "mostly straight" and "mostly gay" instead... Other candidates?
Here's the scale as given on Wikipedia:
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
X Asexual
@168 Most of us find it misleading to use the word 'bi' for everyone in between Kinsey 0 and Kinsey 6. I think most people use it for Kinsey 2s, 3s, and 4s.
Will heteroflexible and homoflexible work to refer to Kinsey 1s and 5s? Or we could use "mostly straight" and "mostly gay" instead... Other candidates?
Here's the scale as given on Wikipedia:
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
X Asexual
172
@168, my experience is that absolutes are useful points of reference, but reality is usually more nuanced. Besides, the difference between you and mydriasis is not about whether or not there are absolutes, but about where exactly you draw the line that separates members of one group from members of the other group.
To me, there is a big difference between people who fantasize about sex with, e.g., men (regardless of whether or not they actually have sex with men), and people who even do ocasionally have sex with men but never fantasize about it. This seems to me a better place to draw the line between bi's and non-bi's than elsewhere.
It's not simply a point about extreme situations vs. real life. If 'what you do' is what defines bi's, then you have to admit those guys in prison who had sex with other men because of the total absence of women and who would go back to women as soon as they got a chance are bi. It's not a normal situation, granted, but it's one that makes the difference between your viewpoint and mydriasis clearer: if you're consistent in your claims, you'd have to say they're bi, because the fact they're having sex with men only because of the absolute absence of women (out of desperation, as they might put it) doesn't change the fact that they're willingly having sex with men, which, by your definition, for guys who also have sex with women, equals bi. By mydriasis' definition, however, it doesn't: they are straight, but they've been without sex with women for so long that even men start looking, well, fuckable.
To me, there is a big difference between people who fantasize about sex with, e.g., men (regardless of whether or not they actually have sex with men), and people who even do ocasionally have sex with men but never fantasize about it. This seems to me a better place to draw the line between bi's and non-bi's than elsewhere.
It's not simply a point about extreme situations vs. real life. If 'what you do' is what defines bi's, then you have to admit those guys in prison who had sex with other men because of the total absence of women and who would go back to women as soon as they got a chance are bi. It's not a normal situation, granted, but it's one that makes the difference between your viewpoint and mydriasis clearer: if you're consistent in your claims, you'd have to say they're bi, because the fact they're having sex with men only because of the absolute absence of women (out of desperation, as they might put it) doesn't change the fact that they're willingly having sex with men, which, by your definition, for guys who also have sex with women, equals bi. By mydriasis' definition, however, it doesn't: they are straight, but they've been without sex with women for so long that even men start looking, well, fuckable.
173
@169: Many are angered by Komen's totally chickenshitted caving in to politicians' and fanatically religious groups' bullying tactics, not so much by where the $600k gets funded.
Are you female and in the low-income bracket? Ever miss a period? Ever felt a breast lump? Often Planned Parenthood is the only hope for women and girls in these situations. Until pigheaded popes, congressmen and politicians, largely men desperate to remain in CONTROL, cease and desist from making women's health issues a contact sport, the fight to keep Planned Parenthood will continue.
Are you female and in the low-income bracket? Ever miss a period? Ever felt a breast lump? Often Planned Parenthood is the only hope for women and girls in these situations. Until pigheaded popes, congressmen and politicians, largely men desperate to remain in CONTROL, cease and desist from making women's health issues a contact sport, the fight to keep Planned Parenthood will continue.
174
@169
And yet they didn't decide it could go to better places (with respect to their stated mission which people donate to them for), they decided that they could use their money as a political wedge - that's why people objected.
Also, fun fact - when donating money, one has the ability to restrict how that money is used. For example, Komen could have required that all their money went directly to breast cancer screening (and none of it went to abortion procedures) - which I'm sure they've done with every donation in the past. Yet they wanted to "defend" planned parenthood.
If Komen had withdrawn their money for a legitimate reason, this shitstorm never would have happened.
And yet they didn't decide it could go to better places (with respect to their stated mission which people donate to them for), they decided that they could use their money as a political wedge - that's why people objected.
Also, fun fact - when donating money, one has the ability to restrict how that money is used. For example, Komen could have required that all their money went directly to breast cancer screening (and none of it went to abortion procedures) - which I'm sure they've done with every donation in the past. Yet they wanted to "defend" planned parenthood.
If Komen had withdrawn their money for a legitimate reason, this shitstorm never would have happened.
175
@171 EricaP
Why not "slightly bi" instead? I believe that question brings us back to the beginning of this tangent. Examine the motivation behind preferring "mostly straight" or "straight"(when rounding or rationalizing) over "slightly bi."
I like Kinsey's scale but it's meant to be experiential only. It's not intended to say anything about physical attraction or love. Lots of people use it more loosely, myself included, but that can be confusing, as multiple definitions of a word always are.
Why not "slightly bi" instead? I believe that question brings us back to the beginning of this tangent. Examine the motivation behind preferring "mostly straight" or "straight"(when rounding or rationalizing) over "slightly bi."
I like Kinsey's scale but it's meant to be experiential only. It's not intended to say anything about physical attraction or love. Lots of people use it more loosely, myself included, but that can be confusing, as multiple definitions of a word always are.
176
@172 ankylosaur
Again, I'm not talking about inmates. They are irrelevant to what I'm failing to communicate. I'll give up now.
Again, I'm not talking about inmates. They are irrelevant to what I'm failing to communicate. I'll give up now.
177
@178, I understand your point. You're insisting inmates are an exaggerated case that has no bearing on your definitions, whereas I think they do. I'm testing its consistency, i.e. I'm checking whether or not you're consistent with your criteria in a non-frequent situation (aka a 'thought experiment'). But you're not interested in it, so yeah, I'll stop.
Bottom line: you think a man are bi if he, besides having sex with women, also has willingly/repeatedly sex with men, no matter what the reason is. Mydriasis (and I think I agree) thinks the reason why he has sex with men, too, is important for deciding whether or not he's bi. In other words, you see 'bi' as a mere descriptive term ('sex with both men and women happens here'), whereas Mydrasis sees it as an orientation ('what is he attracted to?'). Would you say that's a fair assessment?
Bottom line: you think a man are bi if he, besides having sex with women, also has willingly/repeatedly sex with men, no matter what the reason is. Mydriasis (and I think I agree) thinks the reason why he has sex with men, too, is important for deciding whether or not he's bi. In other words, you see 'bi' as a mere descriptive term ('sex with both men and women happens here'), whereas Mydrasis sees it as an orientation ('what is he attracted to?'). Would you say that's a fair assessment?
178
@175, to me, 'slightly bi' = 'heteroflexible' = 'mostly straight', i.e. they sound like perfect synonyms (though I'm sure people will feel different pragmatic associations with these terms).
I think you're trying to imply 'slightly bi' people who identify as straight are doing so just to avoid prejudice, external or internal. A case of the cup being half full vs. half empty. Is that the point?
I think you're trying to imply 'slightly bi' people who identify as straight are doing so just to avoid prejudice, external or internal. A case of the cup being half full vs. half empty. Is that the point?
179
@175, but, on second thoughts... I don't know if others would agree, but 'slightly bi' sounds to me like the person would consider sex with the non-preferred sex as a possible source of pleasure, i.e. I'd see a 'slightly bi' man feeling occasionally attracted to other men, whereas a heteroflexible guy wouldn't be; he's just not horrified by it (the way homophobes are) and is OK with doing it as a chore.
It's of course a continuum, though.
It's of course a continuum, though.
180
@178 ankylosaur
Almost. Not "are" but rather "may be." Depending on the person I may have my suspicions, especially if you fuck men and women and call yourself "straight." But, yeah, mydriasis uses a lot of words more loosely than I do. That muddies communication. She's worth talking to so I'll try to be wary of getting excited over it. That's a challenge for me though.
Anyway, go ask a random person on the street, "As a straight man, do I have sex with women, men, or both?"
When I'm standing in front of you and in that moment you pick a label, then you are telling me something interesting about yourself and your plans for the immediate future. That's what's most informative and interesting to me. I don't care if you behaved trans in prison for 5 years. That was an aberration. Don't get into a long discussion about cannibalism in life boats when ordering dinner. Yes, that happens, but do we need to take that into account at all times?
Almost. Not "are" but rather "may be." Depending on the person I may have my suspicions, especially if you fuck men and women and call yourself "straight." But, yeah, mydriasis uses a lot of words more loosely than I do. That muddies communication. She's worth talking to so I'll try to be wary of getting excited over it. That's a challenge for me though.
Anyway, go ask a random person on the street, "As a straight man, do I have sex with women, men, or both?"
When I'm standing in front of you and in that moment you pick a label, then you are telling me something interesting about yourself and your plans for the immediate future. That's what's most informative and interesting to me. I don't care if you behaved trans in prison for 5 years. That was an aberration. Don't get into a long discussion about cannibalism in life boats when ordering dinner. Yes, that happens, but do we need to take that into account at all times?
181
@ 121, Mr. J: If I may quote you, Thanks:
"That's a truly conflicted depiction of being straight. If you sometimes have sex with other guys (fear not: we'll keep in mind your gigantic rationalizations for what motivates your behavior!) you are by definition not straight. You describe this as business as usual, right? This as opposed to an isolated period of experimentation.
Are you afraid your dick will fall off if you admit to being bisexual? It can't be that you haven't heard of bisexuality so it must be an unwillingness to apply the word. "Heteroflexible" seems like a euphemism to me. Or maybe splitting hairs."
Actually, I've been on the other end of the scenario...where guys (of whatever orientation) chat me up and it becomes evident that there's interest there to wanna mess around with me on the low..
I myself haven't ever messed about with people like that. Maybe it's the fact that my hair is long, I'm attractive-enough when shaved and that I'm not too tall or too short. A lot can play into that. It's flattering enough to me to have anyone be interested in you. Fortunately, I am in love and have been in love with someone for a very, very long time. I'm happy, and no piece of outside strange is worth jeopardizing the great thing I share with the love of my life :) .
Bisexual in spirit. Never bagged a lady in the sack. Gay to the end, man. I know me. I sometimes wish I was more bi, but I'm not (although I do gather why you could say that).
Nine times out of ten, it's guys who identify as straight (and are known to be straight) that flirt with me and kinda occasionally hint at here and there that if we both kept quiet about it and went with it...
Again, it's enough to be flattered by it all, then to keep it moving. I only wanna be a freak in the sack for my bestest and most beloved;).
I don't have sex with other guys. I just jerk off A LOT. I'm in love (with an actual person, not with jerking off per se' LOL), and I never thought I would find happiness ever -- true happiness -- but I have.
Sorry to paint myself as being some straight-guy seducing, in denial about being bi, overly-explaining pseudo-intellectual, or something.
I don't mind being called to task about anything. I'll answer honestly and without b.s. . It's more helpful anyway. Who needs bullshit, never mind from me?
:-)
Peace.
More...
"That's a truly conflicted depiction of being straight. If you sometimes have sex with other guys (fear not: we'll keep in mind your gigantic rationalizations for what motivates your behavior!) you are by definition not straight. You describe this as business as usual, right? This as opposed to an isolated period of experimentation.
Are you afraid your dick will fall off if you admit to being bisexual? It can't be that you haven't heard of bisexuality so it must be an unwillingness to apply the word. "Heteroflexible" seems like a euphemism to me. Or maybe splitting hairs."
Actually, I've been on the other end of the scenario...where guys (of whatever orientation) chat me up and it becomes evident that there's interest there to wanna mess around with me on the low..
I myself haven't ever messed about with people like that. Maybe it's the fact that my hair is long, I'm attractive-enough when shaved and that I'm not too tall or too short. A lot can play into that. It's flattering enough to me to have anyone be interested in you. Fortunately, I am in love and have been in love with someone for a very, very long time. I'm happy, and no piece of outside strange is worth jeopardizing the great thing I share with the love of my life :) .
Bisexual in spirit. Never bagged a lady in the sack. Gay to the end, man. I know me. I sometimes wish I was more bi, but I'm not (although I do gather why you could say that).
Nine times out of ten, it's guys who identify as straight (and are known to be straight) that flirt with me and kinda occasionally hint at here and there that if we both kept quiet about it and went with it...
Again, it's enough to be flattered by it all, then to keep it moving. I only wanna be a freak in the sack for my bestest and most beloved;).
I don't have sex with other guys. I just jerk off A LOT. I'm in love (with an actual person, not with jerking off per se' LOL), and I never thought I would find happiness ever -- true happiness -- but I have.
Sorry to paint myself as being some straight-guy seducing, in denial about being bi, overly-explaining pseudo-intellectual, or something.
I don't mind being called to task about anything. I'll answer honestly and without b.s. . It's more helpful anyway. Who needs bullshit, never mind from me?
:-)
Peace.
182
@ Mr. J: Wanna have a drink together sometime :) ? The orange groves in Florida are the best for gettin' fukked up on some citrus goodness! If you're a bird, I'm a bird ;) .
Insanity? Me??? What would ever make you think that? ;-D I *know* I have some screws loose on occasion, but to my credit, I make ample light of that honestly.
Mr. J, I detect some sparks between you and I. Wanna?
;)
Insanity? Me??? What would ever make you think that? ;-D I *know* I have some screws loose on occasion, but to my credit, I make ample light of that honestly.
Mr. J, I detect some sparks between you and I. Wanna?
;)
183
@175, "slightly bi" doesn't give any info about which side of the spectrum you're on. If I tell a guy at a bar that I'm "slightly bi," he doesn't know if I'm mostly lesbian or mostly straight. So it's less useful as a term.
184
@ 183, EricaP: Hi Erica. How are you?
I don't bother with saying I'm bi at all, 'cos I know I'm not.
Actually;), for a time it used to tickle to me to 'fess up to other people that I'm gay. Especially when some people don't tend to believe me off the bat, 'cos I tend to fly under the radar (gaydar?) with how I tend to be, how I carry myself..
If I were truly bi, I would out and proud about it. In lieu of that, I am out and proud as a gay man. That's my truth. Underneath all of the empathy for wanting happiness for any couple of any sexual persuasion.
I'm glad I'm not bi, actually. Who needs all of that additional interpersonal drama? Not me, man!
I found true love eons ago, and I'm happier than I ever have been. Hope that clarifies things some.
I don't bother with saying I'm bi at all, 'cos I know I'm not.
Actually;), for a time it used to tickle to me to 'fess up to other people that I'm gay. Especially when some people don't tend to believe me off the bat, 'cos I tend to fly under the radar (gaydar?) with how I tend to be, how I carry myself..
If I were truly bi, I would out and proud about it. In lieu of that, I am out and proud as a gay man. That's my truth. Underneath all of the empathy for wanting happiness for any couple of any sexual persuasion.
I'm glad I'm not bi, actually. Who needs all of that additional interpersonal drama? Not me, man!
I found true love eons ago, and I'm happier than I ever have been. Hope that clarifies things some.
188
@ 183 & 185: I just tell 'em all straight out (no pun intended) that I am gay: it's sometimes funny to watch people react with barely-disguised discomfort, writhing in their barstool or mild shock. The truth is the truth. That'd be the ultimate bag of steamin' hot bullshit if I were to play the bi card in some bar somewhere. I'm not a good liar and I'm grateful for that.
I honestly don't care who's bi, straight, gay, poly, cis, quasi, transgendered, transsexual, asexual, hyper-sexual... It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round.
Honesty is honesty, and we all have our own truth as individuals. Mine is is that I am totally, 100% a gay man, and I am at peace with that. I've never actually said I was bi before. Before I came out as gay in 1997, I was at best evasive about my sexuality. Then, I just graduated to sticking with the truth and facts that I'm gay. Who needs me putting tension in the air because I can't handle my own truth? That's why I came out: to get rid of the old toxic conditioning and build a better, healthier, more honest foundation for my subsequent life.
Let's all go and have a drink together at the orange grove! My treat! ;)
I honestly don't care who's bi, straight, gay, poly, cis, quasi, transgendered, transsexual, asexual, hyper-sexual... It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round.
Honesty is honesty, and we all have our own truth as individuals. Mine is is that I am totally, 100% a gay man, and I am at peace with that. I've never actually said I was bi before. Before I came out as gay in 1997, I was at best evasive about my sexuality. Then, I just graduated to sticking with the truth and facts that I'm gay. Who needs me putting tension in the air because I can't handle my own truth? That's why I came out: to get rid of the old toxic conditioning and build a better, healthier, more honest foundation for my subsequent life.
Let's all go and have a drink together at the orange grove! My treat! ;)
189
@ 187, Mr. J: How are you, man? :-)
To quote you: "I don't drink. Those other guys you mentioned? They're bi-curious, not straight."
I don't really drink either. I prefer reefer myself. Yeah... Those other guys are bi-curious. It's not so "gay" if you try to hook up with someone who is a tad androgynous in appearance. It's "safe" to want to experiment on someone who doesn't quite look like one of their golfing buddies or something.
Again, it's flattering whenever anyone else finds you attractive. Having said that, I am genuinely monogamous for my true love babe and it would crush me to ever jeopardize what we share to ever mess around with anyone else.
I'm lucky and blessed enough to have real love in my life. I ask for nothing more. Take what you need and know when that's enough. That's me.
Perhaps dinner together, all of us? :-)
To quote you: "I don't drink. Those other guys you mentioned? They're bi-curious, not straight."
I don't really drink either. I prefer reefer myself. Yeah... Those other guys are bi-curious. It's not so "gay" if you try to hook up with someone who is a tad androgynous in appearance. It's "safe" to want to experiment on someone who doesn't quite look like one of their golfing buddies or something.
Again, it's flattering whenever anyone else finds you attractive. Having said that, I am genuinely monogamous for my true love babe and it would crush me to ever jeopardize what we share to ever mess around with anyone else.
I'm lucky and blessed enough to have real love in my life. I ask for nothing more. Take what you need and know when that's enough. That's me.
Perhaps dinner together, all of us? :-)
190
@ 187, Mr. J again: I agree that those guys are bi-curious. Let them be as curious as they want: they're still not gettin' in my pants.
I still believe that those who fuck anything with a pulse, male or female, don't know how to focus in on receiving, giving and feeling deserving of love.
Who knows what goes on in others' minds? I now trust in who I am, and I am true-blue into monogamy. I am already fulL:)filled, and I wouldn't wreck what I share for anything or anyone else in the world. Life is good :-) .
I still believe that those who fuck anything with a pulse, male or female, don't know how to focus in on receiving, giving and feeling deserving of love.
Who knows what goes on in others' minds? I now trust in who I am, and I am true-blue into monogamy. I am already fulL:)filled, and I wouldn't wreck what I share for anything or anyone else in the world. Life is good :-) .
191
Ms Erica/Mr J - Yes, "slightly bi" unfortunately suggests alternatives too far apart for comfort. But it made me wonder whether it might not be possible, to borrow from crayons, to do something with designations like "bi-straight" and "straight-bi" (and the converse) to indicate equal relationship potential with a preferential lean and then wherever one might want to set the bar as the first standard of unequal potential. Then one might go on from there. It's wildly full of holes, but I like the idea of starting from the centre instead of the ends. Anyone who wishes, please feel free to refine.
192
I'm gay, but bi in spirit. I guess that makes me "gay-straight" (for I empathize with any walk of life, to be honest. Yet, I'm gay and not bisexual, but think everyone --regardless of what sexuality they possess -- deserves happiness and the same equality as anyone else. How's that?
194
@191 brilliant! I'd be happy to say I'm straight-bi (and follow up with "straight-leaning bisexual" for those who then look at me quizzically).
195
@ 191, vennominon: I like this bit, what you wrote:
"...but I like the idea of starting from the centre instead of the ends..."
Absolutely true. I never would have figured out and trusted in who I am had I not looked from this inside-out: from the centre instead of the ends, as you'd say.
Everything falls into place once you adhere to listening to yourself and what you *feel*. What you think matters to, but in my own experience as an example, I tend to be overly-analytical to a detrimental effect sometimes..
Once the compass turns inward readying itself to look outward through your own eyes and soul..
That's where someone's natural style emanates from: where people can tell you're real and genuine, no matter what your truth as a story is.
That's well put, vennominon: "...but I like the idea of starting from the centre instead of the ends..."
Besides, there's way too much to try to focus on if you look from the outside in trying to make it as if you're looking from the inside out through your own eyes, belief and vision.
I say I'm "gay-straight" because I incorporate all of the other variations of sexuality within that. I champion the rights of any person, regardless of their sexual orientation.
So, I guess I would be "gay - (as in through) straight". I honestly don't identify with any movements or political causes. I'm for the individual. Cool question.
"...but I like the idea of starting from the centre instead of the ends..."
Absolutely true. I never would have figured out and trusted in who I am had I not looked from this inside-out: from the centre instead of the ends, as you'd say.
Everything falls into place once you adhere to listening to yourself and what you *feel*. What you think matters to, but in my own experience as an example, I tend to be overly-analytical to a detrimental effect sometimes..
Once the compass turns inward readying itself to look outward through your own eyes and soul..
That's where someone's natural style emanates from: where people can tell you're real and genuine, no matter what your truth as a story is.
That's well put, vennominon: "...but I like the idea of starting from the centre instead of the ends..."
Besides, there's way too much to try to focus on if you look from the outside in trying to make it as if you're looking from the inside out through your own eyes, belief and vision.
I say I'm "gay-straight" because I incorporate all of the other variations of sexuality within that. I champion the rights of any person, regardless of their sexual orientation.
So, I guess I would be "gay - (as in through) straight". I honestly don't identify with any movements or political causes. I'm for the individual. Cool question.
196
@Mr J
"Again, I'm not talking about inmates. The are irrelevant to what I'm failing to communicate."
They aren't irrelevant, though. For most people, being in prison is an extreme case of sexual deprivation. For some people (cough) three weeks is an extreme case of sexual deprivation. Desperate times call for desperate measures - we just vary on when our cutoff for desperate times is.
"Do we want to define things by the exception or by the norm? Prison? What people do on the battlefield is subject to the same analysis. What you do in your daily life matters."
I never said it was the norm. It was an exception. I've only hooked up with three women in my whole life. Last time I did was over five years ago. It may never happen again, who knows?
@ankylosaur
Nail meets head once more.
I agree.
As to why I say straight instead of 'slightly bi', it just feels more true.
And it's certainly not a prejudice thing. When I was a teenager (the period of time when each of my hookups with girls happened) most of my friends were gay or bi. If anything I would have been inclined to identify as bi because it was 'cooler' in a sense, at the time. But if just didn't feel like me. It didn't feel like who I was, as much as it is more exotic than plain old boring "straight".
"Again, I'm not talking about inmates. The are irrelevant to what I'm failing to communicate."
They aren't irrelevant, though. For most people, being in prison is an extreme case of sexual deprivation. For some people (cough) three weeks is an extreme case of sexual deprivation. Desperate times call for desperate measures - we just vary on when our cutoff for desperate times is.
"Do we want to define things by the exception or by the norm? Prison? What people do on the battlefield is subject to the same analysis. What you do in your daily life matters."
I never said it was the norm. It was an exception. I've only hooked up with three women in my whole life. Last time I did was over five years ago. It may never happen again, who knows?
@ankylosaur
Nail meets head once more.
I agree.
As to why I say straight instead of 'slightly bi', it just feels more true.
And it's certainly not a prejudice thing. When I was a teenager (the period of time when each of my hookups with girls happened) most of my friends were gay or bi. If anything I would have been inclined to identify as bi because it was 'cooler' in a sense, at the time. But if just didn't feel like me. It didn't feel like who I was, as much as it is more exotic than plain old boring "straight".
199
@197, My experience with women was limited to fondling my best friend's boobs in high school -- until my husband encouraged me to go further, as part of his midlife crisis. Now, we go to sex & BDSM parties, where women routinely fondle each other and more. That said, I have three ways of answering your question:
a) if he no longer wanted to go to those parties, I'd worry about his mental health.
b) if he was of sane mind and asked me to be monogamous, I would. (He's my dom.)
c) if, however, he died or divorced me, I'd expect to find myself in a monogamous relationship with a kinky guy.
Or alone, going to the kind of BDSM parties that are heavy on kink, not sex.
a) if he no longer wanted to go to those parties, I'd worry about his mental health.
b) if he was of sane mind and asked me to be monogamous, I would. (He's my dom.)
c) if, however, he died or divorced me, I'd expect to find myself in a monogamous relationship with a kinky guy.
Or alone, going to the kind of BDSM parties that are heavy on kink, not sex.
201
@196, I thought the difference of opinion between you and Mr J was interesting, and it made me think about a couple of things I hadn't thought about before. Like, is a person's sexual identification a result of said person's preferences, or a result of said person's behavior?
It seems to me Mr J is implicitly claiming that a person's behavior always reflects his/her preferences: if you're not being forced at gunpoint or in some extreme situation (he insisted on excluding prisons and lifeboats), then if you're having sex with men and women it's because you prefer that. So you're bi.
Whereas it seems to me you're pointing out there may other legitimate reasons why you'd be having sex with men and women, other than this being your preference.
If I interpret you guys correctly, Mr. J would find it difficult to believe that you, as a straight woman, might have sex with women just because 'sex is sex' and a warm body lying with you in bed is better than no such thing. To him, if you're "really" a straight woman, this should be impossible: a straight woman wouldn't do that, because it goes against his definition of what straight is. You are "slightly bi" or "straight-bi" or even simply "bi."
Whereas you find it easy to understand that a clearly straight woman (or man) might have sex with another woman (or, respectively, man) if the need was big enough (which, as you point out, is a personal thing: 5 years for some people, three weeks for another), or for other reasons (say, you're sorry for the person and want to do her a favor, etc.). I.e., you think someone can feel, and actually be, straight despite episodes of sex with another person of the same sex, because the most important thing is who you fantasize about and/or feel attracted to; said episodes were more like masturbation than sexual orientation. To you, not behavior, but attraction/arousal ('what excites you') defines orientation.
And personally I find it easier to agree with you than with Mr. J. Even though behavior is usually a very good predictor of orientation, I can imagine situations where it would not, and that is enough for me to see both as independent variables. I can see myself having sex with men, even though I don't think I would have pleasure in it. Some of the situations in which this would happen Mr. J would probably consider "extreme"; others (if I found a guy of the exact right kind -- like Dan's "butch girl" crush) he might consider indicators of me being gay; and others yet I'm not sure how he would classify (say, if I had sex with a male friend out of pity or to do him a favor?). Yet, like you, I would find all these situations irrelevant in determining my orientation, which really is straight: my fantasy world is dominated by women, period.
Still, it was an interesting topic to think about. I had never thought about this, and I'm thankful to both you and Mr. J for a bringing it up.
More...
It seems to me Mr J is implicitly claiming that a person's behavior always reflects his/her preferences: if you're not being forced at gunpoint or in some extreme situation (he insisted on excluding prisons and lifeboats), then if you're having sex with men and women it's because you prefer that. So you're bi.
Whereas it seems to me you're pointing out there may other legitimate reasons why you'd be having sex with men and women, other than this being your preference.
If I interpret you guys correctly, Mr. J would find it difficult to believe that you, as a straight woman, might have sex with women just because 'sex is sex' and a warm body lying with you in bed is better than no such thing. To him, if you're "really" a straight woman, this should be impossible: a straight woman wouldn't do that, because it goes against his definition of what straight is. You are "slightly bi" or "straight-bi" or even simply "bi."
Whereas you find it easy to understand that a clearly straight woman (or man) might have sex with another woman (or, respectively, man) if the need was big enough (which, as you point out, is a personal thing: 5 years for some people, three weeks for another), or for other reasons (say, you're sorry for the person and want to do her a favor, etc.). I.e., you think someone can feel, and actually be, straight despite episodes of sex with another person of the same sex, because the most important thing is who you fantasize about and/or feel attracted to; said episodes were more like masturbation than sexual orientation. To you, not behavior, but attraction/arousal ('what excites you') defines orientation.
And personally I find it easier to agree with you than with Mr. J. Even though behavior is usually a very good predictor of orientation, I can imagine situations where it would not, and that is enough for me to see both as independent variables. I can see myself having sex with men, even though I don't think I would have pleasure in it. Some of the situations in which this would happen Mr. J would probably consider "extreme"; others (if I found a guy of the exact right kind -- like Dan's "butch girl" crush) he might consider indicators of me being gay; and others yet I'm not sure how he would classify (say, if I had sex with a male friend out of pity or to do him a favor?). Yet, like you, I would find all these situations irrelevant in determining my orientation, which really is straight: my fantasy world is dominated by women, period.
Still, it was an interesting topic to think about. I had never thought about this, and I'm thankful to both you and Mr. J for a bringing it up.
202
@Mr. J, Mydriasis, here's another analogy to perhaps illustrate the difference between your viewpoints.
I like WWII movies, but my wife doesn't. She will, however, sometimes watch a WWII movie with me, and maybe even find something interesting in one of the plots or subplots to actually enjoy, even though she clearly doesn't have pleasure with the whole 'war story' genre. So, if you're assessing my taste in movies, you clearly have to include 'WWII movies' -- they're a relevant genre -- but not if you're assessing my wife's taste in movies, even though, because of me (and also because of other guys she was with before me) she's actually watched a number of WWII movies.
Or, a similar example: because my daughter likes (or used to like: now at 9, she's moved on to more complicated things) "Dora the Explorer", I've sat with her to watch quite a number of Dora episodes. I've even sort of enjoyed Dora sometimes; I won't say it was a total waste of time. Yet I would definitely say that "Dora the Explorer" is not something I would have chosen to watch by myself, so all the Dora episodes I watched are totally irrelevant if you're trying to assess and determine my taste in movies, my "cinematographic orientation" as it were.
I think most people would agree that not every movie I watched was chosen only because I liked it, or its genre: most people would agree some of the movies I watched are irrelevant when describing my taste in movies. Wouldn't the same be true also for my sexual orientation? Just as I watched some movies for reasons other than it agreeing with my taste in movies, couldn't I also have sex with people sometimes for reasons other than this person fitting my sexual orientation?
I like WWII movies, but my wife doesn't. She will, however, sometimes watch a WWII movie with me, and maybe even find something interesting in one of the plots or subplots to actually enjoy, even though she clearly doesn't have pleasure with the whole 'war story' genre. So, if you're assessing my taste in movies, you clearly have to include 'WWII movies' -- they're a relevant genre -- but not if you're assessing my wife's taste in movies, even though, because of me (and also because of other guys she was with before me) she's actually watched a number of WWII movies.
Or, a similar example: because my daughter likes (or used to like: now at 9, she's moved on to more complicated things) "Dora the Explorer", I've sat with her to watch quite a number of Dora episodes. I've even sort of enjoyed Dora sometimes; I won't say it was a total waste of time. Yet I would definitely say that "Dora the Explorer" is not something I would have chosen to watch by myself, so all the Dora episodes I watched are totally irrelevant if you're trying to assess and determine my taste in movies, my "cinematographic orientation" as it were.
I think most people would agree that not every movie I watched was chosen only because I liked it, or its genre: most people would agree some of the movies I watched are irrelevant when describing my taste in movies. Wouldn't the same be true also for my sexual orientation? Just as I watched some movies for reasons other than it agreeing with my taste in movies, couldn't I also have sex with people sometimes for reasons other than this person fitting my sexual orientation?
203
@ankylosaur
I don't conclude from a person's behavior what that person's attractions are. You can behave bisexually absent attraction. You can feel bisexual attraction absent behavior. Behavior is a fairly simple thing to categorize. You either did/do something or not. Motivation is something that we may never know for certain. Its discovery is contingent on honesty and self-awareness.
I'm happy to roll with whatever you tell me today about your attractions or what sorts of fantasies you have. I also expect those to evolve over the years.
Maybe I'll meet you socially and feel a spark of attraction, and then I'll naturally wonder if sex is possible between us. If you tell me you're straight then I'll drop it. If I find out later that sex was possible, then I'll wonder why you hid that fact by telling me you're straight. Is bisexuality a dirty secret to be kept on the down low?
I love your and mydriasis's relaxed attitude when it comes to behavior. It would be more illuminating to have a similar attitude when it comes to labeling.
I don't conclude from a person's behavior what that person's attractions are. You can behave bisexually absent attraction. You can feel bisexual attraction absent behavior. Behavior is a fairly simple thing to categorize. You either did/do something or not. Motivation is something that we may never know for certain. Its discovery is contingent on honesty and self-awareness.
I'm happy to roll with whatever you tell me today about your attractions or what sorts of fantasies you have. I also expect those to evolve over the years.
Maybe I'll meet you socially and feel a spark of attraction, and then I'll naturally wonder if sex is possible between us. If you tell me you're straight then I'll drop it. If I find out later that sex was possible, then I'll wonder why you hid that fact by telling me you're straight. Is bisexuality a dirty secret to be kept on the down low?
I love your and mydriasis's relaxed attitude when it comes to behavior. It would be more illuminating to have a similar attitude when it comes to labeling.
204
@196 mydriasis
Desperate times call for desperate measures - we just vary on when our cutoff for desperate times is.That's an excellent point. The additional information about your experiences changes my impression a lot.
205
@200 "heavy on kink not sex" means that I can get beaten, caned, spanked, tied up, etc, and generally put on display as an adorable victim of (pleasurable) torture, without any sexual penetration.
206
@203, if a straight-bi guy were sexually interested in you, then he'd give off a different vibe. Many women flirt with me, under the assumption that many straight women will go bi from time to time. If I don't flirt back, it's because I'm not interested. Why should they find out if my lack of flirting is due to their gender or their personality/body?
I guess this is complicated for men because homophobes beat men up for flirting with them.
But as long as a guy gives off a non-homophobe vibe (which you can figure out by asking about his politics, etc.), then you can lightly flirt with him (ie, catch his eye a little longer than normal), and if he's open to the idea, then he'll flirt back. No?
I guess this is complicated for men because homophobes beat men up for flirting with them.
But as long as a guy gives off a non-homophobe vibe (which you can figure out by asking about his politics, etc.), then you can lightly flirt with him (ie, catch his eye a little longer than normal), and if he's open to the idea, then he'll flirt back. No?
207
@206 EricaP
Happy Valentine's Day.
Yeah, it can be dangerous for guys although I've never felt threatened. Flirting among all orientations is tricky. People aren't open books. I agree that no one has a right to know your orientation. But if you tell me lies that's something else. I was thinking more about the social consequences of invisibility than about the difficulties of hooking up.
Happy Valentine's Day.
Yeah, it can be dangerous for guys although I've never felt threatened. Flirting among all orientations is tricky. People aren't open books. I agree that no one has a right to know your orientation. But if you tell me lies that's something else. I was thinking more about the social consequences of invisibility than about the difficulties of hooking up.
209
It seems to me in regards to how one arrives at that “bi” designation, that there are the dual issues of attraction and behavior.
Attraction is unintentional and uncontrollable: we lust after whom we lust after (or as Woody Allen could have put it: “the libido wants what it wants”). There can be degrees of attraction and they can also vary not only from individual to individual, but across gender lines, so that someone might be much more attracted to women—many women and with great frequency—and only occasionally attracted to men, or be attracted more strongly to women and attracted to men with as much frequency, and in as great a number overall, but in a more watered-down way than he or she is towards women. Whether acted on or not, I would expect that if I felt either one of those kinds of attractions to people of both sexes, I would consider myself bi (or at least straight-bi, as Mr. Ven proposes, or a ‘little bit bi,’ or hetero-flexible, the three of which I consider to be synonymous).
Behavior is somewhat different. It is possible to be attracted to someone and not act on that attraction (it happens to monogamous people all the time, as well as to people who are attracted to people who aren’t available or appropriate sexual partners).
For the purposes of determining orientation, it seems to me to make sense to limit ourselves to the kind of sex partner that one *chooses*, when given a truly free choice: in other words, excluding the prison example, but including the example of Mydriasis’ high school years, in which she found herself horny at a party with a number of willing and pretty girls and a dearth of good-looking boys from which to choose.
It’s at the intersection of attraction and behavior that there is unambiguous bi-sexuality, and where the label is probably easiest to self-apply. But I think it is possible to use it where there is either one or the other of the two factors, as long as the sex is a function of free choice. I think that to discount attraction alone as a basis for the designation based on the idea that the person doesn’t actually have sex (which for purposes of this discussion, I’m going to define in the loosest way possible as any kind of sexual contact or act, including making out) with members of both sexes is sort of silly. After all, would we consider telling a man who was attracted to women but wasn’t having sex with them—due to religious vows or another ideological renunciation, or because he was unable to find a willing partner, or was in jail (and not having sex with a man there), or for a medical condition—that he wasn’t heterosexual, because he wasn’t exhibiting the behavior, he wasn’t actually having sex with a woman? Would we tell him, “Nope, you aren’t having sex, so therefore you are asexual?” We would not.
This is where the fantasy question came in, but fascinating as I find it, I don’t think it’s enough of a Rorschach inkblot test for determining people’s sexuality. (There is a whole separate discussion about the nature of fantasy that was started and which would be a great topic, but isn’t really germane to this “when is it bi and when is it not” question.)
Some people fantasize about non-human things; some fantasize about things they would never want to do in real life. While it is definitely convenient to say if both men and women make appearances in your sexual fantasies you are bi, and if one gender/sex is absent, then you’re not, I don’t think it can work that way, in those absolutes. It might come back to the first point I made about degrees of attraction. Maybe you don’t as a general rule find member of the opposite sex attractive enough to fantasize about them in the abstract, so they don’t show up in your scripted, intentional fantasies (the kind EricaP has, as opposed to the kind of pop-up, unplanned fragmentary fantasies Mr. J has).
I confess that to me the hardest thing to understand has been several people’s (notably EricaP’s and Mydriasis’s) statements that they have sex with women even though they claim not to be attracted to women as a matter of course (in other words, not through desperation—and no, I don’t consider a three-week dry spell a condition to make one desperate). Not only would the behavior seem to indicate at least a little bit of bi-ness (straight-bi), but I’m having a hard time with the concept of voluntarily having sex with someone whose gender and genitalia at best, don’t arouse, and at worst, repulse you. This is new for me, and no doubt speaks of my unenlightened state, but I can’t imagine doing it, myself. As always, I thank the contributors of this comment thread for exposing me to new ideas.
As to ankylosaur’s equation of having sex with someone whose genitals and gender you’re not attracted to with sitting on the couch and watching a television program with someone as an act of accommodation, and finding some small thing to like about a show which you wouldn’t choose if given free access to the remote control: I find the analogy unsupportable, if only because (to me, at least) sex isn’t something I share indiscriminately and with such little expectation of satisfaction as to be analogous to spending a half hour on the couch finding something to appreciate in the animation of a piece of dreck children’s programming. I care about sex more so I’ve got more invested in it. I can watch tv with practically anybody.
More...
Attraction is unintentional and uncontrollable: we lust after whom we lust after (or as Woody Allen could have put it: “the libido wants what it wants”). There can be degrees of attraction and they can also vary not only from individual to individual, but across gender lines, so that someone might be much more attracted to women—many women and with great frequency—and only occasionally attracted to men, or be attracted more strongly to women and attracted to men with as much frequency, and in as great a number overall, but in a more watered-down way than he or she is towards women. Whether acted on or not, I would expect that if I felt either one of those kinds of attractions to people of both sexes, I would consider myself bi (or at least straight-bi, as Mr. Ven proposes, or a ‘little bit bi,’ or hetero-flexible, the three of which I consider to be synonymous).
Behavior is somewhat different. It is possible to be attracted to someone and not act on that attraction (it happens to monogamous people all the time, as well as to people who are attracted to people who aren’t available or appropriate sexual partners).
For the purposes of determining orientation, it seems to me to make sense to limit ourselves to the kind of sex partner that one *chooses*, when given a truly free choice: in other words, excluding the prison example, but including the example of Mydriasis’ high school years, in which she found herself horny at a party with a number of willing and pretty girls and a dearth of good-looking boys from which to choose.
It’s at the intersection of attraction and behavior that there is unambiguous bi-sexuality, and where the label is probably easiest to self-apply. But I think it is possible to use it where there is either one or the other of the two factors, as long as the sex is a function of free choice. I think that to discount attraction alone as a basis for the designation based on the idea that the person doesn’t actually have sex (which for purposes of this discussion, I’m going to define in the loosest way possible as any kind of sexual contact or act, including making out) with members of both sexes is sort of silly. After all, would we consider telling a man who was attracted to women but wasn’t having sex with them—due to religious vows or another ideological renunciation, or because he was unable to find a willing partner, or was in jail (and not having sex with a man there), or for a medical condition—that he wasn’t heterosexual, because he wasn’t exhibiting the behavior, he wasn’t actually having sex with a woman? Would we tell him, “Nope, you aren’t having sex, so therefore you are asexual?” We would not.
This is where the fantasy question came in, but fascinating as I find it, I don’t think it’s enough of a Rorschach inkblot test for determining people’s sexuality. (There is a whole separate discussion about the nature of fantasy that was started and which would be a great topic, but isn’t really germane to this “when is it bi and when is it not” question.)
Some people fantasize about non-human things; some fantasize about things they would never want to do in real life. While it is definitely convenient to say if both men and women make appearances in your sexual fantasies you are bi, and if one gender/sex is absent, then you’re not, I don’t think it can work that way, in those absolutes. It might come back to the first point I made about degrees of attraction. Maybe you don’t as a general rule find member of the opposite sex attractive enough to fantasize about them in the abstract, so they don’t show up in your scripted, intentional fantasies (the kind EricaP has, as opposed to the kind of pop-up, unplanned fragmentary fantasies Mr. J has).
I confess that to me the hardest thing to understand has been several people’s (notably EricaP’s and Mydriasis’s) statements that they have sex with women even though they claim not to be attracted to women as a matter of course (in other words, not through desperation—and no, I don’t consider a three-week dry spell a condition to make one desperate). Not only would the behavior seem to indicate at least a little bit of bi-ness (straight-bi), but I’m having a hard time with the concept of voluntarily having sex with someone whose gender and genitalia at best, don’t arouse, and at worst, repulse you. This is new for me, and no doubt speaks of my unenlightened state, but I can’t imagine doing it, myself. As always, I thank the contributors of this comment thread for exposing me to new ideas.
As to ankylosaur’s equation of having sex with someone whose genitals and gender you’re not attracted to with sitting on the couch and watching a television program with someone as an act of accommodation, and finding some small thing to like about a show which you wouldn’t choose if given free access to the remote control: I find the analogy unsupportable, if only because (to me, at least) sex isn’t something I share indiscriminately and with such little expectation of satisfaction as to be analogous to spending a half hour on the couch finding something to appreciate in the animation of a piece of dreck children’s programming. I care about sex more so I’ve got more invested in it. I can watch tv with practically anybody.
210
Saying "I am not attracted to women. I let them finger me/fuck me with a strap-on/eat me because I want sex or want to be watched having sex, but I won't reciprocate because, well, ewww, and fortunately I'm so darn sexy and hottt that I can be selfish that way (or I reciprocate but I have to virtually hold my nose as I'm going down on them, because, ewwww") sounds to me like saying, "I am in the mood for dessert, but I hate chocolate and coconut. But since the only thing on the menu is a chocolate-coconut souffle which takes a half hour to prepare and costs a lot, I'll order it, because, you know, I have to have some sugar somehow."
212
@ 209, nocutename: Epic piece you wrote there!
Take your bows. :-) Happy Valentine's Day, Everyone.
I like how you put this one part: "Attraction is unintentional and uncontrollable: we lust after whom we lust after..."
I agree. For me, I know that I am only attracted to men, but actually, one particular man.
I dunno: I've never been amongst my own personal quagmire of bisexual attraction. I love and admire women greatly, but for whatever reasons, I don't feel sexual attraction to them. Sometimes, I wish I knew what that felt like (don't we always want what we don't have, or, what's on the other side of that fence in that other yard there...), but that rarely lasts beyond a few seconds. I would be a lot less at peace and unhappy had I never met the love of my life as I did some sixteen+ years ago.
When you connect with someone who really is a healthy, well-rounded complement to your own personality, it can make all of the difference in the world.
I never thought I would find someone who would love me for me, and who I am as a soul. But I did :)! Not only does this man possess my heart, but he's smart as fuck, about as attractive as they get and we both share a similar sense of humor. It *still* blows me away that I ever encountered and fell in love with him in the first place. To think I was working in a sub shop behind the counter...and then I saw him walk along the front sidewalk and into the shop...and into my un/consiciousness ever since :) .
What you wrote is great, nocutename. Very detailed and elaborate. I myself don't bother trying to be intimate with someone I'm not physically-attracted to (meaning, craving their genitalia, as well as the rest of him). I guess I've always known who I am enough to know that it would be an exercise in homoflexibility at best, and a possible disaster as a worst-case scenario (not being able to get it up and pleasure a woman the best she deserves).
I don't stress the fact that I'm really just gay, with next to no biflexibility or any of that.
I don't mind. Jesus, isn't there enough crazy interpersonal dynamics to grapple with between two people? Who needs more people in that stew? Not me! I don't know how people can juggle multiple interests like that without their very heads spinning off of their shoulders like some whack supernatural b-movie horror film lol.
Who knows? It's Tuesday after all lol.
Cheers :-) . Happy Valentine's Day 2012, One & All.
More...
Take your bows. :-) Happy Valentine's Day, Everyone.
I like how you put this one part: "Attraction is unintentional and uncontrollable: we lust after whom we lust after..."
I agree. For me, I know that I am only attracted to men, but actually, one particular man.
I dunno: I've never been amongst my own personal quagmire of bisexual attraction. I love and admire women greatly, but for whatever reasons, I don't feel sexual attraction to them. Sometimes, I wish I knew what that felt like (don't we always want what we don't have, or, what's on the other side of that fence in that other yard there...), but that rarely lasts beyond a few seconds. I would be a lot less at peace and unhappy had I never met the love of my life as I did some sixteen+ years ago.
When you connect with someone who really is a healthy, well-rounded complement to your own personality, it can make all of the difference in the world.
I never thought I would find someone who would love me for me, and who I am as a soul. But I did :)! Not only does this man possess my heart, but he's smart as fuck, about as attractive as they get and we both share a similar sense of humor. It *still* blows me away that I ever encountered and fell in love with him in the first place. To think I was working in a sub shop behind the counter...and then I saw him walk along the front sidewalk and into the shop...and into my un/consiciousness ever since :) .
What you wrote is great, nocutename. Very detailed and elaborate. I myself don't bother trying to be intimate with someone I'm not physically-attracted to (meaning, craving their genitalia, as well as the rest of him). I guess I've always known who I am enough to know that it would be an exercise in homoflexibility at best, and a possible disaster as a worst-case scenario (not being able to get it up and pleasure a woman the best she deserves).
I don't stress the fact that I'm really just gay, with next to no biflexibility or any of that.
I don't mind. Jesus, isn't there enough crazy interpersonal dynamics to grapple with between two people? Who needs more people in that stew? Not me! I don't know how people can juggle multiple interests like that without their very heads spinning off of their shoulders like some whack supernatural b-movie horror film lol.
Who knows? It's Tuesday after all lol.
Cheers :-) . Happy Valentine's Day 2012, One & All.
213
@209, great essay, fun read - thank you!
nocute finds it odd I would voluntarily have sex with someone to whom I'm not attracted.
There's a side question here, about whether it's odd to have (voluntary) sex without arousal. I would say that most women I know have had plenty of sex by acquiescence, sex they didn't want & weren't aroused by, but tolerated for other reasons.
But to get back to her essay, she rejects the comparison to TV because she has much higher expectations of satisfaction from sex.
Sex with my husband is satisfying, but, indeed, when I engage in indiscriminate sex (the kind nocute doesn't have), I have little expectation of sexual satisfaction. Mostly, I'm doing it for other reasons, not to orgasm or even to have an wonderful physical experience.
I like being looked at, I like being admired, and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations. I have never come from sex in public, or with a woman, nor even gotten close. Does giving pleasure count as seeking sexual satisfaction? Hmm... I await elucidation...
nocute finds it odd I would voluntarily have sex with someone to whom I'm not attracted.
There's a side question here, about whether it's odd to have (voluntary) sex without arousal. I would say that most women I know have had plenty of sex by acquiescence, sex they didn't want & weren't aroused by, but tolerated for other reasons.
But to get back to her essay, she rejects the comparison to TV because she has much higher expectations of satisfaction from sex.
Sex with my husband is satisfying, but, indeed, when I engage in indiscriminate sex (the kind nocute doesn't have), I have little expectation of sexual satisfaction. Mostly, I'm doing it for other reasons, not to orgasm or even to have an wonderful physical experience.
I like being looked at, I like being admired, and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations. I have never come from sex in public, or with a woman, nor even gotten close. Does giving pleasure count as seeking sexual satisfaction? Hmm... I await elucidation...
214
Okay real quick...
@209 "and no, I don’t consider a three-week dry spell a condition to make one desperate"
People are different from eachother. After three weeks I have a tough time functioning correctly. Actually after two weeks I have a tough time, it takes an additional week for me to consider women.
@210
Yep. I'm a bitch.
@209 "and no, I don’t consider a three-week dry spell a condition to make one desperate"
People are different from eachother. After three weeks I have a tough time functioning correctly. Actually after two weeks I have a tough time, it takes an additional week for me to consider women.
@210
Yep. I'm a bitch.
215
@Erica
okay wow that's where we differ.
Though I've had promiscuious sex, I've never had "indiscriminate" sex in the sense that I had no expectation of getting off.
That's why I have sex. Peroid.
And also - re the whole "bad dessert" analogy from cute, Erica said "and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations."
She likes giving pleasure. A lot of women do, including myself. So that's why those poor, poor women likely got with me on my terms.
And I'm off for now
okay wow that's where we differ.
Though I've had promiscuious sex, I've never had "indiscriminate" sex in the sense that I had no expectation of getting off.
That's why I have sex. Peroid.
And also - re the whole "bad dessert" analogy from cute, Erica said "and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations."
She likes giving pleasure. A lot of women do, including myself. So that's why those poor, poor women likely got with me on my terms.
And I'm off for now
216
@ 213, EricaP: To quote you, if I may:
"...when I engage in indiscriminate sex (the kind nocute doesn't have), I have little expectation of sexual satisfaction. Mostly, I'm doing it for other reasons, not to orgasm or even to have an wonderful physical experience."
With all due respect to you Erica, if you're not having a nice enough experience where you are getting off on who you're with, then why bother at all? It seems like an exercise in misery, to read it. What other reasons can there be besides (maybe) ego-gratification or a desire to be with someone, even if they don't get you off particularly (just winging it here: by no means a character assessment or anything :) )?
I realize some people have intellectually-fed reasons for wanting to be with someone intimately, but if you're not having a really;) pleasurable time of it, then why put yourself through all of that? I couldn't. If I'm not really into someone or duly turned on, I'm not going there. There's only so many hours in a day. Why settle for a bit less-than when you don't need to?
"I like being looked at, I like being admired, and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations."
I get that sort of satisfaction from light flirting here and here. I don't mind being looked at when I look and feel good, but otherwise, I much prefer to slide under the radar. It's easy to attract attention to yourself. It's sometimes harder to play that down and be quiet, but I opt for that more often than not.
I enjoy attention from others, but fucking them 'cos they thought I was cute and I didn't feel anything other than intellectual-curiosity...
It wouldn't be enough for me. I need to want you and wanna fuck you in order for me to sleep with someone. But, we all are different, so there you go: to each their own, indeed. :)
More...
"...when I engage in indiscriminate sex (the kind nocute doesn't have), I have little expectation of sexual satisfaction. Mostly, I'm doing it for other reasons, not to orgasm or even to have an wonderful physical experience."
With all due respect to you Erica, if you're not having a nice enough experience where you are getting off on who you're with, then why bother at all? It seems like an exercise in misery, to read it. What other reasons can there be besides (maybe) ego-gratification or a desire to be with someone, even if they don't get you off particularly (just winging it here: by no means a character assessment or anything :) )?
I realize some people have intellectually-fed reasons for wanting to be with someone intimately, but if you're not having a really;) pleasurable time of it, then why put yourself through all of that? I couldn't. If I'm not really into someone or duly turned on, I'm not going there. There's only so many hours in a day. Why settle for a bit less-than when you don't need to?
"I like being looked at, I like being admired, and I like giving pleasure - so those are usually my motivations."
I get that sort of satisfaction from light flirting here and here. I don't mind being looked at when I look and feel good, but otherwise, I much prefer to slide under the radar. It's easy to attract attention to yourself. It's sometimes harder to play that down and be quiet, but I opt for that more often than not.
I enjoy attention from others, but fucking them 'cos they thought I was cute and I didn't feel anything other than intellectual-curiosity...
It wouldn't be enough for me. I need to want you and wanna fuck you in order for me to sleep with someone. But, we all are different, so there you go: to each their own, indeed. :)
217
@ 216, an embellishment:
Erica, I meant anyone other than your hubby about this part: "With all due respect to you Erica, if you're not having a nice enough experience where you are getting off on who you're with..."
Forgive me for having painted that otherwise.
:-)
Happy Valentine's Day, Everyone.
xoxox
Erica, I meant anyone other than your hubby about this part: "With all due respect to you Erica, if you're not having a nice enough experience where you are getting off on who you're with..."
Forgive me for having painted that otherwise.
:-)
Happy Valentine's Day, Everyone.
xoxox
218
@214 mydriasis
You're a bitch only if you aren't upfront with these ladies about what they're getting into. I rather doubt that's the case, and anyway the situation doesn't arise very often. You've clearly got someone who keeps you from having to wait for weeks.
You're a bitch only if you aren't upfront with these ladies about what they're getting into. I rather doubt that's the case, and anyway the situation doesn't arise very often. You've clearly got someone who keeps you from having to wait for weeks.
219
@216, it's hard to explain being driven by kink (submission, exhibitionism, service & masochism) to people who are driven by sex. Take my word for it, I like my life :-)
220
@ 219, Erica: Fair enough :-) ! As long as you are happy and into what you do, then I am happy for you :-) . I can get the thing about enjoying the submission, exhibitionism, and service.. All are part and parcel to enjoying what gets you off.
Isn't kink in effect an extension of sex, though? At the very least, it sounds like suitable foreplay leading up to a hopefully fulfilling physical encounter.
Hey: as long as you're happy, I'm happy :-) .
Have a Good Night, Everyone.
:-)
Isn't kink in effect an extension of sex, though? At the very least, it sounds like suitable foreplay leading up to a hopefully fulfilling physical encounter.
Hey: as long as you're happy, I'm happy :-) .
Have a Good Night, Everyone.
:-)
221
@220 "isn't kink in effect an extension of sex?"
For me, no, if by sex you mean a sphere of activity revolving around genitals and orgasms.
For me, no, if by sex you mean a sphere of activity revolving around genitals and orgasms.
222
Mr J,
It's social consequences you have to worry about. Societal consequences? Don't worry, you' re not going to move the needle.
It's social consequences you have to worry about. Societal consequences? Don't worry, you' re not going to move the needle.
223
@203(Mr.J), I was highlighting the difference I saw between your viewpoint and Mydriasis, but let me say I don't imply any criticism. If you want to apply labels by behavior -- i.e., sex with both sexes happen = bi, regardless of attraction -- that is a valid way to do so, and as long as people are aware that that's what they mean, it will work fine.
Maybe it's simply the old story about 'what words mean to me and you.' Because I can imagine myself doing things I don't like, I don't consider doing these things very important to who I am and how I identify myself -- the reason I did them was not that I liked them, but something else (my wife asked me, a friend needed a favor, it's for my daughter's birthday party, etc.). When I choose a label to apply to myself, I prefer it to reflect who I think I am. Yes, that may change with time, and so will the label -- I don't expect people never to change the labels they use for themselves, be they professional labels, family labels, or sexual orientations.
So if I call myself straight, I do so because, up until now, only women have really attracted me. I have never had sex with a man (though I came close twice), but I don't rule it out -- as a favor, for instance, or as part of some D/s fantasy with a mistress. But this is, to me, unimportant to my thinking I'm straight (just like all the Dora the Explorer episodes I've watched don't change my impression that I'm a "serious" movie admirer.)
But you use words differently; you'd maybe say I'm "slightly bi" (if you need actual behavior, I suppose you'd have to wait for me to actually have sex with a man at some point before, but still). And that's fine by me, because you're using the word to mean not that I'm attracted to men (which I'm not), but that I am not against having sex with men despite not being attracted to them -- I don't rule out the possibility (I'm not repulsed, as Mydriasis put it).
More...
Maybe it's simply the old story about 'what words mean to me and you.' Because I can imagine myself doing things I don't like, I don't consider doing these things very important to who I am and how I identify myself -- the reason I did them was not that I liked them, but something else (my wife asked me, a friend needed a favor, it's for my daughter's birthday party, etc.). When I choose a label to apply to myself, I prefer it to reflect who I think I am. Yes, that may change with time, and so will the label -- I don't expect people never to change the labels they use for themselves, be they professional labels, family labels, or sexual orientations.
So if I call myself straight, I do so because, up until now, only women have really attracted me. I have never had sex with a man (though I came close twice), but I don't rule it out -- as a favor, for instance, or as part of some D/s fantasy with a mistress. But this is, to me, unimportant to my thinking I'm straight (just like all the Dora the Explorer episodes I've watched don't change my impression that I'm a "serious" movie admirer.)
But you use words differently; you'd maybe say I'm "slightly bi" (if you need actual behavior, I suppose you'd have to wait for me to actually have sex with a man at some point before, but still). And that's fine by me, because you're using the word to mean not that I'm attracted to men (which I'm not), but that I am not against having sex with men despite not being attracted to them -- I don't rule out the possibility (I'm not repulsed, as Mydriasis put it).
224
Mydriasis: I didn't say you were a bitch, and I don't think you are. You offered your own experiences about having sex for sex's sake without being attracted to the person who was willing to service you on your terms. I believe that you used the word "shallow" to describe yourself in those circumstances, but as you were talking about high school, that makes sense!
I was commenting on the (mysterious to me) fact of you and EricaP choosing to have sex with people whom you admit you aren't attracted to, and whose very anatomy you find a turn-off.
By the way, I understand that three weeks without any sexual release might easily be too much for some people, but that would seem to me to be what masturbation is all about. It wouldn't occur to me to let someone to whom I wasn't attracted go down on me so I could get off just to let off sexual steam, especially as I am a zero on the Kinsey scale: I doubt I could get into the act enough to be able to come, which is another reason that, were I you, I would define myself as straight-bi or heteroflexible.
I was commenting on the (mysterious to me) fact of you and EricaP choosing to have sex with people whom you admit you aren't attracted to, and whose very anatomy you find a turn-off.
By the way, I understand that three weeks without any sexual release might easily be too much for some people, but that would seem to me to be what masturbation is all about. It wouldn't occur to me to let someone to whom I wasn't attracted go down on me so I could get off just to let off sexual steam, especially as I am a zero on the Kinsey scale: I doubt I could get into the act enough to be able to come, which is another reason that, were I you, I would define myself as straight-bi or heteroflexible.
225
@213 (EricaP): I would say that indeed you do get sexual satisfaction out of having public sex with women to whom you give pleasure--you just get the sexual satisfaction at a delay, when you think about what you did later as you masturbate or when you tell your husband about it later and it arouses both of you to think of what a shameless little slut you are and you two have hot sex and you come like gangbusters.
If that is what drives the actual acts themselves, which might not lead to satisfaction in the moment, I can see what you're doing with women in public as providing you with indirect sexual satisfaction, and my guess is that over time, as more and more positive-though-delayed responses are associated with the acts of public woman/woman sex, it may even become more arousing to you.
I thought that since you are a sub to your husband, it might be part of a power play: you don't actually like having sex with women, but your body and sexual activity aren't autonomous but rather under the control of and at the whim of your husband. If he wants/orders you to service women publicly, you comply. That is part of your kink dynamic, which I see as being sexual as well as kinky, since ultimately you get sexual satisfaction from it. For some people, an aspect of submission has to do with the withholding of satisfaction until getting approval, anyway.
If that is what drives the actual acts themselves, which might not lead to satisfaction in the moment, I can see what you're doing with women in public as providing you with indirect sexual satisfaction, and my guess is that over time, as more and more positive-though-delayed responses are associated with the acts of public woman/woman sex, it may even become more arousing to you.
I thought that since you are a sub to your husband, it might be part of a power play: you don't actually like having sex with women, but your body and sexual activity aren't autonomous but rather under the control of and at the whim of your husband. If he wants/orders you to service women publicly, you comply. That is part of your kink dynamic, which I see as being sexual as well as kinky, since ultimately you get sexual satisfaction from it. For some people, an aspect of submission has to do with the withholding of satisfaction until getting approval, anyway.
226
@nocutename, I don't think the differnece is caring more or less about sex, but how much the idea of having sex with a non-preferred partner (same sex if you're straight, opposite sex if you're gay) squeaks you. Is sex good if you're doing it for the other person -- you don't feel aroused, you aren't interested in it right now, but you're sorry for your partner so you go along with it for his/her sake? It's not "good" in the sense of leading to orgasm for me, but it may be good in the sense that I like doing it for my partner. Just as I can sit and watch a movie I don't like, because I happen to like the person I'm watching it with. There's a difference of intensity here, but not a difference of kind, I don't think.
I find what you said about "caring a lot about sex" interesting. I've seen similar reactions from other people, which made me ask myself how much I actually care about sex. I like sex, quite a lot actually, but I don't care about it in the sense that I don't think it is a "serious big thing" with deep personal/metaphysical consequences (like a vocation/career or a relationship is). Sex is an enjoyable activity, which I can fruitfully compare with other enjoyable activities even if I enjoy them less than sex.
I certainly like sex more than movies, and as part of my relationship to other people it plays a more important role than watching movies. But sex is not the relationship, nor is it the most important thing in my life. Which is enough, to me, to make it comparable to other meaningful activities in my life. In other words, I don't think sex is a world by itself, so different in kind from all other pleasant things as to be incomparable. Sex isn't "magic," or a transcendent thing like one of Plato's ideals projecting shadows in our cave. It's just part of life.
But I see it is a frequent opinion in Western culture that "sex is different," that it is so different and so important as to deserve a category of its own. Like love (about which I have a similar opinion).
More...
I find what you said about "caring a lot about sex" interesting. I've seen similar reactions from other people, which made me ask myself how much I actually care about sex. I like sex, quite a lot actually, but I don't care about it in the sense that I don't think it is a "serious big thing" with deep personal/metaphysical consequences (like a vocation/career or a relationship is). Sex is an enjoyable activity, which I can fruitfully compare with other enjoyable activities even if I enjoy them less than sex.
I certainly like sex more than movies, and as part of my relationship to other people it plays a more important role than watching movies. But sex is not the relationship, nor is it the most important thing in my life. Which is enough, to me, to make it comparable to other meaningful activities in my life. In other words, I don't think sex is a world by itself, so different in kind from all other pleasant things as to be incomparable. Sex isn't "magic," or a transcendent thing like one of Plato's ideals projecting shadows in our cave. It's just part of life.
But I see it is a frequent opinion in Western culture that "sex is different," that it is so different and so important as to deserve a category of its own. Like love (about which I have a similar opinion).
227
@213: Also, interesting point about women who "have had plenty of sex by acquiescence, sex they didn't want & weren't aroused by, but tolerated for other reasons." I would think that the difference between them and your particular circumstance is that either:
1) they didn't know beforehand that the sex wasn't going to be arousing
2)the sex was coerced or forced--downright rape
3) the sex was motivated by love and affection or a sense of obligation, sometimes combined with love and affection, and sometimes an irritating term of a bargain made for economic or social reasons
or
3) they are paid sex workers who are being compensated directly and explicitly for the sex.
What you're describing is different: you say you have no attraction to women sexually, but you force yourself (or allow your self) to be sexual with women in public, knowing you won't find it arousing. You don't *have* to have this sex, and it doesn't somehow just seem to sort of happen to you; you have to deliberately seek it out.
I would contend that in fact you do derive sexual satisfaction and arousal, not from the sex itself and in the moment, but in the idea of what you've done and who saw you do it at a later moment in time, all of which complicates the idea of "bi-ness" even further, since the satisfaction probably (I'm just guessing here) comes at the direct hands either of your husband or another man, or yourself when it acts as a narrative to move you to orgasm.
In such a case, I would agree that you are more straight than anything else. Straight, but hardly narrow! Happy Valentine's Day!
1) they didn't know beforehand that the sex wasn't going to be arousing
2)the sex was coerced or forced--downright rape
3) the sex was motivated by love and affection or a sense of obligation, sometimes combined with love and affection, and sometimes an irritating term of a bargain made for economic or social reasons
or
3) they are paid sex workers who are being compensated directly and explicitly for the sex.
What you're describing is different: you say you have no attraction to women sexually, but you force yourself (or allow your self) to be sexual with women in public, knowing you won't find it arousing. You don't *have* to have this sex, and it doesn't somehow just seem to sort of happen to you; you have to deliberately seek it out.
I would contend that in fact you do derive sexual satisfaction and arousal, not from the sex itself and in the moment, but in the idea of what you've done and who saw you do it at a later moment in time, all of which complicates the idea of "bi-ness" even further, since the satisfaction probably (I'm just guessing here) comes at the direct hands either of your husband or another man, or yourself when it acts as a narrative to move you to orgasm.
In such a case, I would agree that you are more straight than anything else. Straight, but hardly narrow! Happy Valentine's Day!
228
nocute, your analysis @225 is mostly right on, but it still doesn't make me feel very bi -- not until that future day arrives when, as you predict, "it may even become more arousing to you." But in the meantime, I won't argue with "straight-bi," to help counteract the invisibility of bi people that bugs Mr. J.
229
@nocutename, EricaP: I think EricaP has touched on the essential point here, namely: that what nocutename finds difficult to understand is the idea that one could have sex with not-so-high expectations. Curiously, I think I understand EricaP very well here, because I also don't see sex as soooo terribly important and identity-forming (i.e., I also don't have such high expectations) about it.
Is sex without arousal every a good idea? In my previous comment I mention doing your partner a favor and having sex with him/her even if you're not in the mood. I've done that occasionally, and I don't think it was a bad experience.
Is sex as a favor -- because you see someone you're not attracted to really wants it so much (remember the old 'he wants it so much and it costs me so little'? :-) also ever a good idea? Again, I've done that, too (call this 'pity' or 'mercy sex'), and you can wonder if it was, all in all, good for the other person; but speaking for myself, the fact that I didn't really enjoy it (I didn't orgasm) doesn't bother me. I did it for other reasons, and I'm fine with that.
So the final question -- would sex with a man (which I haven't really had so far) be also so much of a bad idea? I really seriously ask myself this question: would I be disgusted, would I feel violated, would I feel de-personified, etc. etc. -- whatever bad consequences people with high expectations for sex (like nocutename) think that sex without attraction might have -- or would I not? All I can say is, I would have to have a strong motivation (I really like the guy, I'm really doing him a favor, etc.); but given said motivation, I think the absence of arousal in me and the absence of an orgasm at the end wouldn't be oh so terrible. It's not simply "I would survive"; it's also "I'd do this for him."
In other words: I don't think that would damage me in any way. It would just be boring, but there would be no damage. It wouldn't turn me psychotic, it wouldn't traumatize me, I wouldn't become a victim. Again, it would just be (sexually) boring (though maybe interesting from some other perspective -- just as it was interesting to watch Dora the Explorer with my daughter, despite the fact that I personally found it boring as a movie.)
So I see myself agreeing with EricaP. I wonder if this comes from the fact that both of us are rather kinky with submissive tendencies. (EricaP tried to differentiate kink from sex above, which is something I've often wondered about. I think kink is sex, but it somehow offers you a way of differentiating yourself from sex, of de-identifying yourself with the kind of sex you like. Like those deep meditation exercises that de-identify you with some specific cognitive structure -- 'watch yourself thinking; now, who is doing the watching?' -- I think kink helps you de-identify with sex and sexuality, de-identify with fucking or being fucked as part of "who you are" rather than being "things you do".)
More...
Is sex without arousal every a good idea? In my previous comment I mention doing your partner a favor and having sex with him/her even if you're not in the mood. I've done that occasionally, and I don't think it was a bad experience.
Is sex as a favor -- because you see someone you're not attracted to really wants it so much (remember the old 'he wants it so much and it costs me so little'? :-) also ever a good idea? Again, I've done that, too (call this 'pity' or 'mercy sex'), and you can wonder if it was, all in all, good for the other person; but speaking for myself, the fact that I didn't really enjoy it (I didn't orgasm) doesn't bother me. I did it for other reasons, and I'm fine with that.
So the final question -- would sex with a man (which I haven't really had so far) be also so much of a bad idea? I really seriously ask myself this question: would I be disgusted, would I feel violated, would I feel de-personified, etc. etc. -- whatever bad consequences people with high expectations for sex (like nocutename) think that sex without attraction might have -- or would I not? All I can say is, I would have to have a strong motivation (I really like the guy, I'm really doing him a favor, etc.); but given said motivation, I think the absence of arousal in me and the absence of an orgasm at the end wouldn't be oh so terrible. It's not simply "I would survive"; it's also "I'd do this for him."
In other words: I don't think that would damage me in any way. It would just be boring, but there would be no damage. It wouldn't turn me psychotic, it wouldn't traumatize me, I wouldn't become a victim. Again, it would just be (sexually) boring (though maybe interesting from some other perspective -- just as it was interesting to watch Dora the Explorer with my daughter, despite the fact that I personally found it boring as a movie.)
So I see myself agreeing with EricaP. I wonder if this comes from the fact that both of us are rather kinky with submissive tendencies. (EricaP tried to differentiate kink from sex above, which is something I've often wondered about. I think kink is sex, but it somehow offers you a way of differentiating yourself from sex, of de-identifying yourself with the kind of sex you like. Like those deep meditation exercises that de-identify you with some specific cognitive structure -- 'watch yourself thinking; now, who is doing the watching?' -- I think kink helps you de-identify with sex and sexuality, de-identify with fucking or being fucked as part of "who you are" rather than being "things you do".)
230
@nocutename, who wrote:
And here is the question: should this be strange, in principle? I mean, can't someone enjoy having sex for non-sexual reasons (some of which you pointed out)? Is it the case that whenever we do something the motivation is the supposed specific reward that that activity gives us -- we only watch movies because of the aesthetic experience, we only talk because we're interested in the topic, we only have sex because we're aroused? Can't there be other valid reasons?
You mentioned sex workers. If a sex worker does indeed consent in sex for money, then clearly sad sex was not consented to for the purpose of sexual gratification. (Some sex workers do derive sexual gratification from having sex for money, but that's a logically independent fact.) I suppose this would be a valid reason, to you? So here's the question: if I said I could engage in sex with a man -- sex with someone whose genitals do not arouse me -- for money, would it seem easier for you to understand? I.e., if I said I could be a male prostitute (it wouldn't satisfy me sexually, but hey, the money is good), would that seem easier to understand/accept?
What you're describing is different: you say you have no attraction to women sexually, but you force yourself (or allow yourself) to be sexual with women in public, knowing you won't find it arousing. You don't *have* to have this sex, and it doesn't somehow just seem to sort of happen to you; you have to deliberately seek it out.
And here is the question: should this be strange, in principle? I mean, can't someone enjoy having sex for non-sexual reasons (some of which you pointed out)? Is it the case that whenever we do something the motivation is the supposed specific reward that that activity gives us -- we only watch movies because of the aesthetic experience, we only talk because we're interested in the topic, we only have sex because we're aroused? Can't there be other valid reasons?
You mentioned sex workers. If a sex worker does indeed consent in sex for money, then clearly sad sex was not consented to for the purpose of sexual gratification. (Some sex workers do derive sexual gratification from having sex for money, but that's a logically independent fact.) I suppose this would be a valid reason, to you? So here's the question: if I said I could engage in sex with a man -- sex with someone whose genitals do not arouse me -- for money, would it seem easier for you to understand? I.e., if I said I could be a male prostitute (it wouldn't satisfy me sexually, but hey, the money is good), would that seem easier to understand/accept?
232
@227 "I would think that the difference between them and your particular circumstance is that either 1, 2, 3, or [4]..." So I guess I'd be #5.
But, except for #2 (rape), I'm not sure what's gained by breaking it down into categories. (Especially since there's a lot of overlap in those categories). In all those cases, an adult is choosing sex for reasons other than immediate sexual gratification. I'm with ankylosaur, I think people have complicated reasons for studying, for calling their moms, for choosing fruit instead of cake, for driving fast, etc. And for having sex, too. I'm someone who finds orgasm hard to come by, so I've found other reasons for having sex. Probably my itty bitty genes, hard at work trying to reproduce themselves :-)
But, except for #2 (rape), I'm not sure what's gained by breaking it down into categories. (Especially since there's a lot of overlap in those categories). In all those cases, an adult is choosing sex for reasons other than immediate sexual gratification. I'm with ankylosaur, I think people have complicated reasons for studying, for calling their moms, for choosing fruit instead of cake, for driving fast, etc. And for having sex, too. I'm someone who finds orgasm hard to come by, so I've found other reasons for having sex. Probably my itty bitty genes, hard at work trying to reproduce themselves :-)
233
@232, curiously for a guy, I also tend to think that having my orgasm is not the main point of sex for me; I'm more into the playful aspect, the laughs, and the signs of arousal in me and in the other. Maybe it's the D/s tendencies in me, but I tend to like it very much if my female sexual partner doesn't pay any attention at all to getting me off. (I do like to make her get off, though -- accuse me of being inconsistent or of harboring sexist double standards...) I have actually have sex a number of times with the woman orgasming but not me. Again, this speaks to the submissive in me.
234
I feel as if I'm spinning my wheels trying to be understood and I'm being misunderstood in a variety of ways by EricaP and ankylosur.
So, for the record:
* I am submissive. And kinky. I understand those tendencies.
* I don't orgasm easily and never without my vibrator, and have had lots of sex without any expectation or hope of orgasming during it.
* I understand and have also had sex which sole purpose is to do a nice thing for another person.
* I don't only have sex with people I love or think it has to always be a transcendent experience. I have been incredibly promiscuous in my life and am perfectly capable of viewing sex as a kind of carnal recreation (although if it is good, it pretty much beats even the very best TV hands down). I may discriminate more now than I used to or than some people do; I do this only because I have learned that for me, sex is better if I know and like the guy a little bit! The more connection I feel, the more revved up I am.
* Unlike ankylosaur, who is doing a lot of theoretical hypothisizing about what sex with a man to whom he is not really all that attracted to might be like, I've tried to have sex with a member of my own sex, and was not indifferent, but repulsed. All the fellow-feeling I might have for another member of humanity isn't going to make up for a gigantic lack of attraction bordering on revulsion. And why, ank, under what circumstances, supposing I'm not a sex worker or that I love that person and want to make her happy, would I want to subject myself to sex which isn't just not "magical," but which disgusts me? What is the point of that? Or, if I may risk sounding so shallow and self-centered, where's the payoff? Most people want to enjoy the sex they're freely choosing to have.
* @232: I was trying to break down the reasons pepole have sex without hoping for sexual satisfaction because you had made a statement that likened the kind of sex you have that began this conversation about orientation with all other reasons a person might have sex without attraction or expectation of fulfillment. I think, in light of the fact that you are having voluntary, unpaid, recreational, non-emotionally-connective, deliberately-planned sex (which might lead one to conclude that you're getting something out of it, which something under ordinary circumstances might be assumed to be sexual pleasure) it is rather unexpected to hear you say that not only are you not getting any sexual satisfaction out of the sex, but that you are actually turned off by your partners. As your partners are female, and you are having sex with them by choice, it seems a logical conclusion that you're a tiny bit bi; when you say that you are not, as evidenced by the fact that you find female genitals unarousing and they don't enter into your fantasies unless you're trying to write your personal Title IX grant, that makes me wonder why you're bothering to have this kind of sex. I think it is relevant to distinguish it from other kinds of "less than magical" sex.
More...
So, for the record:
* I am submissive. And kinky. I understand those tendencies.
* I don't orgasm easily and never without my vibrator, and have had lots of sex without any expectation or hope of orgasming during it.
* I understand and have also had sex which sole purpose is to do a nice thing for another person.
* I don't only have sex with people I love or think it has to always be a transcendent experience. I have been incredibly promiscuous in my life and am perfectly capable of viewing sex as a kind of carnal recreation (although if it is good, it pretty much beats even the very best TV hands down). I may discriminate more now than I used to or than some people do; I do this only because I have learned that for me, sex is better if I know and like the guy a little bit! The more connection I feel, the more revved up I am.
* Unlike ankylosaur, who is doing a lot of theoretical hypothisizing about what sex with a man to whom he is not really all that attracted to might be like, I've tried to have sex with a member of my own sex, and was not indifferent, but repulsed. All the fellow-feeling I might have for another member of humanity isn't going to make up for a gigantic lack of attraction bordering on revulsion. And why, ank, under what circumstances, supposing I'm not a sex worker or that I love that person and want to make her happy, would I want to subject myself to sex which isn't just not "magical," but which disgusts me? What is the point of that? Or, if I may risk sounding so shallow and self-centered, where's the payoff? Most people want to enjoy the sex they're freely choosing to have.
* @232: I was trying to break down the reasons pepole have sex without hoping for sexual satisfaction because you had made a statement that likened the kind of sex you have that began this conversation about orientation with all other reasons a person might have sex without attraction or expectation of fulfillment. I think, in light of the fact that you are having voluntary, unpaid, recreational, non-emotionally-connective, deliberately-planned sex (which might lead one to conclude that you're getting something out of it, which something under ordinary circumstances might be assumed to be sexual pleasure) it is rather unexpected to hear you say that not only are you not getting any sexual satisfaction out of the sex, but that you are actually turned off by your partners. As your partners are female, and you are having sex with them by choice, it seems a logical conclusion that you're a tiny bit bi; when you say that you are not, as evidenced by the fact that you find female genitals unarousing and they don't enter into your fantasies unless you're trying to write your personal Title IX grant, that makes me wonder why you're bothering to have this kind of sex. I think it is relevant to distinguish it from other kinds of "less than magical" sex.
235
@234 heard and understood and (mostly) agreed with :-)
I think it's reasonable to say that I am "a tiny bit bi"; the girls don't turn me off, they just don't smell right so something else has to turn me on (like thinking of my husband's excitement, or the excitement of the audience admiring me).
Sorry for misunderstanding you before!
I think it's reasonable to say that I am "a tiny bit bi"; the girls don't turn me off, they just don't smell right so something else has to turn me on (like thinking of my husband's excitement, or the excitement of the audience admiring me).
Sorry for misunderstanding you before!
237
@218
Good to know!
@Cute
I don't find the anatomy a turnoff, I just don't find it a turnon. Why would I be bothered by the same kind of anatomy I have? It doesn't bother me for the same reason it doesn't turn me on. "Oh, word. I see that every day."
As for masturbation, I'm not a huge fan.
Hooking up with a woman is essentially the same (lack of attraction, lack of repulsion, but getting off regardless due to physical response) except better.
Having something happen to you is wayy more of a turn on than doing something to yourself. Ever try to tickle yourself? Doesn't work does it. The excitement of not knowing what's going to happen and not having control over the situation is something you can't get by yourself. Plus also makeouts are fun.
I could define myself as straight-bi... but it seems weird to define myself on a few experiences I had many years ago. I feel straight, you know? Sure, it might be more fun and interesting to identify otherwise but it would feel like a lie. When more detail is needed I bring up Margaret Cho's crack that "bi is just another word for 'slutty'"
(And NO I'm not trying to claim that's true, so no shitstorm, please. Just in MY case, that seems to be an apt analysis)
Good to know!
@Cute
I don't find the anatomy a turnoff, I just don't find it a turnon. Why would I be bothered by the same kind of anatomy I have? It doesn't bother me for the same reason it doesn't turn me on. "Oh, word. I see that every day."
As for masturbation, I'm not a huge fan.
Hooking up with a woman is essentially the same (lack of attraction, lack of repulsion, but getting off regardless due to physical response) except better.
Having something happen to you is wayy more of a turn on than doing something to yourself. Ever try to tickle yourself? Doesn't work does it. The excitement of not knowing what's going to happen and not having control over the situation is something you can't get by yourself. Plus also makeouts are fun.
I could define myself as straight-bi... but it seems weird to define myself on a few experiences I had many years ago. I feel straight, you know? Sure, it might be more fun and interesting to identify otherwise but it would feel like a lie. When more detail is needed I bring up Margaret Cho's crack that "bi is just another word for 'slutty'"
(And NO I'm not trying to claim that's true, so no shitstorm, please. Just in MY case, that seems to be an apt analysis)
238
Also: a fun story for anyone still checking in here.
One year (in highschool, actually) when I was at Pride with a couple good friends, I broke off with one other for a minute to go get popcicles. So we're walking back to meet our friends and this woman wearing mardi gras beads instead of a shirt and this man with her come up to us. He asks "excuse me - are you two lovers?"
We laugh and say no we're just friends.
She asks us what our orientation is. My friend says she's bi, and I say I'm straight. The guy says to us "Honey I could tell." I ask how and he says "by the way you're each eating your popsicles"
Maybe everyone should just forgo the introspection and just do a quick popcicle test.
One year (in highschool, actually) when I was at Pride with a couple good friends, I broke off with one other for a minute to go get popcicles. So we're walking back to meet our friends and this woman wearing mardi gras beads instead of a shirt and this man with her come up to us. He asks "excuse me - are you two lovers?"
We laugh and say no we're just friends.
She asks us what our orientation is. My friend says she's bi, and I say I'm straight. The guy says to us "Honey I could tell." I ask how and he says "by the way you're each eating your popsicles"
Maybe everyone should just forgo the introspection and just do a quick popcicle test.
239
@237:
Thanks for the clarification.
I'll take you at your word that you feel straight (and of course, you have the right to define yourself any way you like), so you are straight.
Thanks for the clarification.
I'll take you at your word that you feel straight (and of course, you have the right to define yourself any way you like), so you are straight.
240
@nocutename, I also used to feel revulsion at the sight of genitals similar to my own; this has changed a little through time, though, so I don't think this would bother me anymore. I do get what you're feeling, though, since I also used to feel it. All I'm saying is it isn't like that for me anymore (and, who knows? maybe someday it won't be for you either), and that a good deal of the revulsion I originally felt was clearly culturally based, not really instinctive.
Sorry if I misunderstood your standpoint. If you do see that sex can be good (or at least willingly consented to) even when there's no big sexual gratification for it, then indeed I misunderstood something in what you said -- again, sorry about that. I think maybe the misunderstanding was that you were thinking of sex with someone you're repulsed by (something I would never do either), whereas I was thinking about sex with someone I'm just not really turned on by -- to me, a totally different situation.
Sorry if I misunderstood your standpoint. If you do see that sex can be good (or at least willingly consented to) even when there's no big sexual gratification for it, then indeed I misunderstood something in what you said -- again, sorry about that. I think maybe the misunderstanding was that you were thinking of sex with someone you're repulsed by (something I would never do either), whereas I was thinking about sex with someone I'm just not really turned on by -- to me, a totally different situation.
241
@238, I wonder if that would work for men.
Ultimately, I also do think that self-identification is more about what you think feels true for yourself, not about a specific set of behaviors that you have to have in order to live up to the category. (Of course, this opens up the possibility that you might be lying to yourself, for whatever reason; but what's wrong here is the lie, as it is anytime you lie to yourself, not your sexual identity being what feels right to you.) Behavior can have explanations other than sexual orientation.
Ultimately, I also do think that self-identification is more about what you think feels true for yourself, not about a specific set of behaviors that you have to have in order to live up to the category. (Of course, this opens up the possibility that you might be lying to yourself, for whatever reason; but what's wrong here is the lie, as it is anytime you lie to yourself, not your sexual identity being what feels right to you.) Behavior can have explanations other than sexual orientation.
242
@ 221, EricaP: Would the kinks you enjoy be at least titillating? There has to be some degree of pleasure out of being restained and stuff, I'm thinking.
243
@242, I get a lot of pleasure out of it, it just doesn't involve my genitals or any orgasms.
Think of it like massage, and meditation, and a good exercise workout -- all fun things, just not involving one's genitals or orgasms.
Think of it like massage, and meditation, and a good exercise workout -- all fun things, just not involving one's genitals or orgasms.
244
@ 243, EricaP: I see what you mean now. Some things can titillate without making you orgasm or anything.. Getting them tingles of pleasure from what gets you off, where the hairs on your arms stand on end and you get goosebumps.. Kind of sounds like sweet-sounding foreplay, actually.
I bet when it comes time to actually go at it and make love, you're quite fired up from enjoying the preliminaries of what you enjoy kink-wise.
You sound hip, happy and content, and that makes me happy. You go girl! ;-)
I bet when it comes time to actually go at it and make love, you're quite fired up from enjoying the preliminaries of what you enjoy kink-wise.
You sound hip, happy and content, and that makes me happy. You go girl! ;-)
245
@243
I don't really like massage or exercise for exactly that reason (massage I'm just indifferent to, exercise I hate with every fibre of my being). What the point of being touched or getting sweaty if you're not going to come?
But that's me. As for meditation I wouldn't even put it close to sex, exercise or massage, but hey.
It's interesting how different people are from eachother.
I don't really like massage or exercise for exactly that reason (massage I'm just indifferent to, exercise I hate with every fibre of my being). What the point of being touched or getting sweaty if you're not going to come?
But that's me. As for meditation I wouldn't even put it close to sex, exercise or massage, but hey.
It's interesting how different people are from eachother.
247
@245, you betcha! I always considered that the most important reason why it is better to actually interact with people than avoid them. :-)
248
PP is always under attack. PP has been under attack for the entire duration of its existence. Which is why it needs so many friends!
250
@245: I third it!
@248: The key here is to weaken PP's attackers, which might require more than a circumcision. Hit 'em where it hurts! Eliminate the root of all the woman hating evil: their tainted corporate funded blood money and what hangs in the gross imbalance, and---voila! Problem solved.
Of course, you're talking about an very ugly, very bloody revolution if it ever gets to that point. I'd rather round up and ship the assholes one-way to a desert island filled with rats, fatally poisonous spiders, and snakes.
That would at least save us taxpayers a shitload of hard earned money.
@248: The key here is to weaken PP's attackers, which might require more than a circumcision. Hit 'em where it hurts! Eliminate the root of all the woman hating evil: their tainted corporate funded blood money and what hangs in the gross imbalance, and---voila! Problem solved.
Of course, you're talking about an very ugly, very bloody revolution if it ever gets to that point. I'd rather round up and ship the assholes one-way to a desert island filled with rats, fatally poisonous spiders, and snakes.
That would at least save us taxpayers a shitload of hard earned money.
251
@ CCC, I agree. If your friend is on Grindr and sending FACE PICS, then at least part of him wants to be out. It might be subconcious or whatever, but closet cases who want to stay closet cases dont send face pics over the Internet.
My guess is that he's nervous about coming out and maybe wants help. If he denies it outright, just drop it for now. If he knows you're 100% comfortable with him being gay, it will prolly help him get 100% comfortable soon too.
Case in point, my ridiculously hot boyfriend got drunk and made out with a rather hot "straight" guy at a party that was about 75% homo. Rather than being pissed, I thought it was awesome (and a little hot). Within seconds, the entire party of 30+ people knew the two of them were making out, and I stood there smiling knowing that 1) boyfriend was still going home with me that night, and 2) he was probably helping the poor str8 boy come out.
From talking with str8 boy's friends, no one ever brought that night up with him, and to this day, he's the same closet case he was pre public-make-out session.
My guess is that he's nervous about coming out and maybe wants help. If he denies it outright, just drop it for now. If he knows you're 100% comfortable with him being gay, it will prolly help him get 100% comfortable soon too.
Case in point, my ridiculously hot boyfriend got drunk and made out with a rather hot "straight" guy at a party that was about 75% homo. Rather than being pissed, I thought it was awesome (and a little hot). Within seconds, the entire party of 30+ people knew the two of them were making out, and I stood there smiling knowing that 1) boyfriend was still going home with me that night, and 2) he was probably helping the poor str8 boy come out.
From talking with str8 boy's friends, no one ever brought that night up with him, and to this day, he's the same closet case he was pre public-make-out session.
RSS
Twitter
Comments (251) RSS