How does one objectively draw a line on what should be the number of allowed sexual encounters between men before insisting on labeling them bi or gay? More importantly, who gets to make these rules and by what authority? Are there any scientific papers with conclusions that read, "therefore, we've found strong evidence that those men who receive x number of blowjobs from other men aren't straight"? If it suddenly became the new norm that the amount of guy on guy sexual encounters you could have before losing your straight card was 10 and not just once or twice, would you have any concrete evidence (other than resorting to current social norms) to contradict that new understanding of sexual behavior? This should say something: It should suggest the subjective nature of what "sexual orientation" is. Your notions about what it means to be gay are based on a rather modern European-American understanding of sexuality that is a statistical blip in history in the grand scheme of things. In ancient Greece, sexual relations between men were very common and praiseworthy, whereas relations between men and women were viewed more in terms of man and a slave. It's clear that "sexual orientation" is informed by cultural norms and the material conditions of society, rather than it being this absolute and objective and unchangeable thing you're trying to argue that it is. Then again, I'm explaining this to someone who advocates the understanding of our reality on silly identity politics to the exclusion of historical precedents or the recognition of material conditions that inform such class designations and norms in the first place.
So what you're saying is, if someone has sex with men. As in continuous sex with men as a man. They can still be straight. Same as a woman can have sex with women and still be straight? If that is the case then doesn't that mean our sexual actions don't matter at all? Doesn't that mean we no longer have to take responsibility for our sexual actions. That we never actually have to be honest about what we've done sexually with anyone. If those same rules apply to gay and bisexual men don't they also apply to heterosexual people.
As in no one can ever be upset with someone else for cheating since cheating is only based on a rather modern European-American understanding of sexuality that is a statistical blip in history in the grand scheme of things. I'm only using this one example but there are many many many more reasons why that whole line of thinking is both incorrect and deeply illogical. And according to the same logical that we don't have to take responsibility for, label or even be honest with ourselves or each other then marriage would also be nul an void wouldn't it. Since affairs are sexual in nature and need to be classified. By you and others logic that would completely destroy the very idea of cheating.
Meaning no one anywhere would ever have to be loyal to their partners. Now thats just the one aspect. There are many and i mean many different ways i can think of where that faulty line of reasoning falls flat in every instance it's used. Seriously, how can you divorce someone for infidelity if they can explain it away by saying it can't be labeled?
Keep in mind though, i and many many others have consistently said over and over again to each an ever new person entering this "discussion" that people get curious. Happens all the time. And it's no big deal. Problems come in when they are consistently "curious" but still want and need the label of straight to hide behind. See we aren't talking attack people because of what they do. We're talking people also wanting to use a label that does not fit them. If this were a "discussion" about getting rid of all labels it would be a different story. As those people could then be ignored like the psychos they actually tend to be. Because that would mean that also didn't want the label of things like human being, whatever their job title is, labels like intelligent or sexy. That isn't the case though, they want a particular label for particular reasons.
Like i've said before, yes bicurious is not only a thing but an accepted one. People experiment. What is not acceptable both by normal standards and intellectual ones is attempting to label yourself something you clearly are not. Then again, i am currently talking to someone...in a "discussion" that is understandably raw emotional for some because of the nature of acceptance in general literally said people should kill themselves with all the sensitivity of a mack truck on steroids.
Why do i bring that up you never asked? Well because people actually do kill themselves over issues like this. Why, you never actually asked? Oh because gay and bisexual men have a hard enough time being accepted in general without there being gay and bisexual men out there trying desperately to hide back under the teet of straight labels while trying to label anyone who disagrees as some sort of anti-gay homophobic person. Which not only makes the "discussion" even more mind numblying stupid but confuses the hell out of those trying to find their footing. In a world where they generally struggle already.
Now please tell me why all these guys are so deathly afraid of being labeled gay or bisexual. Why is that still a taboo on site where gay men pretty much rule? How backwards exactly does one have to be to be on a gay and bisexual dominated site an still run for the hills the second anyone even comes close to mentioning what the actual definition of straight is?
