Is a straight man who hooks up with another man really straight?

[328982]

I don't think you're in a position to speak for the insecurities or subconscious concerns of these men. Those are your thoughts. Your viewpoint seems very... individual and not easily transposed.

Your posts don't seem to come from a place of sexual experience, more a projection based around online activity - why on earth would a straight man not seek out porn where he can see PIV? What a bizarre view. That's the essence of heterosexual! Impregnation porn is not 100% straight? But anyway your preferences are none of my business.

What you posted is your opinion, others have different opinions. I can't believe I revisited this thread, I must be insane.

Maybe because it's so dull on Ask a Woman?

 

[deleted924715]

Maybe because it's so dull on Ask a Woman?

Lol. Ouch?

 

[bigbull29]

I don't think you're in a position to speak for the insecurities or subconscious concerns of these men. Those are your thoughts. Your viewpoint seems very... individual and not easily transposed.

Your posts don't seem to come from a place of sexual experience, more a projection based around online activity - why on earth would a straight man not seek out porn where he can see PIV? What a bizarre view. That's the essence of heterosexual! Impregnation porn is not 100% straight? But anyway your preferences are none of my business.

What you posted is your opinion, others have different opinions. I can't believe I revisited this thread, I must be insane.

Thems ain't "my thoughts." It's society's male homosexuality's thoughts. Don't downplay the taboo of male homosexuality in our culture and it's effect on everyday heterosexually-identifying men.

Would women have a such thread to defend their female heterosexuality? I think not.

 

[deleted924715]

Thems ain't "my thoughts." It's society's male homosexuality's thoughts. Don't downplay the taboo of male homosexuality in our culture and it's effect on everyday heterosexually-identifying men.

Would women have a such thread to defend their female heterosexuality? I think not.

They are your thoughts.

 

[328982]

Lol. Ouch?

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

My reference point is the Kinsey Scale. Alfred Kinsey studied human sexual behavior in the 1940's and developed this scale in 1948. It is an attempt to categorize the heterosexual-homosexual continuum.

Rating Description
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

He introduced this scale with the comment:

"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.

While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history. An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life. A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist."​

In Kinsey's scale he was primarily counting only actual sexual encounters. Sexual attraction, desire and libido originates in the brain and precedes actual sexual acts. As an example, a young man could be highly and exclusively sexually attracted to woman but has never had the opportunity to make that desire a reality. Even though he has never engaged in sex with a woman, he would still be considered heterosexual.

Recognizing that human sexuality is more complicated than Kinsey's scale, in 2005 the American Psychological Association tried to broaden his approach with,

"Sexual orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectionate attraction toward others. It is easily distinguished from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female), and the social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior).

Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality."​

So being exclusively heterosexual or exclusively homosexual brackets a large sliding scale of bisexual variations. And people's sexuality can change over time, moving up and down the scale between both extremes. A good example is my current partner. She was exclusively heterosexual during her youth but in her late 20's had some homosexual encounters. After experimenting with bisexuality for a while she decided that heterosexuality was her preference and has remained so ever since. So her position on the Kinsey scale would have been different during different times of her life. Human sexuality is therefore very fluid, dynamic and complicated and thus leads to an infinite number of variations, but unfortunately humans have little capacity for random and unstructured thought so in a attempt to make sense of this, labels are created to organize people into tidy little boxes.

We all know that that paradigm is doomed to failure. I think labels, and societies insistence on them, is the root of the problem here. (The questions I raised at the end of my original post are indeed rhetorical.) As much as I dislike labels we are unfortunately stuck with them. Maybe instead of using the euphemisms, "gay" and "straight", we should all use our positions on the Kinsey scale.

If a man is married to a woman for 20 years and exclusively has sex with her, he is heterosexual. If he now gets the desire to occasionally have sex with men while still having sex with his wife, he would then be bisexual. If he finds that he prefers sex with men and eventually divorces his wife and has sex with men exclusively, he would now be homosexual. That all is straightforward.

I don't think that anyone, no matter where they fit on the heterosexual-homosexual continuum, should have to defend their position on that scale. The "threatened" feeling that you describe heterosexual men as having I think of more as "frightened". Frightened by societal pressures and expectations. Returning to my example above; If a man is married to a woman for 20 years and has always been heterosexual but now has a desire to have sex with a man just to see what it is like, he is frightened that he will be labeled "homosexual" and ostracized by society even if he has just one encounter. That is very unfortunate and I think the primary reason that heterosexual men often strongly defend their heterosexuality even if they have other desires. For some reason, society tolerates the occasional homosexual encounter in a heterosexual woman, and (as you referred to) the occasional heterosexual encounter in a homosexual man, but is very rigid in it's expectations of sexual behavior in a heterosexual man. And that is because many of societies "rules" were created by heterosexual men.

I'm happy to go with the Kinsey scale if you are. In which case I think we agree that heterosexual and homosexual describe a range rather than being absolute or exclusive terms. However, I don't follow your conclusion that "being exclusively heterosexual or exclusively homosexual brackets a large sliding scale of bisexual variations". Again, IMO the "exclusively" is misplaced as that refers only to 0 and 6 on the sliding scale. Heterosexual/homosexual on this scale also includes "predominantly", surely? I guess if we're mapping the Kinsey scale on to the labels 'heterosexual', 'bisexual' and 'homosexual', I'd say that 0-1 = heterosexual, 2-4 = bisexual, and 5-6 = homosexual. In other words, I'd count people who are exclusively to predominantly heterosexual (and only incidentally homosexual) as heterosexual. Of course that's arguable. Perhaps you would only count 0 and 6 on the scale as heterosexual and homosexual, and the 1-5 in between all as bisexual? If so, that seems like a misreading of the scale. The problem also with lumping so much into the bisexual category is that 95% of people identify themselves as heterosexual, not bisexual, so the categories would be out of line with reality.

 

[temptotalk]

Wow how quickly people lean on insults, generalizations and verbalized middle fingers. Very telling given the nature of argument.

 

[328982]

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

My reference point is the Kinsey Scale. Alfred Kinsey studied human sexual behavior in the 1940's and developed this scale in 1948. It is an attempt to categorize the heterosexual-homosexual continuum.

Rating Description
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

He introduced this scale with the comment:

"Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories... The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.

While emphasizing the continuity of the gradations between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual histories, it has seemed desirable to develop some sort of classification which could be based on the relative amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience or response in each history. An individual may be assigned a position on this scale, for each period in his life. A seven-point scale comes nearer to showing the many gradations that actually exist."​

In Kinsey's scale he was primarily counting only actual sexual encounters. Sexual attraction, desire and libido originates in the brain and precedes actual sexual acts. As an example, a young man could be highly and exclusively sexually attracted to woman but has never had the opportunity to make that desire a reality. Even though he has never engaged in sex with a woman, he would still be considered heterosexual.

Recognizing that human sexuality is more complicated than Kinsey's scale, in 2005 the American Psychological Association tried to broaden his approach with,

"Sexual orientation is an enduring emotional, romantic, sexual, or affectionate attraction toward others. It is easily distinguished from other components of sexuality including biological sex, gender identity (the psychological sense of being male or female), and the social gender role (adherence to cultural norms for feminine and masculine behavior).

Sexual orientation exists along a continuum that ranges from exclusive heterosexuality to exclusive homosexuality and includes various forms of bisexuality."​

So being exclusively heterosexual or exclusively homosexual brackets a large sliding scale of bisexual variations. And people's sexuality can change over time, moving up and down the scale between both extremes. A good example is my current partner. She was exclusively heterosexual during her youth but in her late 20's had some homosexual encounters. After experimenting with bisexuality for a while she decided that heterosexuality was her preference and has remained so ever since. So her position on the Kinsey scale would have been different during different times of her life. Human sexuality is therefore very fluid, dynamic and complicated and thus leads to an infinite number of variations, but unfortunately humans have little capacity for random and unstructured thought so in a attempt to make sense of this, labels are created to organize people into tidy little boxes.

We all know that that paradigm is doomed to failure. I think labels, and societies insistence on them, is the root of the problem here. (The questions I raised at the end of my original post are indeed rhetorical.) As much as I dislike labels we are unfortunately stuck with them. Maybe instead of using the euphemisms, "gay" and "straight", we should all use our positions on the Kinsey scale.

If a man is married to a woman for 20 years and exclusively has sex with her, he is heterosexual. If he now gets the desire to occasionally have sex with men while still having sex with his wife, he would then be bisexual. If he finds that he prefers sex with men and eventually divorces his wife and has sex with men exclusively, he would now be homosexual. That all is straightforward.

I don't think that anyone, no matter where they fit on the heterosexual-homosexual continuum, should have to defend their position on that scale. The "threatened" feeling that you describe heterosexual men as having I think of more as "frightened". Frightened by societal pressures and expectations. Returning to my example above; If a man is married to a woman for 20 years and has always been heterosexual but now has a desire to have sex with a man just to see what it is like, he is frightened that he will be labeled "homosexual" and ostracized by society even if he has just one encounter. That is very unfortunate and I think the primary reason that heterosexual men often strongly defend their heterosexuality even if they have other desires. For some reason, society tolerates the occasional homosexual encounter in a heterosexual woman, and (as you referred to) the occasional heterosexual encounter in a homosexual man, but is very rigid in it's expectations of sexual behavior in a heterosexual man. And that is because many of societies "rules" were created by heterosexual men.

Sorry, Boatnik, I read your post more carefully and see that I misread the sense of 'brackets'. Basically I agree with you. And the emotional/romantic aspect does get a bit lost in these discussions, with the focus on sex acts, but it does feel like an important part of the mix.

 

[alcor972]

... hunghorse...
you're cool...
I like how you're write and organize your reasoning...

 

[alcor972]

... hunghorse...
you're cool...
I like how you're write and organize your reasoning...

errr...
... how you write and organize your reasoning...
Sorry for the mistake...
lol

 

[ronin001]

People love to drag out the Kinsey Scale; because it shows some proven and accepted proof of their opinions. However In Medical and Physical science, a theory is only acceptable till it it disproved by others. The Kinsey scaly has and is being attacked for being out of date and very non reflective of present day reality.

As someone with an Engineering background, I was taught based on the technology present there is no way to build or measure a perfect straight line, it does not exist; because of variables, errors and nature. So a line that was 179.55 degrees or 179.9999999 degrees would be considered straight, though not truly fitting the absolute mathematical definition of 180 degrees. If you take a straight manufactured item and it measures 170 degrees with a noticeable bend or curve it would be rejected as being straight, though relatively close to the true definition.

Tolerance is term we here in the threads about mutual respect and live and let live, of this I fully agree. Tolerance is also an Engineering term that refers to a +/- an allowable variable that as long as you fall within this variance zone, the product or item is acceptable without question. If an item falls tooooooooooooo far out side of the tolerance range it will be questioned

I do not knock and person who chooses to explore their sexuality, more power to them, follow ones Curiosity go for it. But there is a point where exploration and curiosity end; and the reality of ones existence takes over and becomes factual.

 

[328982]

I do not knock and person who chooses to explore their sexuality, more power to them, follow ones Curiosity go for it. But there is a point where exploration and curiosity end; and the reality of ones existence takes over and becomes factual.

Sure, and we're debating where that point is - the Kinsey scale is just useful as a reference point. What is your 'tolerance' when it comes to a definition of heterosexual? 99% straight/1% gay?

 

[ronin001]

Sure, and we're debating where that point is - the Kinsey scale is just useful as a reference point. What is your 'tolerance' when it comes to a definition of heterosexual? 99% straight/1% gay?

I can only submit my opinion, my opinion may or may not carry any weight on an individual. Society may have opinions, these opinions may or may not have any bearing on an individual.

In Latin ( Nosce te Ipsum ) translates to Know Thyself : It refers to if a person truly knows who and what he / she is then society be damned , but when a person themselves do not know what the are, then they are screwed as the internal lie they live only adds to the strength and power of society over them.

 

[328982]

I can only submit my opinion, my opinion may or may not carry any weight on an individual. Society may have opinions, these opinions may or may not have any bearing on an individual.

In Latin ( Nosce te Ipsum ) translates to Know Thyself : It refers to if a person truly knows who and what he / she is then society be damned , but when a person themselves do not know what the are, then they are screwed as the internal lie they live only adds to the strength and power of society over them.

So kinda like 'Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet' then?

 

[temptotalk]

There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain.

Translation:

If you think bisexuality doesn't exist just because you don't want it to. Then you're asking for the pain of not being taken seriously because you're a troll.

 

[328982]

There is no one who loves pain itself, who seeks after it and wants to have it, simply because it is pain.

Translation:

If you think bisexuality doesn't exist just because you don't want it to. Then you're asking for the pain of not being taken seriously because you're a troll.

At least it's not clever nonsense. Who is arguing that bisexuality doesn't exist? Not me.

 

[temptotalk]

At least it's not clever nonsense. Who is arguing that bisexuality doesn't exist? Not me.

Wait what? So bisexuality is ok with you? What about being curious/bicurious? What about a guy having sex with another guy not being straight but curious, bicurious or bisexual? Meaning that the kinsey scale doesn't even apply or has to apply?

Oh and i disagree. What ronin001 said was about as powerful a comment as they come, especially when talking about this very specific topic. Know thyself. If you can't correctly classify/understand your own actions then society (which is short for people) will find a way to dictate who you are for you. With the added bonus of not only getting it wrong but ripping down the groups you would normally be associated with. Having a domino effect of making things worse for everyone.

And for further clarification. Kinsey is a part of society. The only reason he seems to have any authority in this is because of...duh duh duhhhhhhhhhhhh labels.

 

[bigbull29]

They are your thoughts.

I can say that about anything you feel or observe. Everything is relevant - there are no absolutes.

 

[luv2watchdick]

Girls are NOT ewwy.
They[girls] are complex, difficult , wet when required, blanket statement men suck dick better?
Anyway whatever floats your boat.
If it was not for gay/bi guys what am I doing here?Certainly it is mostly men commenting on my cock, and it makes my day.
When a woman does, I am ecstatic.
I love sticking my cock into a willing wet pussy.
I Love men complimenting my cock.
Sexually confused?
yes.

Haha, Well at least you're honest about it. I think that's what baffles some folks is that some of us don't always understand
what we like/attracted to, It just is. But, it's bad when a person cannot admit they don't get it.*Kudos*

 

[ronin001]

Wait what? So bisexuality is ok with you? What about being curious/bicurious? What about a guy having sex with another guy not being straight but curious, bicurious or bisexual? Meaning that the kinsey scale doesn't even apply or has to apply?

Oh and i disagree. What ronin001 said was about as powerful a comment as they come, especially when talking about this very specific topic. Know thyself. If you can't correctly classify/understand your own actions then society (which is short for people) will find a way to dictate who you are for you. With the added bonus of not only getting it wrong but ripping down the groups you would normally be associated with. Having a domino effect of making things worse for everyone.

And for further clarification. Kinsey is a part of society. The only reason he seems to have any authority in this is because of...duh duh duhhhhhhhhhhhh labels.

 

[deleted924715]

I can say that about anything you feel or observe.

Huh? Of course you can... that was my point! Opinions are just opinions. I might find your thoughts bizarre, but I respect the fact that they are yours.

Everything is relevant - there are no absolutes.

Some would disagree (that is an absolute statement lol) but it reminded me of this...