Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Heterosexual

215 (62.7%)

Bisexual/pansexual

66 (19.2%)

Homosexual

16 (4.7%)

Asexual

37 (10.8%)

I'm 12 and what is this?

9 (2.6%)

Total Members Voted: 338

[Cheeetar]

What somebody's sexuality is is entirely up to them to discover and express. You have no way of knowing, and casually dismissing them as just doing something to be 'hip' is incredibly rude and disrespectful to that person.

That is not what's happening. There has only been speculation as to what the individual's reason was for presenting himself as bisexual, with that being only one of the possibilities.

As I said, we would like to help them discover and express their sexuality. We don't know, but have good reason to suspect, that they are not actually bisexual. If we didn't care about people discovering and expressing their sexualities, we wouldn't care what he said.

"Want" meaning "would like" - that guy is obviously not a direct part of this conversation. The conversation would be much neater were he.

Are you using the royal we?
Bucket's given a very short, very dismissive account of what the person has said. There are a number of possible explanations, and I don't feel comfortable that it seems to have be assumed that the explanation which is most likely is that the person has no idea what they're talking about or is outright lying in order be more popular (because if they're not bisexual, that's what has to be happening, yes? Them not knowing/knowing and then lying). It's probably not all that nice to be discussing somebody in that way when they're not here, either.

[VerdantSF]

Thankfully, my family is very liberal and would probably accept me either way.

Thankfully it sounds like you'd accept someone else either way, too .  I have a friend who also had a hard-to-pinpoint sexuality, but he was virulently homophobic for a while.  He definitely prefers women, but that small part of him that liked guys was a real sore point for a while.  I think once he figured out that he was bi, but with a preference for women, things fell into place and he stopped hating himself so much.

[Lectorog]

No, "we" was meant to include myself, LordBucket, and potentially other people in this thread.

I'm ending my part of this now though. I don't have it in me to continue. No lasting insults or apologies.

[LordBucket]

I'm gonna have to step in here and ask that people not discuss the actual acts in question. This is primarily about who you are attracted to. What you do in bed with them is your own business, and this is not the place to discuss it.

I will point out that I was discussing nuzzling cats and hugging sisters and specifically pointing out that these were not sexual acts. For Ogdibus to respond that we're not supposed to talk about sex acts on this forum...kind of came across to me as looking for an excuse to get offended and bully others into silence for having the audacity to disagree with him.

[Rose]

Even if you didn't, there was quite a bit of other, more explicit, discussion going on, which I just want to put a stop to before it gets out of hand.

[Max White]

So to summarize:
- Some people are in fact a sexuality that is not heterosexual, regardless of how they feel about any specific act with a specific gender.
- Some people, especially young people, take some time to figure themselves out.
- Others will just claim some sexuality to feel special. What the hell is a demisexual anyway?
All of these are potential options and no single one should be assumed.

[kaijyuu]

What the hell is a demisexual anyway?

Someone who only wants to have sex with people they really, really love. Things like fuck buddies wouldn't do it for them.

A significant portion of the world probably fits into the category.

[Tack]

Indeed. I'm only PTW because Japa seems to have the reins firmly in his hands.

Which with the current discussion the way it is could only spark a BDSM discussion so let's move on to talking about love vs attraction!

Here's one for the Hetero's!
Could you love a person the same gender as you, unconditionally/romantically - if it would never involve anything sexual.

I, myself, am as straight as an arrow, yet I could definitely see myself having a platonic relationship with a couple of my best friends, as long as the shirts stay on.


Is this a blurred line, is this just evidence of Spartan male bonding resurfacing in our more lax society, or is sex the dividing line of sexuality?


(So by law of prefixes, does that mean if I wanted to be cool I could term myself a polysexual: Someone who is only attracted to groups?)

E: I just looked up Polysexual. It's just an overarching definition for Bisexuals, Pansexuals, and others who aren't Monogamosexual
           looks like I'm becoming a... quasisexual!)

[Fniff]

Thankfully, my family is very liberal and would probably accept me either way.

Thankfully it sounds like you'd accept someone else either way, too .  I have a friend who also had a hard-to-pinpoint sexuality, but he was virulently homophobic for a while.  He definitely prefers women, but that small part of him that liked guys was a real sore point for a while.  I think once he figured out that he was bi, but with a preference for women, things fell into place and he stopped hating himself so much.

Thank you. I can definitely see someone like that being quite homophobic. I mean, think of all those violently right wing politicians who get found in a bathroom in a compromising position with another man. The homophobia is probably a defense mechanism. "Hey, I can't be gay if I hate gays! I hate gays!".

[LordBucket]

Here's one for the Hetero's!
Could you love a person the same gender as you, unconditionally/romantically - if it would never involve anything sexual.

Without getting too bogged down in specifics, I think the spirit of the answer to this question for myself personally is: yes. Love and sex are different things. Although I suspect that in a case of "unconditional love" there would tend to be willingness to engage in sex regardless of the desire or lack of desire for it.

"Romance" is something I'm a bit more fuzzy on. I think "romance" is kind of a vague concept that means extremely different things to different people. Personally I tend to associate it with arbitrary mating rituals and the headrush of chemical attraction. I don't see it as having anything to do with love.

Affection and emotional involvement is something that very easily can cross gender/species/etc gaps. Again, I can nuzzle with kittens without ever even bothering to check gender and it can be a very intensely emotional experience, but there's nothing sexual about that. Surely such exchanges could take place between people of the same gender and species, and it would also not need to be sexual at all. We simply have cultural conventions that frown upon it.

[XXSockXX]

kind of like the highschool crowd that dresses in black and tells everyone they're vampires.

Hehe, I used to be one of those (just replace vampire with satanist).

But yeah, teenagers have - by no fault of their own - incredibly poor judgement of themselves sometimes and shouldn't be taken too seriously or judged too harshly.

Whereas romantic relationships are supposed to lead to sex (from what I've gathered in my years). If romance and sex are supposed to go together, why not romantic and sexual attraction?

That's two very different while clearly related things. I can't imagine being romantically interested in someone I'm not also strongly attracted to sexually. I also can't imagine having a relationship without sex. On the other hand I see women I'm sexually attracted to all the time, it just doesn't mean anything. Sex alone leads to what I'd call "is-there-more-sex-to-get-where-that-came-from-attraction"*, sometimes to friendly bonding, sometimes to nothing at all, but never to romance if there weren't any romantic feelings to begin with (for me that is).

In my case I'd say I very rarely am romantically attracted to someone. But this might also have to do with age and experience, the more relationships you have and the longer they last, you get a different view on what love is and don't care about crushes or short-term relationships anymore. So while I've seen thousands of women I've found sexually attractive, I was romantically attracted to only maybe a dozen and really deeply romantically in love (as I think of it now) 2 or 3.

*That's where I think most confusion of sex and romance comes from.

Could you love a person the same gender as you, unconditionally/romantically - if it would never involve anything sexual.

Unconditionally,  maybe, close friendships are like family in that way. Romantically, no, because that would require a sexual component for me and some other types of feelings, that just are not there in other males for me.

[Tack]

Also Japa; aren't you Culturally/Religiously Sexually conservative?

Personally I tend to associate it with arbitrary mating rituals and the headrush of chemical attraction. I don't see it as having anything to do with love.

I completely agree, but I tend to idolize it a bit more. If saying certain words or doing certain actions trigger the headrush of chemicals, that's romance.

Thankfully due to this love and infatuation are able to be scientifically proven, via heartrates and endorphins and whatnot.

Although I tend to term infatuation as being giddy on a 'first high' (which is why it happens to teenagers, and why they assume they're in love), whereas love is more or less just an addiction. (But probably one of the safest and most enjoyable addictions out there).

Unconditionally,  maybe, close friendships are like family in that way. Romantically, no, because that would require a sexual component for me and some other types of feelings, that just are not there in other males for me.

Right.


I'm beginning to think it's a psychological thing. If a hypothetical Johnny was Heterosexual but reclusive, and therefore tended to avoid women and hang out with men, then Johnny would never have the opportunity to develop romantic attachment. As romantic attachment is usually caused by a growing level of trust and contact with a person, it comes down to the division of whether his Heterosexuality would stop him from getting that addiction to his friends, or if he would develop it normally, or if he would just become bisexual.

Unfortunately I can't prove it one way or the other because I personally have never 'been in love' with a guy. My very best friend went overseas for months, and I turned up at his door the day he got back to give him a hug and say hello - but I had none of the signposts that would have happened if it was a girl I was this close to - heart thumping, adrenaline/endorphin rush, etc.

So while I could say I 'Unconditionally' love him, as I'd probably take a bullet for the guy, but I wouldn't say I romantically love him.
So I'm wondering if the latter is possible, for someone like Johnny Hypothetical.

[Rose]

Also Japa; aren't you Culturally/Religiously Sexually conservative?

What I was taught and brought up with, and what I believe, are two different things.

[XXSockXX]

Personally I tend to associate it with arbitrary mating rituals and the headrush of chemical attraction. I don't see it as having anything to do with love.

I completely agree, but I tend to idolize it a bit more. If saying certain words or doing certain actions trigger the headrush of chemicals, that's romance.

I'm a bit fuzzy on what exactly romance is too. A lot of these "chemical" crushes I dismiss as sexual rather than romantic, but I'm not always sure why, that might be me narrowing down my romantic expectations.

I'm beginning to think it's a psychological thing. If a hypothetical Johnny was Heterosexual but reclusive, and therefore tended to avoid women and hang out with men, then Johnny would never have the opportunity to develop romantic attachment. As romantic attachment is usually caused by a growing level of trust and contact with a person, it comes down to the division of whether his Heterosexuality would stop him from getting that addiction to his friends, or if he would develop it normally, or if he would just become bisexual.

He would have to be very isolated. I used to have silly crushes on kindergarten teachers and sort of pre-romantic stuff like that from very early on.

So while I could say I 'Unconditionally' love him, as I'd probably take a bullet for the guy, but I wouldn't say I romantically love him.

I have a friend like that too, but I think of him as more of a brother, there is no romance in that.

[Rose]

Regarding romance, for me, it's when sexual attraction and strong emotional attachment work together.