 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in Femine's Corner. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Femine's Corner - Sexual orientation. What a load of bull. |
New poll |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
Kutske                   Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6644 days Last view: 6644 days |
| ||
| While browsing the Kinsey topic, I decided to make this one to see if there's anyone else out there with my same mindset. I see this whole "sexual orientation" thing - you know, the question of whether you like boys or girls - as totally bogus, a modern invention. For me personally, I'm not homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual, but I'm not at all asexual either. I am resigned to the fact that love is uncontrolable, "love knows no bounds," as they say, and as such, I accept that I could fall in love with a person of either sex. Thus, I've decided that whomever I fall in love with is the person I'll have sex with; male, female, or somewhere inbetween.
But that doesn't mean I'm pansexual, either. As far as what physically arouses me, what rouses my purely sexual interests - outside of the scope of love, affection and romance - is more of an attitude, a certain air about someone, as opposed to merely than what they have inbetween their legs. That is to say, show me a penis, show me a vagina, in either case I'm unaffected -- what makes it sexual for me is the surrounding circumstances; the act itself, rather than the thing being used in the act. (Boobs, however, I will openly admit to liking, but more for the aesthetic and maternal qualities than the sexual...plus, I firmly believe that everybody loves boobs -- men, women and children, regardeless of whether they identify as gay or straight -- everybody loves boobies. But that's another topic.) Does anybody here even remotely understand what I'm talking about, or am I just being difficult and finickey? I mean, I understand why people need labels like gay and straight -- for dating and courting purposes (someone who isn't attracted to men would want to advertise that point so a male doesn't try to initiate a romantic encounter with them, right?) -- but since I don't do the whole "dating" thing (like I said, love is either there or it isn't, and it'll be obvious when I see it, so no point in trying to "make due" or "find it"), I don't have this use or need for a "sexual orientation." What do you think? |
|||
Trapster King Dedede  Since: 11-19-05 From: Sweden Last post: 6405 days Last view: 6297 days |
| ||
| I think the reason why a gay/homosexual view of sexuality is frowned upon is that we haven´t had many people going public about it until very recently. We´ve also been teached that a "normal" view is the one with a man and a woman. Not two women or men. We´re so used to these norms that we´ve a hard time accepting the unusual. | |||
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6299 days Last view: 6299 days |
| ||
Kutske - You're a very unusual fellow 
I cant really identify with that though, because for me, no matter how wonderful a guy is, or great we get along, it can never be more than as friends. Because we would have no sex life at all, as i cant get turned on by a penis. I need a vagina (i can do without boobs though, dont give a damn about them). See i was born without one and so i need to borrow some woman's from time to time!  They are such fun! Also i want to have kids someday and a man cant make them for me.
I'm not homophobic though, in fact one of my closest friends is a gay man who origionally had a crush on me (which was very awkward) |
|||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6296 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Because human SEXuality can usually be constrained to the two sexes, ergo it makes sense for humans to case sexuality in terms of homo and hetero (as well as whatever falls in between) eroticism. From that point you can start narrowing down the various philias and fetishes or what have you. Occem's Razor, kiddo. | |||
candrodor Red Goomba Since: 12-31-05 Last post: 6384 days Last view: 6384 days |
| ||
| Some people honestly don't see gender when it comes to love. You're one of them, Kutske. I know I'm gay though, and the fact that your sexuality is different doesn't change that.
EDIT: Sorry, that sounded quite rude. I didn't mean it quite as abruptly as that... I feel you can classify yourself mostly, but you do get more than just straight and bi. Definitely. And you certainly get more detail than simplay gay, straight or bi. (edited by candrodor on 02-19-06 05:57 PM) |
|||
D3stiny_Sm4sher Ninji  Since: 02-04-06 From: Searching for t3h g4t3... Last post: 6342 days Last view: 6342 days |
| ||
| Well, regarding the first post, you seem to be saying that you 'don't do dating' because...you think it'll be love at first sight, or something?
Sorry, I don't believe in love at first sight--not truly, anyway. Sometimes, people are attracted to each other and start dating right away (actually, a lot more than sometimes), but they never REALLY love each other until they KNOW each other, and how can you know someone you haven't built a relationship with? Or maybe you simply mean you want to build a friendship first, and romance will come naturally if it works out that way. In said case, I must've misinterpreted. To me, sexual orientation is a physical thing. Love isn't. To me, finding a girl to marry is simply finding a best friend that I also happen to find attractive so that I can have kids with them. I love my friends, and I'm sure by the time I get married, there will be at least one guy I love as much as I love my wife, but I'm also attracted to my wife and be physically intimate with her and have children. By nature, humans are attracted to the opposite sex because it's what makes children. That's why guys like big boobs and hips (it means the woman is better-suited for a child, science says) and women like buff men. Of course, love isn't about that, and it doesn't mean everyone is like this. I just don't see why people get upset over sexual orientation conversations because, "Love crosses sexual boundaries." Um, duh, yea, we know that. Love is LOVE, and can do more than hormones ever could. But hormones and love are not the same thing, am I wrong? Sex is not making love, I don't think. Love sometimes makes sex, though, you could say. |
|||
Snow Tomato Snap Dragon  Since: 12-31-05 From: NYC Last post: 6317 days Last view: 6303 days |
| ||
Originally posted by D3stiny_Sm4sher Except when guys ARE attracted to guys.. and girls ARE attracted to girls. Be it for love or for sex. Kutske: I know what you're saying. And I think I'd agree with you. Sexual orientation is a modern invention. With the development of religion, and the concept of morales and that you shouldn'tt indulge yourself... homosexuality came to be seen as wrong. It came with the belief that people should only have sex for pro-creation. However, that's never really been the case... and everyone knows it. Love is love. I've always said it and I always will. Sex goes along with love. If you fall in love LOVE with someone, regardless of any of the circumstances... you're going to want to get physically intimate with them. Sexuality is an air about someone... definatly. It's an additude... not necessarily a body part. I know what you mean. I've found girls absolutely sexy sometimes. And I'm comfortable with admitting it. Though it's considered very taboo to do so. Why? People have this stigma about being open with themselves and their sexuality. I'm never going to understand it. |
|||
emcee Red Super Koopa Since: 11-20-05 Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| The phrase you use, sexual orientation, implies sexual attraction, this isn't the same thing as romance.
Within the female gender, there are physical traits that I find attractive, and others that I find unattractive. Among the ones I find unattractive are things like broad shoulders, a muscular stucture, and excessive body hair or facial hair. This is the case for most men, and this is why woman who look like men are normally considered unattractive. So why than would a straight man, who isn't physically attracted to women who look like men be attracted to a man that looks like a man? I always hear (or more often read) people say that you are secure in your sexuality if you can admit you find someone of the same gender attractive. But not really if there's nothing to admit. If I saw a man that looked exactly like an attractive woman (with pants on of course), I would have no trouble admitting I find him attractive. But more often than not, the traits that people normally consider attractive in men are those features that make them appear more "manly", and the very features I find unattractive in anyone. To me, "admitting" I find another man attractive makes as much sense as "admitting" I consider morbidly obese women attractive (which, by the way, I don't). As for the romance part of it, as shallow as it may sound, whether they want to admit it or not, for the majority of people, the path to their heart is through their eyes. No one sees someone across the room and thinks, gee, I bet she's (or he's) great for conversation. With the exception of maybe internet relationships, the first thing we notice about a person is their appearance (or in some cases their smell), and then we decide from there whether we'd like to know them better. So for a straight person, even though there may be someone of the same sex with all the personallity characteristics they would like in a romantic partner, since there's no physical attraction no romantic relation would occur because they would never get to know each on that intimate of a level. Besides physical attraction, and romantic involvement, the third issue is actual sexuality. As mean spirited as it sounds, I have no problem admitting I am very turned off by the idea of sexual intimacy with some I find physically unattractive. Whether it be someone is who is very overweight, elderly, or has male characteristics (like for instance, a man), and I get the idea this is how most people feel, whether they are able to admit or not. So I guess what I'm saying is that sexual and romantic relationships normally start from a physical attraction, and atleast for a sexual relationship require a certian amount of physical attraction to continue (atleast early on). And for every physical feature there is a more masculine and more feminine appearance, and due to genetics and hormones, men are more likely to be attracted to the feminine versions and women to the masculine. But some people are attracted to both, or masculine if they're a man, and feminine if they're a woman. Calling them bisexual or homosexual may be a label, but its stating a fact, just like calling someone male or female. Also notice I didn't say anything about love. That's a very broad term. I love my mother and sisters, and if I had any brothers I'm sure I'd love them too. I've even had pets I've loved, but thats obviously something completely different than what this thread's about. |
|||
|
Cruel Justice I have better things to do. Since: 11-18-05 From: At my house! Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6297 days |
| ||
| It's as ludicrous as this so-called "Intelligence Quotient". I mean, what kinda retard thought up of this? I know that people can change their minds several times. Find girls slightly more attractive or a tad less. There's always a different shade of grey. | |||
|
Kutske Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6644 days Last view: 6644 days |
| ||
+ Sine Abom.: Occem's Razor, kiddo. Upbupbupbupbup, don't you quote me regulations. I co-chaired the committee that reviewed the recommendation to revise the colour of the book that regulation's in. We kept it grey. Seriously, though, if anyone paid any heed to this Ockham and his sharp little blade, most of what we accept as normal scientific fact today would be unrealized. I mean, what sounds simpler, that some astrological forces and some invisible magic called "gravity" spin our spherical-shaped world around massive distances in a circumference around the sun, or that the sun simply appears in the daytime, and dissapears in the nighttime above our flat world? Exactly. Now, somebody requisition me a beat. candrodor: Some people honestly don't see gender when it comes to love. You're one of them, Kutske. I know I'm gay though, and the fact that your sexuality is different doesn't change that. Who said it did? Just because the dichotomy of "hetero or homo" is a social construct of modern times doesn't mean that there aren't people who are only attracted romantically/sexually to one sex. It just means that black-and-white terms like "gay" and "straight" don't apply to all persons. Besides, as I always say, reality is different for each person. The one who takes a given destiny, and then proceeds to smash it: Well, regarding the first post, you seem to be saying that you 'don't do dating' because...you think it'll be love at first sight, or something? Sorry, I don't believe in love at first sight--not truly, anyway. Sometimes, people are attracted to each other and start dating right away (actually, a lot more than sometimes), but they never REALLY love each other until they KNOW each other, and how can you know someone you haven't built a relationship with? Or maybe you simply mean you want to build a friendship first, and romance will come naturally if it works out that way. In said case, I must've misinterpreted. Well, first let me define "dating." I don't define dating as when two people with romantic interest in each other go out and about. I define a date as when two people go out together with the exp As for why I personally don't do the dating thing...well, I don't believe in "love-at-first-sight" in so many words, because the term has been abused by crappy films starring pretty people who walk past each other on a crowded New York street, take ten paces past one another and then turn, look each other in the eyes, rush into each other's arms and engage in a deep, long kiss as the screen fades to black and the credits roll. That's way too phoney. I would certainly never expect (or even really want, for that matter) that to happen anyway. I do, however, think that true love cannot be forged, it can't be made -- love is something that's either there or it's not, whether it's plutonic or otherwise. I like to think of it as a connection, something you notice the first time you meet someone that gives you the feeling that you're both the same on a very base level. Not neccessarily that you have the same interests or even opinions, but that something at the very core of your being and your soul is built in the same way, that you both start from the same point, even if you've arrived at different destinations. It's a kinship foremost, a finding of a "kindred spirit," if you will. It doesn't happen at first sight, I mean, if you saw this person on the far side of a crowded room, you wouldn't notice, but the first time you two really sit down and talk to each other, even if it isn't for long, there's just some way you can tell from their presence, from that certain air about them, that you want to be around this person, even if you don't know why or to what extent. I mean, you can certainly love someone, and that love can come as the result of knowing each other for an extended period of time, but for me, you can't fall in love with someone over time. And that's what I mean when I say love cannot be forged -- you're either compatable or incompatable, which is one thing that I believe is either black or white, without an inbetween. Well, you could "fall in love" in that you feel the connection, but you just don't realize what it is at first, and it slowly dawns on you as you spend more time together, but the fact remains that the connection was there from the start, you didn't create it and it didn't gradually happen. I think all serious relationships form from that intangible connection, and for me, I found all my closest friends this way. I dunno, maybe it's just me or us, as we all come from unhappy pasts, but we feel like family, like we're a different species from other people and we're the only ones that understand each other, that we have to stick together in this hostile world, and it's been that way since the begining. I say that if I "ever find" romantic love, it'll be in this same way but...to tell the truth, I think I may have already found it, I'm just reluctant to admit it to myself. There's...a person I knew, long, long ago, who dissapeared one day, and I've never seen them since. In all honesty, we were never very close, it's just that I felt that sort of connection I described, like we both came from the same place, like we could truly understand each other without having to utter a single word, and when we do speak, it's in a language inherent to the both of us, that we both understand, even if no one else does. When this person first vanished, I was quite dismayed, but I hid this fact from my "friends" of the time because they really weren't such good friends after all, and they disliked the person that I so longed to meet again. I buried this so deeply that it wasn't until recently that...one of my dear friends, as I exp All my life I've scoffed at the notion of love-at-first-sight, and I've done so very audibly, going so far as to openly ridicule those who believed in it. My reasoning was simple; you can't possibly be in love with someone if you don't know them. I mean, what if you think you're in love with someone and you find out they're a druggie or a chain smoker, or that they vehemently adhere to the opposite political party that you vehemently adhere to, or that they have some disgusting habit that repulses you, or that you like utterly different types of music, or that they have some major character flaw that makes them a hassle to interact with, or that there's some aspect of your personality that they disdain? After all that logical dethroning of love-at-first-sight I did, after all that reasoning I went through to prove that you can't really be in love with someone that you don't know well, after all that, to admit now that I might be in love with this person, even though we were never all that close when we knew each other...would not only to be admitting a major fault on my part, it would also mean that the person I want to spend my life with is gone, and we may never meet again. It would mean that my own cowardice and reluctance has let something slip by me that I may never get back again in all my days, no matter how much I want it, no matter how hard I try...and I just don't know if I can face up to that. I just don't know if I could deal with such a notion. My closest friend used to laugh at my immature notions of love, especially when I'd disavow love-at-first-sight. He always said, "Love doesn't work like that; you're going to find out a lot about the person you fall in love with that you don't like, but what makes it love is that you don't mind, that you have such a strong connection to and bond with this person, that nothing so petty could break it. Love is the willingness to overcome all those obstacles together because at the end of the day, with all the good and all the bad, all you want in the whole world is to simply be together." These are very wise words indeed, from someone who's in the most remarkable, amazing relationship I've ever seen. He's the only person I've ever known to be truly, honestly in love with someone. My own arrogance wouldn't allow me to say, "Well, you've got more experience with the subject, so you're probably right and I'm wrong." But in recent months and years...I've come to see just how right he was. Aww...I made myself sad. I was gonna reply to other things in this topic but...I guess I'll do that later. |
|||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6296 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Kutske Ummm...Occem's Razor, when used by Copernicus, Kepler and others gave us the current solar-system model. The simpler of the two theories (one being that everything is arranged by an unseen force into perfect Ptolemic circles and spheres or that an unseen force has allowed for chaotic, but controlled system of gravitational movement) was the latter, in this case |
|||
|
candrodor Red Goomba Since: 12-31-05 Last post: 6384 days Last view: 6384 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Kutske So we agree? I think so... Sorry to have sounded a bit..yeah. :x |
|||
|
Kutske Since: 11-19-05 Last post: 6644 days Last view: 6644 days |
| ||
PSA: Ummm...Occem's Razor, when used by Copernicus, Kepler and others gave us the current solar-system model. The simpler of the two theories (one being that everything is arranged by an unseen force into perfect Ptolemic circles and spheres or that an unseen force has allowed for chaotic, but controlled system of gravitational movement) was the latter, in this case And you've just illustrated my point perfectly; that Occem's Razor is non-applicable in any case (and therefore useless to cite) because complexity is relative -- any two theories could be presented such that A is simple and B is complex, or such that A is complex and B is simple, depending on the presenter and audience. But let's not detract the topic further off...topic. I'll be happy to debate the credibility of eponymous adages in General Chat if you wish. |
|||
mattp Red Paratroopa Since: 03-04-06 Last post: 6561 days Last view: 6561 days |
| ||
| Occam's razor calls for the simplest theory which explains all facts sufficiently.
The last phrase is pretty important |
|||
SuperKawaiiNeko Paragoomba  Since: 11-23-05 From: Dream Chaser Last post: 6324 days Last view: 6324 days |
| ||
Originally posted by mattp Red card. Sufficience in this context is subjective. Your argument is disqualified as a counterpoint. Originally posted by D3stiny_Sm4sher Unless youre religious or just plain old dont believe science rules all, of course. The thread is about personal views, so I'll allow it, but lets try to be a little more general in the future, hmm? Yellow Card. Dont mind me. Im not trying to be an ass, I just like playing the ref XD |
|||
Kasumi-Astra Flurry Since: 11-18-05 From: Sheffield England Last post: 6297 days Last view: 6296 days |
| ||
| Sexual Orientation is just a convenient invention of society. Social rules and taboos cause a lot of people a great deal of pain in their lives, and it's sad to see people enforcing their beliefs on others as law or social pressure. Law is designed to stand for people, not the other way around. | |||
Vyper Kodondo Raging Venom  Since: 11-18-05 From: Final Fantasy Fire Last post: 6314 days Last view: 6314 days |
| ||
| I hate to sound like a total dick, but WTF? How can you NOT have a sexual orientation? Either you like guys, you like girls, or you like both.
Look at the thread poster. They (IMO) obviously don't care about gender and whoever they fall in love with, they fall in love with. Last time I checked, that means bisexual. |
|||
Soete Micro-Goomba Since: 04-19-06 From: Louisville, KY Last post: 6591 days Last view: 6591 days |
| ||
As much as I hate to just disregard this stuff about Occem's Razor and whatnot... I have no idea what any of that is about. 
I agree with the topic creator. What someone has between their legs has no meaning to me; it's what they have in their minds that gets me. I find myself attracted to people of both sexes because of that. |
|||
|
mattp Red Paratroopa Since: 03-04-06 Last post: 6561 days Last view: 6561 days |
| ||
| I find this entire discussion very ignorant and closeminded. THe thread starter is just as bad as the heterosexuals who say that there isn't any such thing as gay people, they're just confused straight people.
Step outside of your own mind for a minute and realize that people are different and sexual orientation is one difference. Just because you're bisexual doesn't mean that I have to be. |
|||
|
Vyper Kodondo Raging Venom Since: 11-18-05 From: Final Fantasy Fire Last post: 6314 days Last view: 6314 days |
| ||
Originally posted by SoeteThat makes you bisexual. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - Femine's Corner - Sexual orientation. What a load of bull. |
| |
