A Place of Safety
I expect simple behaviours here. Friendship, and love.
Any advice should be from the perspective of the person asking, not the person giving!
We have had to make new membership moderated to combat the huge number of spammers who register
















You are here: Home > Forum > A Place of Safety > General Talk > Defining sexuality
Defining sexuality  [message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 12:51 Go to next message
saben is currently offline  saben

On fire!

Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537



Well, people here seem to get bored quickly, so how about I raise another interesting issue, yet hopefully one no-one will be able to disagree with. The purpose of this topic isn't to discuss opinions, it is to analyse society and why society attatches labels to certain traits yet not others.

My point is basically this- Why do we ourselves and society define males with a male partner preference as being "gay", "homosexual", "queer" or which ever term you wish to use (this argument applies for females attracted to females and also those that are termed "bisexual")? Why is gender such an integral part of society that there needs to be a seperate category for those of an alternate seuxal preference?

Society doesn't label people blond-sexuals or brunette-sexuals, simple because someone prefers people of a specific hair colour. Why then is gender preference such an important distinction to make? Some could say that it is because gender is more than a physical attribute, people of a certain gender are more likely (not guaranteed) to think a certain way, or have certain interests but still there is no Asian-sexual or older-partner-sexual, race, culture and age are far more than physical attritbutes as well.

The thing that annoys me most (and I am as guilty as anyone else here) is that those who do have a male preference are quite willing to say "I'm gay", they are willing to put that label on themselves and really restrict themselves by doing so. I have been trying recently, not to use the term "gay", but instead to say "I'm attracted to males, primarily, that doesn't rule females out totally, it just means the physical and psychological aspects that are inherantly male appeal to me more", I guess it is a little more long winded, but really I don't think sexuality should be something that comes into question, except as a casual topic for discussion, just as prefered hair colour or race isn't really questioned except out of curiousity.

I guess that creates problems with those that do want to classify themselves as "straight" and are unwilling to think outside that little box. If you had blond hair and wanted to get involved with someone that didn't like blonds there wouldn't be an issue. If you're male and want to get involved with a guy that doesn't like males, then it could be a lot more of an issue.

Anyway, there's just my few thoughts to play around with as you like. I do not want this to turn into a "debate" or even really a "difference of opinion", we've had enough of that recently. I just want this to be a discussion based around what I've presented. If you don't like the case I've presented, then please walk about now and do NOT hit the reply button.



Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
Hello Down Unda!  [message #9110 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 14:34 Go to previous messageGo to next message
david in hong kong is currently offline  david in hong kong

On fire!
Location: American working in Thail...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 1101




Good topic, lots of possible reasons. Gender always used to involve power (I'm stronger)(women are "weaker") and property (You are mine to do what I please with)(in some places women still can't own property and can BE property themselves). So some of the needing labels is to control and channel these other considerations...

Another issue has always been important...having children, procreation, passing on your name and genes, that sort of thing. Same sex couples don't do that, or haven't been able to until recent bio-tech advances.

Interesting side issue...in some cultures, who your mother is was more important than who your father is, and property, etc. is passed from mother to child. Some native American cultures were/are like this. Why? Simple! You almost always could point to your mother with pretty good certainty. But (again, until recent DNA testing) it wasn't possible to prove 100% who the father was.

More thoughts would be fun...



"Always forgive your enemies...nothing annoys them quite so much." Oscar Wilde
icon3.gif Disconnected jottings  [message #9117 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 17:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
timmy

Has no life at all
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13739



Sexual orientation is not the simple Kinsey scale of 100% gay to 100% straight. There are severla more axes. Orientation is affected by time, date, place, surroundings, place, age, other people, animals, music, scents, sounds and many other things. According to one of the world class psycho sexual counsellors, and yes, I've been visiting him, there are so many variables that he hates to use even the word "heterosexual".

Looking at me, I have noticed my orientation fluctuate over time. I was heterosexul, probably, until I was capable of noticing it at puberty. Or I expected I was. I "became" not "gay" but attracted to other boys at puberty. I never lost that attraction but was also attracted to certain girls, usually the most feminine ones, during my teens and twenties. I married and was uniquely heterosexual for a year or two. Or marriage obliterated for a time the male attractions. I gradually eased into "married but very attracted to teenagers" and as a battle of will raised the age so I am now contedly attracted to males of "decent appearance and not wrinkled at the edges".

But something took place the moment I said "I am a gay man". I identified suddenly with gay men.

For a young man whose sexual orientation is not fixed I see this self labelling as a serious error. It makes a declaration that he may be unready for, especially if it has circulated around his school, and he discovers that, actually he quite fancies Mary, but Mary cannot fancy him because he "is gay".



Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
Some thoughts...  [message #9119 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 18:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
lenny is currently offline  lenny

On fire!
Location: Far Away
Registered: March 2002
Messages: 1755




I don't think it's strange we have labels for sexual preferences. We don't have words for "brunette-sexuals" or "Asian-sexuals" (though some might want to argue they are just that; waves Hi to David! Smile), but we do have labels for brunettes and asians.

We have labels for lots of things. Fans of various sports teams, different jobs, even physical attributes such as hair and skin color (dick size...), etc.

Why not sexual preference too?

I know many people don't like to label themselves for one reason or another, I have heard people say things like, 'I am not gay, I am me', etc. Well, fine. I am gay. Smile Basically. I happen to find girls attractive too, and I would not mind at all a good cuddle with one. Don't know if I'd actually want to proceed beyond that point however, so that, coupled with my own feelings of preferring males far far more than females overall means I am gay. In my own view. To refuse to call myself gay when obviously I am would feel like acting cowardly, trying to hide.

I don't see this as limiting myself, merely stating a fact. That I like a nice steak for example and can't really imagine living on a diet entirely devoid of meat doesn't mean I don't also like some vegetarian stuff every once in a while. I'm not limiting myself by saying I am a...umm...predator. Smile

Not saying you're wrong, just that the gay label works pretty well for me.


-L



"But he that hath the steerage of my course,
direct my sail."

-William Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act One, Scene IV
I have always had great difficulty with sexual labels  [message #9134 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 22:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nick is currently offline  nick

Likes it here
Location: London
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 351



None of them seem to apply to me and I get exasperated by society’s apparent expectation that one of them should.
We need labels and definitions  [message #9135 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 22:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
e is currently offline  e

On fire!
Location: currently So Cal
Registered: May 2002
Messages: 1179



Labels help us define ourselves. They assist us in understanding who and what we are. They also assist us in finding those who may be like us or those who are different. There are positives to this. But there are also negatives. Much like anything else, it depends on the way the labels and definitions are used.

An automobile can be used as a vehicle to transport us to places we need to be, it can also be used as a murder weapon.
Labels can be used to help us gain an understanding of ourselves, each other, and the world as a whole and to find our place in society. Or they can be used to limit, pigeonhole, and stereotype. Once applied, they can be difficult to remove. What makes a label good or bad is in the way it is used, not in the label itself.

Think good thoughts,
e
Re: Defining sexuality  [message #9136 is a reply to message #9107] Wed, 02 April 2003 22:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
marc is currently offline  marc

Needs to get a life!

Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729



First, I am a person.

I happen to be a person that is romantically and emotionally inclined to other persons of the same sex as myself.

For the reason of simplicity, recognition, and expediancy I call myself gay.

Do I consider the labeling of myself a hinderance or boon to my makeup as a person.... I don't think so either way....

It is a point of referance....



Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
Re: Disconnected jottings  [message #9152 is a reply to message #9117] Thu, 03 April 2003 02:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
saben is currently offline  saben

On fire!

Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537



Interesting point you raise, Timmy. Another one that has bothered me somewhat. I think ALL of us here went through a period of hetereosexuality, mainly because that is the "default" sexuality. No wonder gay kids have such a hard time discovering their sexuality, all their life they've been taught boys like girls, girls like boys, if the labels were abolished I wonder if kids would be asexual, or bisexual before actually deciding which part of the field to play. I know if I hadn't be flooded with people saying "when you find a girl...", "when you get married...", etc it would have made things a lot easier.

Back onto the labels though, while labels for gender preference are okay, why is gender preference the only thing that is labelled, that was my original point more so than whether or not we should use those labels, I guess I diverged a little. Is gender so important that is deserves labels while race, age and other factors are irrelevant? If gender is that important, what makes it so?



Look at this tree. I cannot make it blossom when it suits me nor make it bear fruit before its time [...] No matter what you do, that seed will grow to be a peach tree. You may wish for an apple or an orange, but you will get a peach.
Master Oogway
icon7.gif Wow - great topic  [message #9153 is a reply to message #9107] Thu, 03 April 2003 04:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
trevor is currently offline  trevor

Really getting into it

Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732



I think for the vast majority of people, sexual orientation - the basic shape and characteristics of whom they are attracted to and/or what activities excite them, some of which may anatomically specific - for most fits into one of the 3 common catagories - hetro, homo, bi, however you wish to define those.

To me, this is much more basic than age, hair color, or race because most people may are fairly adamant about their preferred gender of lover, but less adamant about the other details - those are "lesser preferences" by far for most people. There are some names for other preferences, if you think about it a bit, and even names for preferred acts or roles, and fetishes too. Of course if you are completely bisexual, the other factors will be "most critical." What is the percentage of "truely bisexual" people?

I can't help but guess that some people would label themselves as bisexual if pressured because of unwillingness to commit otherwise or because a lover sometime in their life was not their preferred gender.

Don't get me wrong - I agree that gender preference is a grey scale between totally gay and totally straight, but wherever you want to draw the lines on that scale, you end up with three catagories. Someone somewhere teaching a course on sexual awareness also mentioned that "asexual" is also a group/label/possibility - but I don't think there are too many of those here!

I also think that gender is much more "black and white" than the other specifics you mention. From far away (especially naked!) or even if you are blind, you can easily determine external gender of all but a small percentage of people. I guess that's especially important if you make love in the dark. With coloration and shapes and sizes and facial features and voice etc there are many variables and degrees - light brunette, mixed race, young looking, full-figured, etc.

Labels help us to quickly understand without being overloaded with details and quickly communicate a basic idea. Like any catagorization these can lead to stereotyping - making assumptions which may be incorrect.

Of course we can add adjectives - "mostly" or, in my case "technically" or "theoretically", that might clarify the label a bit. Just like "dishwater" and "platinum" when referring to a blond.

Having said all that, of course there are exceptions, and might I say there are some exceptional people on this board! Wink If we respect the individual and realize that people are unique, and sterotypes rarely are a good fit, hopefully the labels will be less important.

Someone somewhere said that until you are past your teens and also sexually experienced, it may be premature to label yourself. I can see many merits in that, but also know some younger or inexperienced folks have never doubted that a particular label is very definitely appropriate.
Re: Wow - great topic  [message #9158 is a reply to message #9153] Thu, 03 April 2003 10:09 Go to previous message
rbryce is currently offline  rbryce

Likes it here

Registered: January 1970
Messages: 216



well i dont have to wear a lable i just whip it out if anyone wants to see my banana-------rob btw where are those dam cookies
Previous Topic: A recurring statement.... Is it really true or a delusion?
Next Topic: the post above this was removed
Goto Forum: