|
|
|
|
but i want to ask this:
is there some sort of major rule that says you absolutely must be turned on (or at least aroused) by anyone?
You can find people physically appealling i suppose, and not be aroused by them, or fantasize about them, true?
You can be in a relationship with someone and not even have to think about sex, beucase you do other things to substitute for sex, true?
*shrugs* i'm just thinking out loud... well not really, i'm thinking this in my mind, and im wondering what you all think of it..
soo.. what does everyone think?^^
~Josh~
21.
Love who you want to.
~Josh~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh said,
>is there some sort of major rule that says you absolutely must be turned on (or at least aroused) by anyone?
Well, there are preconceptions of what one is expected to find attractive. Historically this has been (if you're male) something like "female, 16 up to not more than a couple of years older than you". But even then, no, you're not expected to find any particular person attractive (though people might be surprised to hear that you're not interested in a particular supermodel, it would not really raise an eyebrow provided you were interested in at least some members of the fairer sex).
If you're gay -- well, pretty much the same applies, but (on the whole) I think people are more likely to allow for the fact that you're not so interested in particular "types" but you are in others (I might be wrong on that, but it stands to reason, given that while a straight man might find any woman fair game, a gay man cannot possibly assume that another man will find him attractive, because the chances are he is straight anyway).
>You can find people physically appealling i suppose, and not be aroused by them, or fantasize about them, true?
Definitely. I don't fantasise about anyone, except occasionally in an intimate but non-sexual way. And the number of people I find physically appealing is much greater than the number I am technically aroused by.
>You can be in a relationship with someone and not even have to think about sex, beucase you do other things to substitute for sex, true?
No idea. Presumably.
David
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
cossie
|
 |
On fire! |
Location: Exiled in North East Engl...
Registered: July 2003
Messages: 1699
|
|
|
It's not at all difficult to form a non-sexual relationship with someone. If friendhip flourishes, the bond can become very strong indeed - strong enough, in some cases, to lead to a long term partnership.
Neither is there any rule which demands that everyone should have a strong sexual drive - or indeed a sexual drive at all.
The only requirement is to establish reasonably early in the relationship that both people involved have the same expectations; even if they don't, the relationship may survive - quite a few gay guys I have known have had best friends who were str8 - but the potential for difficulty increases if the two individuals misunderstand each other's feelings and intentions.
In fact, there's only one rule I would try to defend - the rule that, so far as you can, you avoid doing anything for selfish motives if by doing so you are likely to hurt someone else.
For a' that an' a' that,
It's comin' yet for a' that,
That man tae man, the worrld o'er
Shall brithers be, for a' that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
thanks Cossie.
I appreciate your reply. So thanks for that^^
*hugs*
~Josh~
I just tought since there are a lot of people who want only sex or something in a relationship that there was some sort of expectation.
Thanks for replying^^
~Josh~
21.
Love who you want to.
~Josh~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
You are a unique individual and your sexual responses and emotional responses are thus uniquely your own. There are no rules.
You are more likley to be "turned on" by a creature of the same species who is receptive to mating and who meets your "Attractiveness quotient"
Since gay people are attracted to the same gender, and, we hope, the same specis(!), that gender is not likely to be "Biologically receptive" (ie emitting the right pheremones to signify readiness), thus your arousal, if that is what you expect, must presumably be derived from different stimuli.
Hmmm. Does that mean we (need to?) train ourselves to become aroused? Interesting idea.
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh wrote:
> "You can be in a relationship with someone and not even have to think about sex, beucase you do other things to substitute for sex, true?"
>
Absolutely and definitely yes! My last sort-of-relationship lasted a dozen years (for some of which we lived together, some of which we lived apart). We were emotionally close and physically affectionate (hugs n' cuddles). But we never had sex, of any description.
To be honest, there's a large part of me that would have liked to have sex with him. But it wouldn't have felt right to him, and I understood and respected that. And after a while it was totally not an issue.
"The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy. ... Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night devoid of stars." Martin Luther King
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, absoluteley!
I'm quite younger than most people here, but I've come to experience, if only briefly, that some guys I have gone out with and even some "internet boyfriends" are either more than two years younger or about ten years older than me (I know it can be dangerous...) anyway, those people are simply not who I would ever be aroused by, or would consider having sex with, mostly because they are physically incompatible...
In any case, romantic dinners, smiles, hugs, even walking on the beach, sitting and talking, composing or just talking without saying a word never required one to ever become ever erect! or aroused, in any case. Some things do substitute. And I find that even my teenage libido is quelled (however thats spelled) enough that I dont ever require personal manual help in that area.
...Am I being too clinical and emotionally unatached when I talk like this?
Anyway, thats my opinion
A truth told with bad intent
Beats all the lies you can invent
-William Blake
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
just out of curiousity, how old are you?^^ lol. im jsut curious.
anyway, thanks for commenting^^
I think i like having substitutes for sex is much better then doing it. *rolls eyes*
No offence, but I dont understand wahts so great about it. I much prefer to have dinner wtih someone then to have sex with them^^
Thanks again^^
~Josh~
21.
Love who you want to.
~Josh~
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh said,
>I much prefer to have dinner wtih someone then to have sex with them.
Ditto. (Or rather, I'd have to make that I would prefer to have dinner with someone [I find attractive] rather than having sex with them, as I'm not in a position to have much experience of this.) I think that's the nice thing about this place -- people here are, I think, all more interested in romance than sex. (This comes in varying degrees, of course -- I'm not really interested in sex at all; others here think it is excellent in the context of a loving relationship.)
If I had not had a chance to get to know the people round here I would probably still be largely closeted, believing that I must be the only gay person in the world who is not so much interested in sex as romance. I have to say that, from my little experience of gay dating sites, social interaction sites etc., I still have the distinct impression that most gay people are more interested in one night stands than the heterosexual population. That no longer bothers me, however, as I know that I'm not the only person in my position -- the probability is high that sooner or later I will come across someone else who feels the same way.
David
P.S. Dee's 16 now -- it says in his profile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
saben
|
|
On fire! |
Registered: May 2003
Messages: 1537
|
|
|
I prefer to have dinner with someone then to go home, have sex and exhaustedly fall asleep in each other's arms. If I had to choose between dinner and sex, I'd go for dinner, but why choose? 
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I like the third option have a nice dinner and then have sex and exhaustedly fall asleep in each others arms. But I would also settle for the dinner and falling asleep in each other arms, with no sex.
For at least me any way I view sex in two different ways. There’s fucking and then there’s making love. But I find I don’t think sexual about most of the guys I find hot or peak my interest. Than there are boys that I could jump there bones right there on the spot.
Jay
So say what you want
(You know I'm wasting all my time)
You've gotta mean it when you say what you want
(You're only safe when you're alone)
And everybody's on your mind
Saying anything to get you by
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
