# In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay? 

 Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


----------



## bucs90 (Feb 17, 2016)

God damn man....with today's liberals who the fuck can know? "Gay" probably means you like to give oral sex to transgender oak trees or something.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?


----------



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?



Well okay.. so what makes one a "homosexual" then? Do you have to engage in homosexual relations? Or is it just the simple attraction that makes you gay? And what if you are some combination of both? Or any of the myriad of examples I presented? Where do we actually define this "gayness" thing?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?
> ...


You should invest in a dictionary or poll people that may be gay. I think you have worked yourself into a lather over this. May I ask why you are so bent out of shape over it?  Did you meet a guy that turned you on or something?


----------



## Si modo (Feb 17, 2016)

OP needs a dose of Popeye:


----------



## bucs90 (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?
> ...



The phrase "homosexual" is probably racist now. They use Cis or Xi or something now. "Homosexual" is so 1990s bro. 

Some idiots like Miley Cyrus don't even acknowledge homo or hetero. They just say sex is sex and no label matters they just do what feels good.

There is no more male or female or hetero or homo man.

It's just 1 person and 1 other person doing shit. Whatevs.


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 17, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> God damn man....with today's liberals who the fuck can know? "Gay" probably means you like to give oral sex to transgender oak trees or something.


Red or white oak?


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 17, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


He's yearning...


----------



## bucs90 (Feb 17, 2016)

It's "pansexual" now. Apparently "pansexual" means you are gay this week....straight next week....beastiality the next.....

Miley Cyrus: Pansexual, 'change my style every two weeks'


----------



## bucs90 (Feb 17, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> > God damn man....with today's liberals who the fuck can know? "Gay" probably means you like to give oral sex to transgender oak trees or something.
> ...



Racist


----------



## Moonglow (Feb 17, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> It's "pansexual" now. Apparently "pansexual" means you are gay this week....straight next week....beastiality the next.....
> 
> Miley Cyrus: Pansexual, 'change my style every two weeks'


I thought you old enough to retort, butt fucker...


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> It's "pansexual" now. Apparently "pansexual" means you are gay this week....straight next week....beastiality the next.....
> 
> Miley Cyrus: Pansexual, 'change my style every two weeks'


Why is this confusing to you? Are you too old to cope with the speed of change?


----------



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Perhaps it is something about reading text as opposed to hearing the spoken word but for some reason you've interpreted my comments to be "bent out of shape" and I can only assure you that is not the case. I am not the least bit "bent out of shape" or "worked into a lather" over this. I am merely positing a topic for discussion among adult people on the forum and you're welcome to interject your opinion. 

Since you asked.. I often meet men who I consider sexually attractive. They don't arouse me sexually but I can see how they would arouse a female or someone who is attracted to sexy males. I'm personally attracted to sexy females but I can acknowledge the sexual appeal of another individual. Does that make me gay?


----------



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> The phrase "homosexual" is probably racist now. They use Cis or Xi or something now. "Homosexual" is so 1990s bro.
> 
> Some idiots like Miley Cyrus don't even acknowledge homo or hetero. They just say sex is sex and no label matters they just do what feels good.
> 
> ...



Which is the essence of my argument. What IS "Gay" in 2016?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Dude you wrote a large paragraph. Its not that serious.

I would think it made you bi sexual. I can never tell when a guy would be appealing to women.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> > The phrase "homosexual" is probably racist now. They use Cis or Xi or something now. "Homosexual" is so 1990s bro.
> ...


Probably the same as it was in 2015.


----------



## aris2chat (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.




ménage à trois?  quatre?

if consensual, why does it matter?

every person has to find who and what they are, and that might chance over time. Some fall in love only once or twice, other might marry many time, not always the the opposite sex.


----------



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well okay... exhibit A: 






If you can't tell this guys is appealing to women, that's pretty odd. 

Am I "bisexual" because I think he is a sexy ass mofo? I would never have homosexual relations with him... he doesn't arouse me sexually... but I think he is very sexually appealing... I wish the fuck I looked like that!


----------



## Steve_McGarrett (Feb 17, 2016)

Gay means having your ass thrown off the top of buildings to your death by Muslim refugees that Obama will be allowing in this country.


----------



## Boss (Feb 17, 2016)

aris2chat said:


> if consensual, why does it matter?



Again... that's kind of my point... it shouldn't matter... it matters because for some odd reason we feel compelled to define sexuality as "gay" or "straight" or "whatevs". And HOW do we define it? WHERE are these lines drawn? WHY are they drawn where they are?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 17, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


I forgot this guys name but the only reason i know he looks good to women is because my wife said he looks nice for a white guy. If she had not said that i would think he looked gay to be honest.

Yes you are bi-sexual if you think he is sexy. I'm straight and I dont think any man  looks sexy.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Dude you wrote a large paragraph. Its not that serious.



Dude... writing a large paragraph doesn't denote "bent out of shape" or "worked into a lather" over something. It's English composition. There was not an appropriate break in train of thought for a new paragraph. I am merely trying to establish a point at which we can begin a conversation. Please refrain from reading emotion into my comments, I didn't display outrage or disgust, I didn't insult or denigrate. I simply posed some various scenarios and situations and juxtaposed my OP question.


----------



## emilynghiem (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?
> ...



OK let's make this simple Boss.
If you think being gay is relative, like being a "little bit gay"
then FU IT you're not gay. It's like being "a little bit pregnant."
If you have to think about it, and ask, then NO.

If you are gay to the same degree that other people are heterosexual, then yes, you are gay.

You think and feel in terms of that orientation, you are attracted to and look for people with that orientation, and you establish relations with that orientation -- ALL THREE LEVELS -- body mind and spirit, thought word action. Internal, external, relations.

The same way people identify as heterosexual
and aren't "a little bit heterosexual"
the same for when you are homosexual.

And bisexual does not necessarily mean "ambiguous"
or "ambivalent" -- it can mean someone is 100% heterosexual and 100% homosexual at the same time, like being 100% fluent in French and 100% fluent in Spanish at the same time.

It does NOT have to mean "unable to decide" between French and Spanish; it means that when you relate to a French audience, then you naturally speak in French, and likewise you naturally speak in Spanish when relating to a Spanish audience.

The people IN the relationship will naturally choose words, focus, direction and activities that they ALL AGREE are real for that relationship, so it's 100%.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Dude you wrote a large paragraph. Its not that serious.
> ...


You did so needlessly and for a long time. Of course you were in a lather. No one writes that long without being worked up.  How do you not know what gay means in this day and age?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well, he may be gay... I don't know... what IS gay? That's what I'm attempting to get to the bottom of here.  You're not being much help because it sounds as though you might be repressing your true sentiments... you have two eyes, don't you? You are aware of what makes men sexually attractive to women, aren't you? Maybe you're honestly not... but maybe you're really the gay one?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


I already told you that gay was slang for homosexual. Have you been living under a rock?
I am aware that women are sexually attracted to men but I have no clue why since I am not a woman. If I was gay I think I would be attracted to men and find them sexy like you do.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Steve_McGarrett said:


> Gay means having your ass thrown off the top of buildings to your death by Muslim refugees that Obama will be allowing in this country.


You must have nightmares every time you see a muslim then.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No, not a long time... one long paragraph. It's a considerably shorter OP than most I've written here. You INFERRED that I was worked into a lather and bent out of shape... I don't know why... nothing I said indicated such a thing. It took me less than a minute to read my paragraph which establishes the OP topic. I didn't criticize anyone in particular or insult anyone, I didn't express outrage or contempt... I simply asked a series of pertinent questions. YOU drew the inferences and I think we need to talk about WHY that is? What do you imagine me being "bent out of shape" about? What am I "worked into a lather" over?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well okay.. so you're a straight male who is competing in nature against other straight males for a sexual partner, aren't you? Are you saying you have no inherent instinct as to how you go about attracting the opposite sex or what?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I already told you that gay was slang for homosexual.



And I've already said you can simply replace "gay" with the word "homosexual" if that bothers you. It doesn't address the OP question, it's simply a fatuous comment that has no value.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Because you wrote an extra long paragraph about something a 3rd grader has an understanding of. Obviously you were exasperated over what being gay meant.  My thought is that you caught sexual feelings from some guy you saw and were trying to work it out.  Can you explain how you dont know what gay means in this day and age?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



This strikes me as a bit of a troll thread, but I'll respond as though it isn't.

I think that there can be some ambiguity in definition when it comes to sexuality, but basically, being gay is being attracted exclusively to the same gender.  Straight, therefore, is being exclusively attracted to the opposite gender.

Of course, changing definitions of gender muddy this.

There can be a lot of middle ground between gay and straight.  I think of it as a sliding scale and imagine that most people are at least capable of falling somewhere in the middle, given the right circumstances.  

I can't say that I've seen much confusion over what being gay means in a general sense.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


I didnt have to compete with other males. Women smiled at me and I smiled back and then we hooked up.  I have been told by most women that I have "no game" which is what you are alluding to when you ask if I know how to go about attracting the opposite sex. I just stand there and it happens. Evidently I was blessed and lucky enough to just be myself and attract women.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> It's "pansexual" now. Apparently "pansexual" means you are gay this week....straight next week....beastiality the next.....
> 
> Miley Cyrus: Pansexual, 'change my style every two weeks'



Pansexual is just a word used to encompass gender identities outside of the usual male and female.  Bisexual only takes male and female into account and someone who who is open to being with transgendered (or whatever other gender identities exist now, I don't know what they are) people might not consider bisexual to fit them, is my take on it.


----------



## Steve_McGarrett (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Steve_McGarrett said:
> 
> 
> > Gay means having your ass thrown off the top of buildings to your death by Muslim refugees that Obama will be allowing in this country.
> ...


For your disappointment,  I'm not gay.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Steve_McGarrett said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Steve_McGarrett said:
> ...


I dont believe you. Of course youre gay. No need to try and convince me.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well no... third graders don't have much understanding about sexuality. I'm still exasperated over what "gay" means. Seems to me like it's a creation invented to discriminate and insult people, to stereotype them and put them in a box so you can continue to be a bigot or homophobe, or condemn others for intolerance. You actually make snide comments to reinforce this when you assume my comments are the result of some person making a sexual advance toward me. 

I have had other men come on to me before. I told them I was not interested because I wasn't attracted to them in that way. BUT... I've also had women come on to me that I wasn't attracted to in that way. I've never felt a sexual attraction to another man personally. I can look at another man and see they are sexually attractive. I think any male who calls himself straight but doesn't admit that he can see how another man is sexually attractive is hiding something. Are you afraid it will make you appear gay? Well, that would define a homophobe, would it not?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> ...



That's funny because you just gave a very confusing and ambiguous definition of what "gay" really means.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I already told you that gay was slang for homosexual.
> ...


All you have to do is look up what the word homosexual means and you will know what most 3rd graders know. Where you asleep for the last 3 or 4 decades or something?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I didnt have to compete with other males. Women smiled at me and I smiled back and then we hooked up.  I have been told by most women that I have "no game" which is what you are alluding to when you ask if I know how to go about attracting the opposite sex. I just stand there and it happens. Evidently I was blessed and lucky enough to just be myself and attract women.



Well sorry, I don't believe you. I think, at some point along about puberty, you started grooming yourself, using deodorant, brushing your teeth, using mouthwash, dressing in a certain way, and you began to do what the laws of nature compel you to do in order to attract a mate. Whether you admit that or not is a different story.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well I already know what homosexual means. Are you just going to continue to demagogue the thread and not discuss the OP topic? You basically called me "gay" because I think Channing Tatum is a sexy man.... I haven't had homosexual relations with him, don't intend to... wouldn't care to.  So now, you seem to be doing a 180 and claiming that gay means homosexual relations. Which is it???


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Ah ha. So you were working yourself into a lather. Youre complaining about discrimination and silly nonsense over a word gay people made up to define themselves.  I never made any snide comments. I just assumed that you had gay feelings and were trying to work them out due to the level of your admitted exasperation.

You just admitted you thought another man was sexy. I think youre gay and not dealing with it well. I dont find anything about another male sexy. Now women are a different story.  I find lots of women sexy.  I thought homophobe meant you were afraid of homosexuals?  I have some friends that are gay men and I'm not afraid of them.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I didnt have to compete with other males. Women smiled at me and I smiled back and then we hooked up.  I have been told by most women that I have "no game" which is what you are alluding to when you ask if I know how to go about attracting the opposite sex. I just stand there and it happens. Evidently I was blessed and lucky enough to just be myself and attract women.
> ...


You dont have to believe me. I just supplied the information you requested. I started grooming myself long before puberty because I am a clean person. Had nothing to do with attracting women.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

emilynghiem said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well you said "make this simple" and you presented one of your famous meandering posts that is very confusing. Sexuality has nothing in common with various languages we can choose to learn. I fail to see any correlation there.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Feb 18, 2016)

Who are you to force everyone to the morality of your fucking religon? I say fuck you!


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


I am discussing the topic. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill. As far as I know the meaning of gay hasnt changed. If you would just admit you are confused about your sexual orientation you would be able to deal with it better.

I didnt call you gay. I said you were probably gay or bi if you think that guy is sexy. You dont have to have sex with someone to be gay.


----------



## theHawk (Feb 18, 2016)

Being "gay" in 2016 means you're entitled to special rights, and if anyone doesn't agree to that, you are being discriminated against by a bigot.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

What special rights do gays get?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Wait.  If you know what homosexual means, and you can replace gay with homosexual as you stated in this thread, why did you write the OP?


----------



## theHawk (Feb 18, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Who are you to force everyone to the morality of your fucking religon? I say fuck you!



The only people trying to force their morality and religion on others are homo-progressive atheists.


----------



## aris2chat (Feb 18, 2016)

why can't we be like a water painting, colours all blended to create a picture, not harsh lines.
As life changes those we love might change.  As we grow and taste new things our favorites might change.  As we meet new people our likes and attraction might change.

You might think you will never marry again and then have your socks knocked off by someone across the street.  the type of person you were attracted to as a teen or young adult is probably not what yu are attracted to in your thirty or forties.... unless you found that "one" that you can't shake even when that person is gone

No labels, no confinements, no limits
Life is a learning process, we should never stop learning and discovering  the world or ourselves.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well no, I didn't say I was worked into a lather over anything. I am trying to gain understanding and you're grandstanding in my thread.. .trying your best to be a total dick. You've now made snide little comments to me AND OTHERS implying they are "gay" based on something they said... nothing to do with what type of sexual relations they have or desire to have. 

I actually think you are a homophobe... a textbook example. You seem to want to hide from the facts of nature. You are a male competing in a world of other males for female companionship and you naturally have an instinct as to what you need to do in order to attract them... if you don't think you have that, maybe you are gay? Now, if you realize that you're a Darwinian creature who has these natural instincts, you can certainly recognize others who have attributes you naturally associate with this... or you're hiding that feeling in denial for some reason... I think it's because you are afraid of being thought of as homosexual... a homophobe.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



What is confusing and ambiguous about 'being attracted exclusively to the same gender'?  I suppose, given the new self-identifying gender terms people are using, I could further clarify and say that it is being attracted exclusively to the same biologic gender.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Who are you to force everyone to the morality of your fucking religon? I say fuck you!



Thread OP is not about religion... please stay on topic and refrain from trolling.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



So you can be banging chicks left and right... biggest man whore around... but if you have attraction to males, even if you don't act on it... you're gay?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



There is a difference between finding someone sexually attractive and seeing how someone else might find that person sexually attractive.  For example, if someone told me they found painted toenails especially attractive, I could look at someone with painted toenails and understand they are attractive to that other person, while still finding nothing sexually appealing about feet myself.

My point is that if you say you look at a man and think he is sexy, I think it would be more accurate (and less confusing) if you said you look at a man and see how he is sexy to others.  The way you've said it a couple of times in this thread seems to imply sexual attraction on your part rather than recognition of attractiveness to others; you don't find the men sexually attractive, you recognize their attractiveness to others.

That is what you seem to be saying, anyway.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...




You didnt have to say you were working yourself into a lather. I can see it by your admitted exasperation and the length of your OP on something that is common knowledge. Now your making references to dicks. Why dont you just admit you are gay or bi? No one cares dude. If your embarrassed about your sexual orientation I promise I wont judge you. Please just dont bullshit me.

Actually I dont mind if you think I'm gay. Its not really a concern of mine. Youre the one denying youre gay or bi. If I were gay I would be proud of it. No matter how you attempt to twist it I simply dont find other males sexually attractive like you have admitted you do. I dont think nature gives you that insight unless you are gay or bi. Sorry man


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Did you miss my use of the word 'exclusively'?

Or are you asking about someone who goes around having sex with people they feel no attraction for?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

> You didnt have to say you were working yourself into a lather. I can see it by your admitted exasperation and the length of your OP on something that is common knowledge. Now your making references to dicks. Why dont you just admit you are gay or bi? No one cares dude. If your embarrassed about your sexual orientation I promise I wont judge you. Please just dont bullshit me.



Well, because I am not sexually attracted to my same gender. I am sexually attracted to the opposite gender. YOU keep making this assumption as if it's some kind of insult to me... it really doesn't bother me, but it makes you look like a complete bigot. 

You've already judged me so you promise is totally worthless. 

The length of my OP is one paragraph which takes less than a minute to read. It's not lengthy at all. And it's NOT "common knowledge" because I presented a litany of examples which are ambiguous at best. This thread is blowing up with people weighing in with all kinds of opinions on what constitutes "gay" and it's all over the board.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Yes if your only attracted to males and you are a male. Is that what is going on with you?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Actually I dont mind if you think I'm gay. Its not really a concern of mine.



I don't think you're gay.. I think you're a homophobic bigot who loathes gays but doesn't want to admit it. If this topic is so uncomfortable for you, why are you here? Why not "unwatch" the thread and go find something you are comfortable having an intelligent discussion about?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> > You didnt have to say you were working yourself into a lather. I can see it by your admitted exasperation and the length of your OP on something that is common knowledge. Now your making references to dicks. Why dont you just admit you are gay or bi? No one cares dude. If your embarrassed about your sexual orientation I promise I wont judge you. Please just dont bullshit me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well you already said that you found another man sexually attractive so its hard to believe you.

I havent judged you I am trying to help you sort out your feelings for other men.

Thats a long paragraph and you admitted you were exasperated. Yes its common knowledge unless you have been living under a rock for a couple of decades.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

There is nothing wrong or 'homosexual' about being able to appreciate the beauty of another person's physical atributes of the same gender & doesn't qualify as being gay or homosexual or even having such tendencies.
I think a true homosexual person is one that is only sexually attracted to the same gender. BUT there are many out there that 'claim' they are gay, but are really only following the crowd because it's kind of the 'big' thing to do. A type of rebellion.


But, am I the only one that remembers the word 'gay' meant happy? And homosexuals were called queer?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> > You didnt have to say you were working yourself into a lather. I can see it by your admitted exasperation and the length of your OP on something that is common knowledge. Now your making references to dicks. Why dont you just admit you are gay or bi? No one cares dude. If your embarrassed about your sexual orientation I promise I wont judge you. Please just dont bullshit me.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There have been, what, 2 or 3 serious attempts to define the word for you, including mine?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Actually I dont mind if you think I'm gay. Its not really a concern of mine.
> ...


Who told you the topic was uncomfortable? I never said that. I think its interesting now that you added this new twist on how you think that guy is sexually attractive. If I was uncomfortable I wouldnt be on this thread.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



I don't know what you're talking about, I clearly said I am not sexually attracted to males, I am sexually attracted to females. I can look at another male and recognize they are sexually appealing just as I can look at a woman and recognize they are sexually appealing. I can even look at a tranny and say.. hey, you know, that guy makes a pretty nice looking woman! But I don't believe this defines my sexuality... you seem to think it does.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > > You didnt have to say you were working yourself into a lather. I can see it by your admitted exasperation and the length of your OP on something that is common knowledge. Now your making references to dicks. Why dont you just admit you are gay or bi? No one cares dude. If your embarrassed about your sexual orientation I promise I wont judge you. Please just dont bullshit me.
> ...



But you continue to fail and contradict yourself.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> There is nothing wrong or 'homosexual' about being able to appreciate the beauty of another person's physical atributes of the same gender & doesn't qualify as being gay or homosexual or even having such tendencies.
> I think a true homosexual person is one that is only sexually attracted to the same gender. BUT there are many out there that 'claim' they are gay, but are really only following the crowd because it's kind of the 'big' thing to do. A type of rebellion.
> 
> 
> But, am I the only one that remembers the word 'gay' meant happy? And homosexuals were called queer?



I don't know that I'd use the word 'many'.  There aren't that many homosexuals in general, at least compared to total population, and I doubt that anything close to a majority of those who identify as gay are just rebelling.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> There is nothing wrong or 'homosexual' about being able to appreciate the beauty of another person's physical atributes of the same gender & doesn't qualify as being gay or homosexual or even having such tendencies.
> I think a true homosexual person is one that is only sexually attracted to the same gender. BUT there are many out there that 'claim' they are gay, but are really only following the crowd because it's kind of the 'big' thing to do. A type of rebellion.
> 
> 
> But, am I the only one that remembers the word 'gay' meant happy? And homosexuals were called queer?


Who said anything was wrong with it?  I just find it odd that he would find another man sexually attractive and not be gay or bi. Yes I remember when gay meant happy. I never heard the word queer until I was on this site.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


But you continue to fail to admit youre confused about your sexuality.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Now I'm contradicting myself?  Care to point out how?

You might want to look to your own issues of starting a thread asking what gay means, saying that you can replace gay with homosexual, then saying you know what homosexual means.  

That also doesn't explain how a few people trying to answer your question qualifies as the thread 'blowing up with people weighing in with all kinds of opinions on what constitutes "gay"'.

EDIT : To be fair, JustAnotherNut did pop in with another answer as I was typing my previous post.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> JustAnotherNut said:
> 
> 
> > There is nothing wrong or 'homosexual' about being able to appreciate the beauty of another person's physical atributes of the same gender & doesn't qualify as being gay or homosexual or even having such tendencies.
> ...




Come on out to Seattle and surrounding areas, more than you can shake a stick at.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


You know exactly what I'm talking about. You said that guy was sexually attractive. If he is attractive to you then you are attracted to him.


----------



## emilynghiem (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



The language is related to the TWO PEOPLE COMMUNICATING WITH EACH OTHER.

The homosexuality/heterosexuality is determined by the TWO PEOPLE IN THE RELATIONSHIP.

You can take that literal or deeper.

A friend of mine pointed out that in the LITERAL sense of the word homosexual, then FOOTBALL is a homosexual sport because all the team players are the same gender.

So you can just keep it literal if you want.

If you want to go deeper then you can use homosexual/heterosexual to mean the deeper spiritual and sexual/romantic partnership between "soul mates" and then the GENDER of the two "soulmates" determines if the RELATIONSHIP that connects those two people is homosexual or hetereosexual.

If so, then if those two people identify with that relationship and orientation, then that is why they call themselves either
homosexual or heterosexual.

So you can start with literal gender of the two people in a relationship,
and then take it further to mean the actual connection between the two people, and then take it further to refer to how THEY IDENTIFY and call themselves.

It is totally appropriate to use the terms heterosexual/homosexual at any of these levels, from literal to personal identity. 

Then, it depends on the context and level that someone is referring to.
Either on the surface, if it means LITERALLY homosexual/heterosexual.
Or if it means there is a special connection between the people. 
Or if it means how the people actually IDENTITY and call themselves.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...



How do you know that the people identifying as gay are not actually gay?

And before this goes further, I find it entirely plausible that some people, particularly young people, might claim to be gay as a form of rebellion, or to fit in with a particular crowd, things like that.  It just seems unlikely to me that it would be particularly widespread.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

exhibit B


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Well you already said that you found another man sexually attractive so its hard to believe you.
> 
> I havent judged you I am trying to help you sort out your feelings for other men.
> 
> Thats a long paragraph and you admitted you were exasperated. Yes its common knowledge unless you have been living under a rock for a couple of decades.



No... I wrote an average paragraph in compliance with standard English composition. I admitted I am exasperated by this ambiguous label of 'gay' which doesn't seem to have any definitive parameters other than opinions. It's simply NOT common knowledge or we'd all be in agreement on this and we're obviously not. 

I do find other men sexually attractive. Not sexually arousing to me personally but I prefer women. I find some women very sexually unattractive and unarousing... does that mean I'm not straight? I sometimes find lesbian women sexually attractive and arousing... does that mean I'm gay again? Watching two guys make out doesn't do anything for me but I don't mind watching two women make out. 

It's the 21st century man... Sexuality is beyond our trite little catchphrases we've invented to denigrate, insult, ostracize, ridicule, condemn, exploit or use against people we don't like. I'm not the one living under the rock.... you seem to be.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

emilynghiem said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...



What on earth does team sports have to do with sexual orientation?  What definition of homosexual would make the members of a sports team homosexual because they are of the same gender?  Would it apply to other groups.....your small business only has women working in it?  They are gay!  Taking a tour of the Kremlin and there are only men?  They are gay!


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well you already said that you found another man sexually attractive so its hard to believe you.
> ...



YOU don't find the men sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted to them.  If you see how they are attractive to others, but not to you, then you don't find them sexually attractive.  I don't know why you keep repeating this.  You are basically saying, "I find these people attractive, but I don't find them attractive.".  It doesn't make sense.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I just find it odd that he would find another man sexually attractive and not be gay or bi.



Again... it's NATURE.  The male of any species has an inherent attribute built in for mating purposes. They instinctively know how to attract a female of the species so they can reproduce.... the birds and the bees man. 

So given that you're not some freak of nature that doesn't possess this attribute, you have to have some idea of what makes a man sexually appealing to a female. You seem to believe that admitting that makes you gay or bi. I think NOT admitting something that is inherent nature makes you a homophobic bigot who doesn't want to admit that's what he is... and you exemplify this by continuing to denigrate those who aren't afraid to admit what is natural.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well you already said that you found another man sexually attractive so its hard to believe you.
> ...



The problem with your diatribe is the word is not ambiguous nor was it made up to denigrate or insult anyone. Gay people made the word up themselves.  Yes this is common knowledge.

If you find other men sexually attractive then you are probably gay but it sounds like you are most likely bi since you also find women sexually attractive.

Again gay people made up the term gay so if that angers you then you should take it up with them. I'm all for calling people what they want me to call them.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> JustAnotherNut said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



You're right I don't, but those who claim gay identity has skyrocketed in just the past few years, more so than ever before. Yes part of this is because of 'coming out of the closet' and being more widely accepted than the old 'shame on you' attitudes of history. But all of it?


----------



## emilynghiem (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



If you take the word "homosexual" to mean completely literally on the surface, then anything that is all the same gender can be labeled homosexual.

Obviously that's not what we're talking about
when we are referring to sexual orientation and preference.

On the other extreme, some people use heterosexual/homosexual to refer to the INDIVIDUAL identity and NOT just to the 'relationship with another person'

I am pointing out there are three levels that people can use homosexual as a label
* on the surface anything that is homogeneous in gender
* or in reference to the RELATIONSHIP and CONNECTION between two people
* or referring to the individual's actual IDENTITY as a person and how they see their gender and orientation

Instead of Boss asking what does gay or homosexual mean as if there is only ONE answer this could mean, I am saying there are different levels where people use the term homosexual to mean different things.

If we distinguish these three levels that people can be referring to,
then we can make sure we're talking about the same thing,
and not HAGGLE over what does gay/homosexual mean.
It means all three of these levels, depending on the context and focus.
So I would look at the CONTENT or concept that someone means,
and not haggle if that is different from someone else's concept or focus,
and what THEY MEAN when they use those terms.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I just find it odd that he would find another man sexually attractive and not be gay or bi.
> ...



It may be your inherent nature but its not mine. I dont find any men sexually attractive. I dont have a clue what women find sexually attractive about men either. If I was a woman I would be a raging bull dyke. Of course I think saying you find another man sexually attractive means you are gay or bi. Whats sexually attractive about another man? I am attracted to soft things like breasts and curves. I dont know any men that have those things.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I just find it odd that he would find another man sexually attractive and not be gay or bi.
> ...



You seem to be saying that what someone finds sexually attractive is


JustAnotherNut said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...



Not all......but I would think the majority, possibly the vast majority, are because of acceptance.  "Shame on you" doesn't exactly cover what someone had to deal with if they were openly gay in the not so distant past.  For that matter, there is still plenty of "shame on you" or worse to go around now, it's just far less of an acceptable social norm.

I could be wrong; I certainly don't have an extensive enough social circle to make any definitive statements on the subject.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

emilynghiem said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > emilynghiem said:
> ...



I think I understand now.  You mean if you break it down to mean 'single gender'.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> YOU don't find the men sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted to them. If you see how they are attractive to others, but not to you, then you don't find them sexually attractive. I don't know why you keep repeating this. You are basically saying, "I find these people attractive, but I don't find them attractive.". It doesn't make sense.



No... I can certainly find people sexually attractive and not be aroused sexually by their sexual attractiveness. 

*Person A: *






*Person B:*





You're honestly trying to tell me that you don't see any differentiation between the sexual attractiveness of Person A and Person B?  ...Really?


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> JustAnotherNut said:
> 
> 
> > There is nothing wrong or 'homosexual' about being able to appreciate the beauty of another person's physical atributes of the same gender & doesn't qualify as being gay or homosexual or even having such tendencies.
> ...



Really? What about fag or faggot? All terms used to indicate a homosexual up to around late 70's, early 80's maybe?


----------



## aris2chat (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



love is beyond skin deep, love in the person inside


----------



## aris2chat (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...




a rose by any other name.......


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You continue to imply this is a "diatribe" even after I have corrected you several times on that assertion. This is me trying to have a civilized discussion about sexuality in 2016 and what we mean by the term "gay". A "diatribe" is a forceful and bitter verbal attack against someone or something... that seems to be describing YOUR responses to my postings. 

The term "gay" is certainly ambiguous because we've yet to settle on a firm definition... is it the act of homosexual behavior or the attraction to same gender? Is it the exclusive attraction and is it attraction and not arousal? Are there gay virgins? 

*If you find other men sexually attractive then you are probably gay...*

And you're basing this on what? Certainly not nature... if I am a young budding peacock looking around at other male peacocks, I naturally realize what behavior attracts female peacocks and I naturally try to emulate that.... why would you think humans are any different? 

You've seemingly indicated you lack this ability to instinctively be aware of what makes males sexually attractive to females so maybe  YOU are the freak of nature? Maybe you're in denial of your own homosexuality? If that's not the case, I suspect you're denying that you have this ability because you think that might imply that you are gay or people will think you're gay and you are a homophobe.


----------



## Searcher44 (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


Are there any homosexual animals?





A female Japanese macaque mounts another female

"._... in some populations, homosexual behaviour among females is not only common, it's the norm. One female will mount another, then stimulate her genitals by rubbing them against the other female. Some hold onto each other with their limbs using a "double foot clasp mount", while others sit on top of their mates in a sort of jockey-style position, says Paul Vasey of the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, who has been studying these macaques for over 20 years."_
_
"For some animals, homosexual behaviour isn't an occasional event – which we might put down to simple mistakes – but a regular thing"

"Bonobos are often described as our "over-sexed" relatives. They engage in an enormous amount of sex, so much so that it's often referred to as a "bonobo handshake", and that includes homosexual behaviour among both males and females." Like the macaques, they seem to enjoy it, according to Frans de Waal of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, US. Writing inScientific American in 1995, he described pairs of female bonobos rubbing their genitals together, and "emitting grins and squeals that probably reflect orgasmic experiences".

"In flocks of sheep, up to 8% of the males prefer other males even when fertile females are around. In 1994, neuroscientists found that these males had slightly different brains to the rest. A part of their brain called the hypothalamus, which is known to control the release of sex hormones, was smaller in the homosexual males than in the heterosexual males." That is in line with a much-discussed study by the neuroscientist Simon LeVay. In 1991, he described a similar difference in brain structure between gay and straight men.  (_*OP's note: this is
a relatively old study, I wouldn't use it for argument purposes unless confirmed by more contemporary sources*.)
_
LeVay suggests that the same gene that promotes homosexual behaviour in male sheep could also make females more fertile, or increase their desire to mate. The female siblings of homosexual sheep could even produce more offspring than average. "If these genes are having such a beneficial effect in females, they outweigh the effect in males and then the gene is going to persist," says LeVay._
(OP note: Suggested or proven?)
_
"It seems obvious that this built-in need to keep reproducing would manifest itself in a powerful sex drive, one that might well spill over into mating while females are infertile, or same-sex matings. Victorian scientists saw animals having more offspring than seemed necessary: today we see animals having more sex than seems necessary._
_
"We may never find a wild animal that is strictly homosexual in the way some humans are. But we can expect to find many more animals that don't conform to traditional categories of sexual orientation. They are using sex to satisfy all sorts of needs, from simple pleasure to social advancement, and that means being flexible."
http://www.yalescientific.org/2012/03/do-animals-exhibit-homosexuality/
Do Animals Exhibit Homosexuality?_


_"Recent research has found that homosexual behavior in animals may be much more common than previously thought. Although Darwin’s theory of natural selection predicts an evolutionary disadvantage for animals that fail to pass along their traits through reproduction with the opposite sex, the validity of this part of his theory has been questioned with the discoveries of homosexual behavior in more than 10% of prevailing species throughout the world."_
_
"Biologists Nathan W. Bailey and Marlene Zuk from the University of California, Riverside have investigated the evolutionary consequences and implications of same-sex behavior, and their findings demonstrate benefits to what seems to be an evolutionary paradox. For example, their studies of the Laysan albatross show that female-female pairing can increase fitness by taking advantage of the excess of females and shortage of males in the population and provide superior care for offspring. Moreover, same-sex pairing in many species actually alleviates the likelihood of divorce and curtails the pressure on the opposite sex by allowing members to exhibit more flexibility to form partnerships, which in turn strengthens social bonds and reduces competition. Thus, not only do animals exhibit homosexuality, but the existence of this behavior is quite prevalent and may also confer certain evolutionary advantages."
_
I don't know if that answers any questions but some interesting stuff there, eh?
And don't forget Humans are creative animals with enhanced soaring imaginations so the tendency to be always trying something new, in sex or extreme sports or art should not surprise us.
_



_


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



I understand what you are saying. And I also know that 'shame on you' doesn't do justice to the enormity of the injustice they've endured. My thought here is the incident in Wyoming.  I just couldn't think of a more proper term at the moment.

I just don't think there really are as many 'true' homosexuals vs those making a conscious choice. I have met a few true homosexuals and they are nothing like the many same sex couples I've seen on the street or dealt with when working with the public. It almost seems more like some movement similar to a political movement. Seems as though they are everywhere, even young teens in the local schools and not just a few. There are LGBT parades, holidays, etc. and a lot of this is as if they are pushing it 'in your face'.
I don't know, sometimes I wonder if there are any heterosexuals left out there.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> You know exactly what I'm talking about. You said that guy was sexually attractive. If he is attractive to you then you are attracted to him.



I am attracted to a well-cooked T-bone steak... I don't want to have sex with it. I think Halle Berry is a sexually attractive female but she is not my type, she doesn't turn me on sexually. I think George Clooney is a sexually attractive male but I don't get a boner when I see him without a shirt... I don't have fantasies about him... I wouldn't have sex with him... I'm not sexually stimulated by him. I've never found another male to be sexually arousing but I can often acknowledge sexually attractive men. 

My ex wife used to be crazy about Sean Connery. She said he was the sexiest man alive... I never really saw that.. he seemed handsome in a way, but I thought Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan were sexier James Bonds. Back in my single days when I went out clubbing, looking to pick up women, I wanted to go with guys who were sexy looking like me and not some dumpy nerds who couldn't pick up chicks... but I didn't want to go with guys who were hotter than me either. 

I've just never had the problem with recognizing sexual attractiveness in both males and females and I don't understand how any male really does because it's perfectly natural and it's okay. It doesn't make you gay. Much of my career, I spent making men more attractive in the way they dress and present themselves to appeal to the female market. Sexual attractiveness is such a huge part of marketing and it's very important to know what works and what doesn't. That said, in my field, there were a lot of "gay" males. But really... in 2016... why do we cling to these ambiguous labels that simply keep us segregated? It seems so dumb and backward-thinking to me.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Sean Connery IS the sexiest man alive. Not was, IS.


----------



## Fang (Feb 18, 2016)

Gay means the same thing in 2016 that it meant in 1990, 1950, 1850, etc. If you're a man and you're gay you like to take it up the ass. Disgusting I know. But thats what it means.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



Yes. We all know. You are "just curious". It's OK. It's 2016 and you can be yourself. There are still some states where you can be fired if your boss finds out....but that's OK. Your boss doesn't hate you. He hates the sin.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Feb 18, 2016)

[/QUOTE]So you can be banging chicks left and right... biggest man whore around... but if you have attraction to males, even if you don't act on it... you're gay?[/QUOTE]

No. Relax. You are bisexual. Not gay. Feel better?


----------



## Ravi (Feb 18, 2016)

I feel sorry for the OP. Looks like he spent a long night struggling with his sexual identity. The pictures of "attractive" males he's posted look gay.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Feb 18, 2016)

Ravi said:


> I feel sorry for the OP. Looks like he spent a long night struggling with his sexual identity. The pictures of "attractive" males he's posted look gay.



I think this thread is in the wrong place. I will assist.


----------



## Toro (Feb 18, 2016)

Not that's there's anything wrong with that.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Feb 18, 2016)

Gay used to be a perfectly fine word to describe joyful emotion it has been co opted to the detriment of the language


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



No, it makes you bi.


----------



## Coloradomtnman (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



He looks like a meathead douchebag and I don't understand why women would want to have sex with him.

You're bisexual.


----------



## playtime (Feb 18, 2016)

wow... you put WAY too much thought into that.  seriously dude...who cares?   will your life change by getting an answer?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Well okay.. so what makes one a "homosexual" then? Do you have to engage in homosexual relations? Or is it just the simple attraction that makes you gay? And what if you are some combination of both? Or any of the myriad of examples I presented? Where do we actually define this "gayness" thing?



Andrew Dice Clay said it best -

"Ya either suck cock, or you don't."


----------



## aaronleland (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss is SO gay.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...


Really.   Yes I have heard fag. We would call people that all the time to make fun of them.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


Just curious, eh?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


I see you've given some serious thought to this.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You know exactly what I'm talking about. You said that guy was sexually attractive. If he is attractive to you then you are attracted to him.
> ...


You keep saying its natural to find other men sexually attractive and I disagree. If I dont know what makes a male sexually attractive to women how would I know what makes a male sexually attractive to me since I am only attracted to women?  I've asked women what was sexually attractive about myself and I have gotten all kinds of responses even from the same female.  I honestly think you may be bi or gay if you find another man sexually attractive. Like I said before its no big deal because I understand sexuality is on a sliding scale.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Interesting choice considering he's bi-sexual.


----------



## Disgruntled_American (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I think gay is slang for homosexual. How did you get so confused about what gay means?
> ...



It's not that hard.  homosexual is someone that is attracted to the same sex.  Why is that so hard?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

theHawk said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Who are you to force everyone to the morality of your fucking religon? I say fuck you!
> ...


So...evangelical christians are gay?    That's priceless!


----------



## mdk (Feb 18, 2016)

Gay is like Gozer. It's whatever it wants to be.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...


Or...maybe they aren't afraid to admit it anymore.  Did you think of that?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > YOU don't find the men sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted to them. If you see how they are attractive to others, but not to you, then you don't find them sexually attractive. I don't know why you keep repeating this. You are basically saying, "I find these people attractive, but I don't find them attractive.". It doesn't make sense.
> ...



In other words, you don't find them sexually attractive, you instead recognize their sexual attractiveness to others.

The phrase 'I find so-and-so sexually attractive' is saying that the person is good-looking to you; the person has qualities you look for in a sexual partner; the person arouses you.  'I find' makes it about what you personally think of the person.

If you actually read what I've been saying to you you'd know that nothing I've said means you cannot see a difference in the looks of two men.  However, if you don't consider either man desirable, you find neither one sexually attractive.

Let's look at the Mona Lisa.  If you don't particularly care for the painting, but you recognize things about it that others are impressed by, would you say you find it beautiful?  Of course not.  You might say you can see why others find it beautiful, but you wouldn't say that you find it beautiful.  This is the same kind of situation.  You don't find the men sexually attractive, but you can see why others do.

What is so difficult to understand here?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Fang said:


> Gay means the same thing in 2016 that it meant in 1990, 1950, 1850, etc. If you're a man and you're gay you like to take it up the ass. Disgusting I know. But thats what it means.


I find it fascinating how you think of the sex act when you talk of gay people...When I talk of straight people, I don't immediately default to thinking of what they do for sex.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

aris2chat said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Yes, but I'm discussing sexual attraction.


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Personally I don't care what it means, because liberals shift meanings to suit themselves for the moment. Take two guys in prison that had girlfriends. They engage in sex. At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay? It's a state on mind like so much with liberalism. It's moral relativism. Now it's down to defining your gender the way you want.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Disgruntled_American said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


*snicker*  You said "hard".   twice.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Personally I don't care what it means, because liberals shift meanings to suit themselves for the moment. Take two guys in prison that had girlfriends. They engage in sex. At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay? It's a state on mind like so much with liberalism. It's moral relativism. Now it's down to defining your gender the way you want.


Obviously you care. You replied to the thread and asked several questions about it. They arent gay. They are bi. Obviously they are attracted to both sexes.  WTF is wrong with you idiots?


----------



## Disgruntled_American (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Personally I don't care what it means, because liberals shift meanings to suit themselves for the moment. Take two guys in prison that had girlfriends. They engage in sex. At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay? It's a state on mind like so much with liberalism. It's moral relativism. Now it's down to defining your gender the way you want.



You are absolutely incorrect.  A Homosexual is someone who is ATTRACTED to the same sex.  PERIOD.  It has NOTHING to do with action.  A virgin can be homosexual if they are attracted to the same sex just like someone who is a virgin and attracted to the opposite sex is a heterosexual.

It is the ATTRACTION and not the ACT that defines someone being a homosexual or heterosexual.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

mdk said:


> Gay is like Gozer. It's whatever it wants to be.



Wait, was it Gozer the Gayzerian?


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Disgruntled_American said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Personally I don't care what it means, because liberals shift meanings to suit themselves for the moment. Take two guys in prison that had girlfriends. They engage in sex. At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay? It's a state on mind like so much with liberalism. It's moral relativism. Now it's down to defining your gender the way you want.
> ...


You avoided the point. What if the guys in prison did get attracted to men, and even had others?


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Personally I don't care what it means, because liberals shift meanings to suit themselves for the moment. Take two guys in prison that had girlfriends. They engage in sex. At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay? It's a state on mind like so much with liberalism. It's moral relativism. Now it's down to defining your gender the way you want.


That's called "any port in a storm".


----------



## Disgruntled_American (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Disgruntled_American said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



In prison it has more to do with power and control, not attraction.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Disgruntled_American said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



If they are attracted to men and women, that would be bisexual rather than homo- or heterosexual (assuming we aren't using any of the newer terms for sexuality).


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Disgruntled_American said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


You must have avoided school. What is confusing to you that the men in your example are bi?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Disgruntled_American said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Disgruntled_American said:
> ...


I disagree. In prison power may be an element but you have to be sexually aroused to get a woody for another man.


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Disgruntled_American said:
> ...


So if they think of no one else they are homosexuals but when they get out and hookup with their gals they become bi-sexual and if they don't think about each other anymore they become heterosexual?


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Disgruntled_American said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Disgruntled_American said:
> ...


Another side step.


----------



## Disgruntled_American (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Disgruntled_American said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



No, sexuality studies that were done.  Sorry you don't like it.  That is also the majority of rapes as well, has more to do with power and control rather than sexual gratification.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...


It sounds like you too are trying to work out your confusion over your sexual orientation.  Its really not that hard.


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Disgruntled_American said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Disgruntled_American said:
> ...


What studies? What didn't I like? You are too stupid to form anything but low brow insults.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Iceweasel said:
> ...



While I believe sexual attraction can change over time,  you seem to be equating who a person is with at the moment to their sexual orientation.

If a person is attracted to only the opposite sex, they are heterosexual.  If a person is only attracted to the same sex, they are homosexual.  If a person is attracted to both sexes, they are bisexual.  Those are the basic definitions.

Things get more complicated with differing gender identities, but I'm trying to keep it simple both because it's easier to talk about and because I'm not well informed about a lot of recent terms for sexuality and gender identity.


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> While I believe sexual attraction can change over time,  you seem to be equating who a person is with at the moment to their sexual orientation.
> 
> If a person is attracted to only the opposite sex, they are heterosexual.  If a person is only attracted to the same sex, they are homosexual.  If a person is attracted to both sexes, they are bisexual.  Those are the basic definitions.
> 
> Things get more complicated with differing gender identities, but I'm trying to keep it simple both because it's easier to talk about and because I'm not well informed about a lot of recent terms for sexuality and gender identity.


No, I said "At what point do they become "gay"? If they like it but went back to their girlfriends when they got out, were they ever gay?"

There are straight guys that went to prison and came out gay and stayed that way. At what point did they become "gay"? Like I said I don't care what people call themselves, a man is always a man and homosexual acts are what they are. No need to mind read.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Iceweasel said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > While I believe sexual attraction can change over time,  you seem to be equating who a person is with at the moment to their sexual orientation.
> ...



The point at which a person is not attracted to the opposite sex but is attracted to the same sex is the point at which they are gay.  

It's hard to give a definitive answer about specific individuals because no one else can know what they are thinking and feeling.  It's not about a particular act, it is about that person's attraction to the genders, and only that person knows the truth about who they are attracted to (if they even realize it themselves).

You seem to be looking for an answer along the lines of "When you have intercourse with a member of the opposite sex you are gay", but that isn't how it works.  Again, if a person is attracted to members of their own gender but not to members of the opposite gender, they are gay, at whatever point that is true.


----------



## Iceweasel (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...


That's what I said, attracted to in this scenario than that. And you continue to mischaracterize what I said. There's so much dishonesty on your side.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Iceweasel said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...


Ice is trying to work out his feelings regarding his sexual orientation on the sly just like Boss. No one is really that dumb about what gay means.


----------



## NLT (Feb 18, 2016)

Gay = homosexual = mdk 
Faggot= Statistikhengst 
Lesbian= Jodey Foster
Bulldyke= bodecea Seawytch @skydancer


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> In other words, you don't find them sexually attractive, you instead recognize their sexual attractiveness to others.
> 
> The phrase 'I find so-and-so sexually attractive' is saying that the person is good-looking to you; the person has qualities you look for in a sexual partner; the person arouses you. 'I find' makes it about what you personally think of the person.
> 
> ...



You're getting what I am saying and you're not.  Finding someone desirable is not the same as finding them sexually attractive. If I say that someone is sexually attractive it doesn't mean I desire them. It simply means I recognize the qualities in them that make them sexually attractive to those who desire them. Saying that I find them sexually attractive doesn't mean I am attracted to them sexually. This is true whether it's a man or woman. 

I wish some women would weigh in here, I would like to hear their thoughts. I don't think they have as big of a problem recognizing the sexual attractiveness of other women and I don't think they believe it makes them lesbians. I also think they can look at a man and find him sexually attractive without it meaning they want to fuck him. So why is it that this seems to be such a problem for males? 

I logged on today to read about a half a page of the same childish insults directed toward me from other guys who somehow believe I am gay or bi. I've never had any desire to be sexual with another man in my life. I've never been confused about it, I don't ever think about it or wonder what it would be like, I don't find sexually attractive men arousing. Then we have the crude remarks about "take it up the ass" or "you suck cock or you don't"  and I believe this dovetails with my earlier point.... "GAY" has come to be a vehicle by which we can denigrate, insult, ridicule, condemn, criticize, demean or use against others to segregate them from the norm. 

There are no real parameters that make someone gay, partially-gay, kinda-gay, full-on-gay or semi-gay, it's all a matter of opinion and self-identity. It can mean you are attracted to the same gender or it can mean you are engaging in homosexual acts. Hell, I am getting called 'gay' for simply recognizing another man is sexually attractive.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Ice is trying to work out his feelings regarding his sexual orientation on the sly just like Boss. No one is really that dumb about what gay means.



Again, all you seem to be doing is interjecting your homophobic bigotry. Trying to insult people and denigrate them by being a cyber bully. You're making it very clear what "gay" means to you... it's a way for you to intimidate and insult others. You're so afraid of being labeled "gay" that you're in complete denial of simple nature. You are such a homophobe you can't even admit another man is sexually attractive... you want to claim you don't recognize it. When it's pointed out that you must be able to recognize it in order to make yourself sexually attractive to females, you pretend you're some kind of fucking Adonis and never had to try.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> If a person is attracted to only the opposite sex, they are heterosexual. If a person is only attracted to the same sex, they are homosexual. If a person is attracted to both sexes, they are bisexual. Those are the basic definitions.



So there are no truly gay women unless they are virgins? Because, if a woman has ever been sexually attracted to a guy, you're saying she is bisexual and not homosexual. 

And thanks, Dr. Phil. for the basic definitions none of us were aware of. Don't know what we'd do without you! I mean, I've been wondering my whole life about this and now you've explained it!


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Ice is trying to work out his feelings regarding his sexual orientation on the sly just like Boss. No one is really that dumb about what gay means.
> ...


Gay means homosexual. Thats all it means to me. Youre confused about your sexual orientation if you feel another man is sexually attractive and trying to pretend its natural. If your intimidated thats your issue.  How would thinking another guy was sexually attractive help me attract a woman? Adonis was a white guy and I am Black.  I'm pretty sure I look better than Adonis.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ...trying to work out his feelings regarding his sexual orientation on the sly just like Boss.



Hey, at 56 years old, if you haven't worked that out...what's the point?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > If a person is attracted to only the opposite sex, they are heterosexual. If a person is only attracted to the same sex, they are homosexual. If a person is attracted to both sexes, they are bisexual. Those are the basic definitions.
> ...



When someone starts asking what it means to be gay, or at what point a person is gay or straight, providing answers to that seems appropriate.  You, apparently, think that doing so calls for being a sarcastic asshole.

Maybe if you didn't start a thread asking what gay means you wouldn't see people providing definitions of sexual orientations.

If you know what it means to be gay, why the thread?  If you don't, why be a dick when an answer is provided?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > If a person is attracted to only the opposite sex, they are heterosexual. If a person is only attracted to the same sex, they are homosexual. If a person is attracted to both sexes, they are bisexual. Those are the basic definitions.
> ...



What does being a virgin have to do with anything?  You realize that one can be sexually attracted to a person without having sex with them, don't you?

I was pretty clear.  If a woman is only attracted to other women, she is gay.  If she has been attracted to men in the past, but no longer is, then she still fits the qualifications of being gay.  I never said anything about 'if a person has ever'.  That's you making things up.

For someone who feels the need to try and make fun of me providing simple definitions of basic sexual orientations, you sure don't seem able to grasp what they mean.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > In other words, you don't find them sexually attractive, you instead recognize their sexual attractiveness to others.
> ...



Clearly we disagree about what it means to say you find someone sexually attractive.  I am pretty confident that Asclepias uses the same meaning I do, and that is why he continues to question your sexuality (seriously or in jest).


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> JustAnotherNut said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



yes, I (we) have done the same..........but did you also know the term 'fag' is or was used in UK for cigarette? just askin

To the OP, I can understand your dilemma over this, because the term is being used in a broad sense like an 'umbrella'. There is differences between sexual identity (man trapped in a womans body & visa versa) and sexual preferences(being sexually attracted to same gender) and whatever other myriad differences people keep coming up with that center around 'themselves' in a sexual context. There are huge differences to each, but are grouped under the 'gay' label.
Some people are just too closed minded in that respect & think everything is either black or white & not willing to acknowledge any gray areas.

There are some who just like to play or pretend to either dress up or act on some urges, yet at the end of the day are still hetero. Somehow living out those fantasies even in small ways, makes them feel better for whatever psychological reason, but when it comes right down to it, the opposite gender is what makes them orgasmic. Just because a man likes the feel of satin or silk on his skin or a woman likes denim, doesn't really qualify them as being 'gay', they just have a higher sensitivity for touch.
I've also seen a few men who are 'effeminate' in many ways, enough to make you wonder, yet they still are aroused by women. And the same in reverse. Are they gay? NO.....but many think so & classify them as such.

I'm a woman, I can look at another woman's body and my mind may even think of sex because of it, but one thing is for sure she just isn't built with the right equipment. Does that make me lesbian? Or bi? I don't think so  because if I were to see a gorgeous hunk of a guy and a 'sexy' woman side by side....I'm going for the guy thank you and not have second thoughts about her.
These all may be 'fine lines', but are very important factors when determining what is really gay or not


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> When someone starts asking what it means to be gay, or at what point a person is gay or straight, providing answers to that seems appropriate. You, apparently, think that doing so calls for being a sarcastic asshole.
> 
> Maybe if you didn't start a thread asking what gay means you wouldn't see people providing definitions of sexual orientations.
> 
> If you know what it means to be gay, why the thread? If you don't, why be a dick when an answer is provided?



Sorry, maybe the thread OP just went completely over your head? 

Watch it there, you talked about a dick... Asclepias says that makes you GAY! 

I didn't need a definition of what makes someone homosexual. That was not the intent or purpose of the OP. I hoped to have a mature adult conversation about sexual attitudes in the 21st century. A few people seemed to have gotten that point and have contributed wonderfully. A few others have taken the opportunity to flood the thread with juvenile insults and their closet-homophobia. 

I think "gay" is quickly becoming an obsolete term... it's the new "colored people".  It seems to be more of a source of divisiveness and vehicle for prejudice than any good it does to have around as a definition of individual sexuality. After all, our sexuality may change over time.... maybe not Assclap's... but many younger generation people... they are more "pansexual" or "metrosexual" than "gay."  ....Don't fence me in!  ...You know what I am saying? I think there is a sexual liberation happening with the younger generation and we're going to see less and less of the "he's gay" and "she's bi" stuff... it's not going to matter. People are people... they are who they are.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Clearly we disagree about what it means to say you find someone sexually attractive.  I am pretty confident that Asclepias uses the same meaning I do, and that is why he continues to question your sexuality (seriously or in jest).



No, I think he continues to question my sexuality because he is a bigot. I don't think you are a bigot... you might be a bit homophobic though. I think we're closer to being on the same page than Assclap and myself. 

Again, I can find someone sexually attractive but not desire them sexually.... male or female. We all have our personal sexual desires... that thing that turns us on sexually... and it varies from person to person. Some men like women who are dressed classy with hair done up, etc.... some like the co-ed cheerleader with white socks and pigtails... some like smoldering and sultry... some like perky and smiley... different strokes for different folks... some perfectly heterosexual males might actually be sexually stimulated at the sight of another man in drag!  Does that make them "gay" or is it just their fetish? Who am I to judge? 

My OP point is... it's 2016... why are we still trying to define sexuality in such a closed-minded and boxed-in way? Why can't we all just be who we are sexually without this labeling and categorizing? Are we not yet civilized enough? Are there still too many bigots like Assclap? And what can we do about that as a society?


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> What does being a virgin have to do with anything? You realize that one can be sexually attracted to a person without having sex with them, don't you?
> 
> I was pretty clear. If a woman is only attracted to other women, she is gay. If she has been attracted to men in the past, but no longer is, then she still fits the qualifications of being gay. I never said anything about 'if a person has ever'. That's you making things up.
> 
> For someone who feels the need to try and make fun of me providing simple definitions of basic sexual orientations, you sure don't seem able to grasp what they mean.



So, by your definition, you can be gay then not be gay and then be gay again? And this all resides on what is happening in the moment... if today, I happen to find a male who I am attracted to sexually, even if we never have sex, I am a gay man... but if I am sexually attracted to a woman tomorrow, I am not gay anymore?  

Or is it, once you have a homosexual thought, you become gay from then on? You can fuck chicks exclusively the rest of your life and you'll still be gay because you had that one time you felt sexually attracted to the same gender? I'm just finding your definition very confusing.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

NLT said:


> Gay = homosexual = mdk
> Faggot= Statistikhengst
> Lesbian= Jodey Foster
> Bulldyke= bodecea Seawytch @skydancer


Can't quit us....like a moth to the Other Side's flame.


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ...trying to work out his feelings regarding his sexual orientation on the sly just like Boss.
> ...


You'd be surprised.  That's right in the range of when closeted males can't take the lie anymore and come out in a blaze...usually leaving a family behind.


----------



## MikeK (Feb 18, 2016)

For the vast majority of people the term "gay" is simply an inoffensive one syllable substitute for the five syllable word, homosexual.  

To deny the need to designate gender preference is to suggest the reality of the preference does not exist.  The _need to know_ exists mainly to facilitate choosing a partner and to avoid wasting one's time:  I recall "putting the moves" on a very attractive woman Marine ("BAM") for several days and being laughed at for my folly.  I was too green at the time to realize that she, along with a lot of other women Marines, was "gay."


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

*If you desire cock while not desiring pussy, you are gay. Pretty simple

if you desire vagina and dont desire dick, you are straight.

 If you desire both cock and vagina, you are bisexual. 

Theres no ambiguity, just simply another reason to whine about how others might use language, a meaninglessness. 

*opinions above are regarding a male perspective


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

G.T. said:


> *If you desire cock while not desiring pussy, you are gay. Pretty simple
> 
> if you desire vagina and dont desire dick, you are straight.
> 
> ...




thanks for the vulgar input, Howard Stern.... now, just go.


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > *If you desire cock while not desiring pussy, you are gay. Pretty simple
> ...


You spelled accurate and very pointed, wrong. It's no problem, was happy to answer your o-p to any sane non busy-body individual's satisfaction. Being succinct isn't a gift, you know. Well, ok fuck, yes it is.


----------



## longknife (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



What the hell happened to "lighthearted and carefree"?


----------



## Skylar (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> bucs90 said:
> 
> 
> > The phrase "homosexual" is probably racist now. They use Cis or Xi or something now. "Homosexual" is so 1990s bro.
> ...



Gay is homosexual. Gay is not bi or pan or trans or anything but gay.


----------



## Skylar (Feb 18, 2016)

longknife said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> ...



Probably sitting next to the pile of sticks known as faggots.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > What does being a virgin have to do with anything? You realize that one can be sexually attracted to a person without having sex with them, don't you?
> ...



Technically yes, but I don't think that people's sexual appetites change that drastically moment to moment.  But yes, I do think a person can be gay at one point in their life and not be gay at another point.  

I don't think that a gay man is going to, out of the blue, stop desiring other men and start desiring women.  I don't know why you would take it to that extreme as though people usually change sexual orientation day to day.  However, just as a person might find different things attractive in a partner when they are a teen and when they are middle aged, so I think some people might find only the opposite sex attractive as a teen but end up finding both sexes attractive at middle age.  Does that mean they were always bisexual, or did their orientation change?  I can't say for certain.  I think a change in orientation is possible, but perhaps it's almost always someone who is truly bisexual but couldn't admit it to themselves who changes orientation.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly we disagree about what it means to say you find someone sexually attractive.  I am pretty confident that Asclepias uses the same meaning I do, and that is why he continues to question your sexuality (seriously or in jest).
> ...



Well, OK, at this point there's probably not much confusion.  I should have said I think the conflict started because Asclepias uses the phrase as I do.

We should skip that phrase because I don't think we will come to any agreement on how it should be defined.  However, I agree, what someone finds attractive will vary, sometimes greatly, from person to person.  I don't think that judgement is necessarily the reason for using terms like gay or straight.  As with many other labels, they are a way to simplify things, or create a sense of clarity (even if it is false).  If someone is straight, you have a basis for deciding whether or not they might find you attractive.  If you go to a gay bar, you can make a guess at the reaction you'd get if you hit on someone of the opposite gender.

We're not going to get rid of labels.  They may change, certainly sexual orientation has gained many new labels in recent years, but people like to use them.  I don't know that we can, or even should, do anything about the fact of labelling, and I think that the stigma attached to a label like gay is already being chipped away.  I think the important thing isn't to worry about labels so much as the way such labels are used.  

I'm not sure why some people want to see sexuality in a boxed-in way.  For some it may be a desire for simplicity, for others a need to define people as the same or different from themselves.  For most people, though, it's probably just an easy way to describe sexual desires.  I am straight rather than I only am attracted to members of the opposite gender, I am gay rather than I am only attracted to members of the same gender.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

JustAnotherNut said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > JustAnotherNut said:
> ...


Yes I knew it was also a cigarette in Australia as well.

I think like the OP you may be bi on whatever sliding scale there is that determines that.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > When someone starts asking what it means to be gay, or at what point a person is gay or straight, providing answers to that seems appropriate. You, apparently, think that doing so calls for being a sarcastic asshole.
> ...


When you talk about dick combined with saying you find men sexually attractive like you did thats the only time I think you are gay or bi.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly we disagree about what it means to say you find someone sexually attractive.  I am pretty confident that Asclepias uses the same meaning I do, and that is why he continues to question your sexuality (seriously or in jest).
> ...


What appears to turn you on is men that you find sexually attractive. Like I said before sexual orientation is on a sliding scale. You have obviously moved along the scale to where you register as gay or bi.  There is no shame in that.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> ...but perhaps it's almost always someone who is truly bisexual but couldn't admit it to themselves who changes orientation.



What is this "admit it to themselves" thing that keeps getting mentioned. You've done it and Assclap did it... and I don't understand.  Why would you have sexual desires and not admit them to yourself? How does that work? I can see how you wouldn't admit your secret desires to others but to yourself? Seems like it's self-evident that IF you have said desires, you are admitting it to yourself, else, what do you call the desire? 



Montrovant said:


> Technically yes, but I don't think that people's sexual appetites change that drastically moment to moment. But yes, I do think a person can be gay at one point in their life and not be gay at another point.



How do you know about people's sexual appetites and what difference does the appetite make with regard to attraction? You started by saying that it's not about anything more than attraction to the same gender, now it seems to be about an appetite for sex. Seems like you are jumping around quite a bit on what constitutes gayness.

I think that you're discovering it's not as easy to define as you thought but you want to make it easy so you don't have to admit my point. That's cool, I just hope others here are seeing the same thing I am. 

Again, the point of the OP is, why do we need to define these orientations at all in 2016?  Can't we just accept people as they are without categorizing what they are? Why do certain men have this hang up with acknowledging the sexual attractiveness in other men? Is that homophobia? Women don't seem to have that problem. As time goes by, it seems clearer and clearer that these labels we apply are simply a way to put people in stereotypical boxes and discriminate against them.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> When you talk about dick combined with saying you find men sexually attractive like you did thats the only time I think you are gay or bi.



I didn't "talk about dick" ...I said you were being a total dick. And you ARE! And no it wasn't the only time you said that about me... you first said it because I told you that I find some men sexually attractive.


----------



## Syriusly (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



Homosexual=gay= someone attracted to the same gender
Heterosexual= straight= someone attracted to the opposite gender.

Never complicated for me- I am straight- and I didn't have to wait until I had sex to be straight.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> What appears to turn you on is men that you find sexually attractive. Like I said before sexual orientation is on a sliding scale. You have obviously moved along the scale to where you register as gay or bi.  There is no shame in that.



There is shame in the fact that you continue to display your homophobic bigotry.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > When you talk about dick combined with saying you find men sexually attractive like you did thats the only time I think you are gay or bi.
> ...


Weird choice of word to use considering the topic. Obviously you feel that its natural to find other men attractive but yet you cant give me a reason for doing it other than you are gay or bi. Just because thats your orientation doesnt make it natural for me.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > What appears to turn you on is men that you find sexually attractive. Like I said before sexual orientation is on a sliding scale. You have obviously moved along the scale to where you register as gay or bi.  There is no shame in that.
> ...


I think you are a latent homosexual or you are bi. Have you ever talked to a gay guy? They have told me they can tell when someone is in the closet.


----------



## Bonzi (Feb 18, 2016)

It means your happy.
Haven't you noticed the happiest people are homosexuals?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> ...


Question. Can you look at a random guy and know he is sexy to women? I cant but Boss seems to think its something natural.


----------



## Syriusly (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



That is odd to me- but okay lets go with that. I certainly see men who appear 'handsome' to me- say George Clooney- but I have never considered any man to be "sexually attractive."

Do you harbor any desire to have sex with the men you find sexually attractive? If you do- and you also find women to be equally sexually attractive to you- then if you absolutely need to indentify yourself, then I would say you are bi-sexual.

If you don't- you are just a hetero man who can recognize male beauty.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> We're not going to get rid of labels. They may change, certainly sexual orientation has gained many new labels in recent years, but people like to use them. I don't know that we can, or even should, do anything about the fact of labelling, and I think that the stigma attached to a label like gay is already being chipped away. I think the important thing isn't to worry about labels so much as the way such labels are used.



I don't know, we seemed to have gotten rid of the N-word and "colored people" without any trouble. 

As we can see by Assclap's responses, the labels DO matter... they are a way to attack and denigrate someone because you think it's insulting or offensive.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



Why do you care so much to start a thread about it?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > We're not going to get rid of labels. They may change, certainly sexual orientation has gained many new labels in recent years, but people like to use them. I don't know that we can, or even should, do anything about the fact of labelling, and I think that the stigma attached to a label like gay is already being chipped away. I think the important thing isn't to worry about labels so much as the way such labels are used.
> ...


Typically when someone identifies themselves as gay who am I to get rid of the label they chose?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > We're not going to get rid of labels. They may change, certainly sexual orientation has gained many new labels in recent years, but people like to use them. I don't know that we can, or even should, do anything about the fact of labelling, and I think that the stigma attached to a label like gay is already being chipped away. I think the important thing isn't to worry about labels so much as the way such labels are used.
> ...



But we have replaced those words in large part with others.  Black or African-American are the common ones today, obviously.  

Using labels to attack or denigrate is what I meant when I said we should be concerned about how labels are used.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...


I never knew straight men found other men sexually attractive or could pick out a man that women would find sexually attractive naturally. I'm learning something new here.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

I can understand what gay means.  It means a person is attracted to their same sex.  What causes someone to be gay?  That's something else, and I don't know.  Nobody REALLY knows why.  

Now, transgender is another story.  I do not understand that at all.  Rather than a mistake of nature, I tend to lean towards transgender being more of a problem within the person, such as a chemical imbalance or some other kind of anomaly that has not yet been discovered.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



And why not?  Anyone can recognize beauty for goodness sakes!  It doesn't mean you are gay.  I swear that some of you are just a bunch of 13-year-old children.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > ...but perhaps it's almost always someone who is truly bisexual but couldn't admit it to themselves who changes orientation.
> ...



I used appetites to replace attraction.  Perhaps that was a poor choice.  

I think it's very easy to define gay.  I've done so more than once in this thread.  What can be difficult is determining if a person fits with that label.

Why do we need to define orientations?  I went over this a bit in another post, but simply put, using a label can be easier.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Why do you care so much to start a thread about it?



Because I don't like the insidious bigotry of people like AssClap, who use labels to denigrate and attack others. Because I think we are in a new era, with a generation of young people who don't view sexuality as a big deal the way we once did or our parents did. The lines are blurred... it's not so easy to define. I thought it might make an interesting topic for sophisticated adults to discuss but the thread was quickly bombarded by backward-thinking bigots who want to label people "gay" and insult them.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...


I've never seen a beautiful guy nor do I know of any other straight guy that that has seen a beautiful guy.  I wouldnt even use the word beautiful to describe a man.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you care so much to start a thread about it?
> ...


but you keep missing the fact that gay people made up the term gay and a lot of them wish to be addressed using that label. Youre weird. Its like a white person getting mad because a Black person says to call them Black.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you care so much to start a thread about it?
> ...



And what about all the people in the 60s and 70s?  The era of free love and sex?  Lol.  I think it is pretty easy to define, bossy.  It is when you feel an "attraction" towards a person of your same sex.  Then there are bisexual people who are capable of feeling attractions to either men or women.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > ...but perhaps it's almost always someone who is truly bisexual but couldn't admit it to themselves who changes orientation.
> ...



Why wouldn't someone want to admit their sexual orientation to themselves?  Do you honestly need that question answered?  Shame, pressure from family/friends, the stigma of society, their own self image.

It's also possible that a person might not be self aware enough to realize the full extent of their sexual attractions.

These are just possibilities I'm pointing out to highlight that I don't know or claim to know exactly how sexual orientation works.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Okay, good looking, hot, handsome, nice bod, whatever.  That was not the point of my post.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


I wouldnt use any of those words either except maybe handsome and it wouldnt be in a sexual way.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



Denial.


Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Whatever, you still admit that you can recognize "beauty" in another person of the same sex.  That doesn't make someone gay.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Question. Can you look at a random guy and know he is sexy to women? I cant but Boss seems to think its something natural.



Of course it's natural. You're in denial because you're a homophobe. Afraid someone might think you'r gay if you admit another man is sexy looking. You know what makes a man sexy looking, you're a man who is trying to attract women, so you have to know... it's natural. Just as women know what makes a woman sexy looking to men... they have to know  if they're going to attract a male. 

So for you to sit here and try to claim you're totally oblivious to that is a clear indication you're either a freak of nature and probably homosexual... OR you're a bigoted homophobe.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Handsome doesnt mean beauty to me. I use it to describe someone that doest look weird to me.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



Alright, alright.  Enough already.  You are just being silly now, as per usual.    Can't converse with a troll.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Question. Can you look at a random guy and know he is sexy to women? I cant but Boss seems to think its something natural.
> ...


Like I said it may be natural to you because you are gay or bi but its not natural nor does it serve any purpose for a straight guy to see another man as sexually attractive.  I already explained to you that I dont try to attract women. It just happens. Why would thinking another man is sexually attractive be useful to me in trying to attract a woman anyway?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


I think youre being silly trying to claim a man is beautiful to another man.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> And what about all the people in the 60s and 70s? The era of free love and sex? Lol. I think it is pretty easy to define, bossy. It is when you feel an "attraction" towards a person of your same sex. Then there are bisexual people who are capable of feeling attractions to either men or women.



I understand it's easy to define for the individual... that's why I am puzzled by this notion that Assclap thinks I am somehow grappling with my sexuality or something. Makes no sense at all. I am sexually attracted to women, always have been, never have been attracted to men... BUT... I can recognize and acknowledge a sexy looking man just like you can recognize and acknowledge a sexy looking woman.... Assclap is AFRAID of that... he's a homophobe  who thinks if he admits that, people will think he is gay! He telegraphs this sentiment by saying that I am "probably gay" because I admit that I have no problem acknowledging a sexy-looking man.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Like I said it may be natural to you because you are gay or bi...



But I am not gay or bi and I've told you that repeatedly... STILL ...you insist that I am... based on what? Your homophobia! That's all!


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > And what about all the people in the 60s and 70s? The era of free love and sex? Lol. I think it is pretty easy to define, bossy. It is when you feel an "attraction" towards a person of your same sex. Then there are bisexual people who are capable of feeling attractions to either men or women.
> ...


I really think you are gay or bi if you find another man sexually attractive. Its not natural for a straight guy to be sexually attracted to other men. Sorry dude. Denying is only going to cause you more confusion like your question that started the thread. I know you are trying to work out your feelings for another guy but like I said just admit it. No one cares.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Why wouldn't someone want to admit their sexual orientation to themselves? Do you honestly need that question answered? Shame, pressure from family/friends, the stigma of society, their own self image.



Those are reasons they wouldn't want to admit their sexuality to others, not themselves.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Like I said it may be natural to you because you are gay or bi...
> ...


If you find another man sexually attractive youre gay or bi. Remember its a sliding scale.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Why wouldn't someone want to admit their sexual orientation to themselves? Do you honestly need that question answered? Shame, pressure from family/friends, the stigma of society, their own self image.
> ...


Like you must have your reasons for not admitting you are gay or bi.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



I don't think that is what he said though.  He said that he can recognize when another man might be "sexy looking" to a woman.  There is a difference there, you know.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I really think you are gay or bi if you find another man sexually attractive.



Well all I can say is that I'm not. 
You can think whatever, you're a homophobic bigot so it doesn't matter to me what you think. 






*This man is sexually attractive. *





*This man is not sexually attractive. 
*
I don't have to be gay or bi to make that determination.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Why wouldn't someone want to admit their sexual orientation to themselves? Do you honestly need that question answered? Shame, pressure from family/friends, the stigma of society, their own self image.
> ...



No.  It's called denial.  The refusal to accept the truth about themselves.  Plenty of gay men and women try to live out their lives as straight because they are in denial.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Why wouldn't someone want to admit their sexual orientation to themselves? Do you honestly need that question answered? Shame, pressure from family/friends, the stigma of society, their own self image.
> ...



It's kind of like how Ascep is in denial about being a troll.  Lol.  Or how others go on one thread to talk about how kind hearted they are or how religious they are, and then go into another thread and act like complete clowns and arses.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Like you must have your reasons for not admitting you are gay or bi.



And you just continue to demagogue the thread with your bigotry and hate... trying to insult me by calling me gay or bi. I have ZERO desire to be with a male sexually. I am 100% totally heterosexual. I love women... I love hot sexy women. There is no question or doubt in my mind... I'm not confused and never have been. I am very secure in my masculinity... unlike YOU!


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well I am not gay or bi and I find a lot of men sexually attractive. I am not attracted sexually to them because I am heterosexual. If I were gay or bi, I might be sexually attracted to them or I might not be. I find many women sexually attractive but I am not attracted to them sexually because they're not my type. That doesn't mean they're not sexually attractive individuals or that I can't acknowledge that.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Like you must have your reasons for not admitting you are gay or bi.
> ...


Why would you consider it insulting to be gay or bi? Are you a homophobe?  If you are sexually attracted to men you are not 100% heterosexual. Sorry but 100% heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Of course you are gay or bi. I dont know why you denying it.  You must be attracted sexually if you find them sexually attractive. What you are saying is not making sense and I think its because you are confused regarding your sexual orientation. Why else would you have such a hard time understanding what gay means?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...


I think Boss is one of them.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


No. He specifically said he finds other men sexually attractive. I even asked him again



Boss said:


> Well I am not gay or bi and I find a lot of men sexually attractive..


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Why would you consider it insulting to be gay or bi? Are you a homophobe? If you are sexually attracted to men you are not 100% heterosexual. Sorry but 100% heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive.



I don't consider it insulting, you do. That's why you keep saying it to me repeatedly after I have corrected you. I'm not sexually attracted to men, I have clearly stated that numerous times. That does not mean that I can't find men sexually attractive. I think you must have a problem with context here. 

Most normal heterosexual men do find other men sexually attractive and they want to emulate them so they can attract females. I used to want to look like Burt Reynolds. I didn't want to fuck Burt Reynolds but I recognized he was a sexually attractive man that women liked... that's natural.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> No. He specifically said he finds other men sexually attractive. I even asked him again.



I specifically find other men to be sexually attractive. I am not attracted sexually to them. Regardless of how many times I've told you this, you continue to repeat this allegation that I am gay or bi... you do it to insult me because you think being gay or bi is insulting. You are a homophobe and bigot. So insecure in your masculinity that you can't even admit whenever you see a sexy-looking man. ...Sad!


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Why would you consider it insulting to be gay or bi? Are you a homophobe? If you are sexually attracted to men you are not 100% heterosexual. Sorry but 100% heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive.
> ...


Who told you I consider it insulting? Can you quote that?  Of course you are sexually attracted to men if you find them sexually attractive. You do realize is the same thing dont you?

No normal heterosexual male finds other men sexually attractive so they can emulate them. You sound confused. You cant make yourself into someone else. Why did you want to look like Burt Reynolds?  I've never wanted to look like someone other than myself.  I really think you need to examine your reality and answer some hard questions about yourself. Youre definitely gay or bi and in denial.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > No. He specifically said he finds other men sexually attractive. I even asked him again.
> ...


I keep saying you are gay or bi because you keep saying you find other men to be sexually attractive. No heterosexual male finds other men sexually attractive.  That doesnt fit the definition of heterosexual.


----------



## jillian (Feb 18, 2016)

bucs90 said:


> God damn man....with today's liberals who the fuck can know? "Gay" probably means you like to give oral sex to transgender oak trees or something.



in rightwingnut hack world.

poor loons


----------



## bodecea (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I really think you are gay or bi if you find another man sexually attractive.
> ...


Why do you say "sexually attractive"?  Why not just "attractive"....or "pleasing to the eye"...or "admirable physique"?

I am not attracted to men sexually....So, I would say the first pic is attractive or good looking and the second one not so much.   No "sexual" about it.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Of course you are gay or bi. I dont know why you denying it. You must be attracted sexually if you find them sexually attractive. What you are saying is not making sense and I think its because you are confused regarding your sexual orientation. Why else would you have such a hard time understanding what gay means?



Nope... still not gay or bi, but thanks for continuing to flood the thread with your ignorant bigotry and hate for others. 

I don't have a hard time understanding what gay means. For you, it's an insult you can hurl at someone to make you feel more like a real man. I guess that's what you do now instead of slapping your women around, huh?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you are gay or bi. I dont know why you denying it. You must be attracted sexually if you find them sexually attractive. What you are saying is not making sense and I think its because you are confused regarding your sexual orientation. Why else would you have such a hard time understanding what gay means?
> ...


Yes. Boss youre either gay or bi. I'm sorry you are insulted but its the truth and you know it. Men that are heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive. Thats not what heterosexual means.

het·er·o·sex·u·al
ˌhedərəˈsekSH(əw)əl/
_adjective_

*1*.
(of a person) *sexually attracted to people of the opposite sex.
synonyms: straight;*


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Of course you are sexually attracted to men if you find them sexually attractive.



Not true. I find many women to be sexually attractive women but I am not attracted to them sexually. 






*A very sexually attractive woman!  *_...BUT..._ I am not sexually attracted to her because she's not my type. I like blondes with long hair and blue eyes.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you are sexually attracted to men if you find them sexually attractive.
> ...


See thats another sign. Now your claiming your not sexually attracted to her because she is not your type.All women are your type when you are heterosexual. You cant think your body into not responding. Face it dude youre gay or bi.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Yes. Boss youre either gay or bi. I'm sorry you are insulted but its the truth and you know it. Men that are heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive. Thats not what heterosexual means.
> 
> het·er·o·sex·u·al
> ˌhedərəˈsekSH(əw)əl/
> ...



Again, I am not insulted by this... YOU are the one who thinks it's an insult and that's why you continue to say it, even after I have continued to correct you. Finding someone sexually attractive is NOT THE SAME as "sexually attracted" to someone. I'm really sorry your bigoted hate makes you blind to that.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

God man!  This is SO stupid!


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> See thats another sign. Now your claiming your not sexually attracted to her because she is not your type.All women are your type when you are heterosexual. You cant think your body into not responding.



What? ALL women are your type when you're heterosexual???? 

I've never heard a more asinine comment in my life.  So basically, any time you compliment ANY woman on her looks, she can take that to mean you are ready to fuck her then and there? What a shallow and superficial piece of absolute dog shit you are.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. Boss youre either gay or bi. I'm sorry you are insulted but its the truth and you know it. Men that are heterosexual men dont find other men sexually attractive. Thats not what heterosexual means.
> ...


Of course your insulted. That why you keep claiming I am trying to insult you. I never said it was an insult. As a matter of fact I said no one cares if you are gay or bi.  Yes finding someone sexually attractive is the same as being sexually attracted. One is the present tense and the other is the past tense.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > See thats another sign. Now your claiming your not sexually attracted to her because she is not your type.All women are your type when you are heterosexual. You cant think your body into not responding.
> ...


Thats correct. You may find her ugly as sin but I bet she can convince you to have sex with her if you are heterosexual.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

bodecea said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



What's wrong with saying "sexually attractive"?  Why do you have a hang up over "sexual?" 

I'm not attracted to men sexually either, but I can recognize when a man is a sexually attractive man or even the difference between a handsome man and a man who has sexually attractive qualities.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Of course your insulted. That why you keep claiming I am trying to insult you. I never said it was an insult. As a matter of fact I said no one cares if you are gay or bi.  Yes finding someone sexually attractive is the same as being sexually attracted. One is the present tense and the other is the past tense.



No... One is recognizing a quality and the other is expression of a desire. Two completely different things. 

And no, you're not insulting me... you think you are. It's because you're a homophobic bigot.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you are sexually attracted to men if you find them sexually attractive.
> ...



Lol.  How silly!  Only blondes?  What if they color their hair?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Oy.  How old are you bossy where you would only be sexually attracted to blondes with blue eyes?  Lol.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Of course your insulted. That why you keep claiming I am trying to insult you. I never said it was an insult. As a matter of fact I said no one cares if you are gay or bi.  Yes finding someone sexually attractive is the same as being sexually attracted. One is the present tense and the other is the past tense.
> ...


Thats typically how it works. You recognize they are sexy and then you express your desire. The only thing different about it is the tense. Youre gay or bi dude. Just admit it.

Of course youre insulted because you seem to think something is wrong with being gay or bi and pretending you can read my mind in order to arrive at that conclusion.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

For me, there is MUCH more to a sexual attraction than a person's outward appearances.  In fact, I've known some good looking people (or at least decent looking) who were . . . very unattractive people.   

Hair color?  That doesn't really come into play for me.  Eye color?  Naw.  Those are superficial qualities that can be changed pretty easily nowadays.  I have to feel a connection in order to feel a sexual attraction to a particular person.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Youre gay or bi Boss. Like I said earlier there is no shame in it. Lots of people are in the same boat if that makes you feel better.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> For me, there is MUCH more to a sexual attraction than a person's outward appearances.  In fact, I've known some good looking people (or at least decent looking) who were . . . very unattractive people.
> 
> Hair color?  That doesn't really come into play for me.  Eye color?  Naw.  Those are superficial qualities that can be changed pretty easily nowadays.  I have to feel a connection in order to feel a sexual attraction to a particular person.


I think we are just talking about instant raw sexual attraction. Like that picture Boss posted of some guy earlier that he claimed was sexually attractive.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > For me, there is MUCH more to a sexual attraction than a person's outward appearances.  In fact, I've known some good looking people (or at least decent looking) who were . . . very unattractive people.
> ...



I don't usually feel that just by looking at a person.  Like I said, there has to be some kind of a connection there for me.  While I can say, "wow, that is a good looking person," I don't want to jump his bones just because of his appearance.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Thats correct. You may find her ugly as sin but I bet she can convince you to have sex with her if you are heterosexual.



Probably not because she's just not my type, like I said. 

I'm probably a lot different than you. When I have sex with a woman it has to be more than a physical thing. There are lots of drop-dead gorgeous women who I could have had sex with but didn't. You can't imagine how much pussy is thrown at you when you're in the business I was in. I transformed average looking people into sex symbols... both men and women. So I know how to make someone sexually appealing and that involves recognizing sexual attractiveness. If I fucked every woman who I made sexually attractive I wouldn't have a dick anymore... it would be gone!


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I think we are just talking about instant raw sexual attraction. Like that picture Boss posted of some guy earlier that he claimed was sexually attractive.



That was Channing Tatum and I think it's pretty much a consensus among women that he is a sexually attractive man.  Now... he may be gay as a $3 bill.... I don't know.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


You've never looked at a guy and got (pardon) moist?


----------



## MaryL (Feb 18, 2016)

My best friend as a child, her name was "Gay". Gay used to mean light hearted and happy. Not a politically correct euphemism for  perverted sexual deviants, err,  homosexuals  coo-opted. Or corrupted, more to the point.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I think we are just talking about instant raw sexual attraction. Like that picture Boss posted of some guy earlier that he claimed was sexually attractive.
> ...


Whats gay about a $3 dollar bill?  It seems you agree with that consensus that he is sexually attractive which is why I think you are gay or bi. I dont see it like you claim "normal heterosexual" men do


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Lol. How silly! Only blondes? What if they color their hair?



Well no, not really, just using that as an example to juxtapose against Halle Berry. The only thing I don't really care for is red heads. I do prefer long hair over short and I do like them blue eyes.... but, there are many women who I find sexually attractive with brown eyes and even red hair. Sexually attractive does not mean attracted to sexually. Two completely different things.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No.  It takes a bit more than that.  Lol.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

I don't get sexually excited by looking at a person, especially a person that I don't really know anything about.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

You guys are just weird.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


I am learning a lot today. I've never met a woman that didnt find some men capable of instantly getting them aroused.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Watching a sex act?  That might turn me on, but just looking at a person naked or dressed or scantily dressed?  Nope.  That doesn't really do anything for me.


Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



You probably don't know many women anyways.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> It seems you agree with that consensus that he is sexually attractive which is why I think you are gay or bi. I dont see it like you claim "normal heterosexual" men do



Normal homophobic meat heads like you? Yeah, I doubt you see it. 

And hey... maybe that's why I got rich making men and women look sexy as fuck? Perhaps I have this "gift" of being able to see what is and isn't sexually appealing without my hormones taking control of my brain like you? 

In any event, I can look at a man or woman and say.. they are sexually attractive... she is hot... he is a hunk... without it meaning I want to fuck them on the spot. I guess maybe I am a bit more civilized or cultivated than you? Maybe I am more open minded and secure with my sexuality? Or maybe there are plenty of people just like me who don't have a hangup with recognizing sexual appeal... and YOU are the oddball?


----------



## MaryL (Feb 18, 2016)

When I am really happy, I wish I could say I was feeling GAY with  out the  double entendre. Not feeling randy for someone of the same sex. Stealing the meanings of language away from us, from an perfectly innocent into a deviant one. Kudos, perverts!


----------



## aris2chat (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You know exactly what I'm talking about. You said that guy was sexually attractive. If he is attractive to you then you are attracted to him.
> ...




Connery and Brosnan.......Moore not so much


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

MaryL said:


> When I am really happy, I wish I could say I was feeling GAY with  out the  double entendre. Not feeling randy for someone of the same sex. Stealing the meanings of language away from us, from an perfectly innocent into a deviant one. Kudos, perverts!


There is nothing deviant about the word gay.  Unless you are some kind of prude.


----------



## LoneLaugher (Feb 18, 2016)

MaryL said:


> When I am really happy, I wish I could say I was feeling GAY with  out the  double entendre. Not feeling randy for someone of the same sex. Stealing the meanings of language away from us, from an perfectly innocent into a deviant one. Kudos, perverts!



Oh.....you poor thing! That's how I feel about the word "patriot". Really dumb assholes fucked it up for us normal people.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


Um yes. sorry.

ho·mo·sex·u·al
ˌhōməˈsekSH(əw)əl/
_adjective_

*1*.
(of a person) sexually attracted to people of one's own sex.



_noun_

*1*.
a person who is sexually attracted to people of their own sex.
synonyms: gay, lesbian;


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> I don't know you well enough to say for sure, but I don't think you come across as if you are interested in men for a sexual relationship. Lol.



I didn't mean to put you on the spot, I know you don't know me well enough... but you've conversed with me a few times and you should get a sense of whether or not I am gay or bi. I just wanted your honest opinion of what you *believed* based on what you know of me. 

I keep telling the idiot that I am not gay or bi but he seems intent on continuing to flood the board with that allegation, as if he is doing it to deliberately insult me. Then he claims I must be a homophobe because I think it's an insult.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



No, I'm sorry.  Saying that a person is "sexually attractive" is completely different than claiming YOU are sexually ATTRACTED to that particular person.  Now you've been told multiple times.  Bossy has told you that he is not gay.  What is it that you are trying to do here?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know you well enough to say for sure, but I don't think you come across as if you are interested in men for a sexual relationship. Lol.
> ...


If you think its an insult you must be a homophobe. You can call me gay all day long and I wont take it as an insult because nothing is wrong with being gay.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


How do  you know someone is sexually attractive if you dont feel any sexual attraction? Youre not making sense.  

I dont care what he told me. He also told me it was normal for heterosexual men to find other men sexually attractive.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



In the same sense that I can admire the beauty of a flower and not want to fuck it's brains out.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


Admiring a flower is not considering it sexually attractive. Youre still not making sense.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know you well enough to say for sure, but I don't think you come across as if you are interested in men for a sexual relationship. Lol.
> ...



He seems to be having a very difficult time understanding a rather simple concept.  Seems that is more his problem than yours.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



BUT... as I keep telling you, I am NOT "sexually attracted" just because I find someone sexually attractive. I am sexually attracted to females... that makes me NOT homosexual. 

Alaska looks like a wonderful adventure... doesn't mean I want to experience a wonderful adventure in Alaska. I would rather go to Maui... I like the beach more than the snow. Still... Alaska is beautiful and looks like a wonderful adventure!


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


Sorry but thats impossible you cant find someone sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted.


----------



## MaryL (Feb 18, 2016)

Anyone remember Alan Berg? He was assassinated by the white Aryan brotherhood of  Nazis wankers. Poor guy, he once  did a radio show that pissed a lot off people off, because he started it off  by saying he was ...GAY. But he meant happy, and most everyone else took it the OTHER way. That made a hell of an impression on me, the way language can be manipulated, and just how seriously people take these things.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Sorry but thats impossible you cant find someone sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted.



No, really... you CAN... If you're not a homophobic bigot neanderthal.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> You just said he didnt say it was an insult but he did.



No.. I said YOU SAID I said it was an insult.  I said it wasn't an insult but you were trying to use it to insult me... which you clearly are doing because you refuse to let go of it like a little puppy with a chew toy. 

Now... as the OP of this thread on a Zone 2 forum, I am going to ask you respectfully to stop this now and stop harassing me and trolling my thread or I will start reporting your posts to the mods. 

Enough is enough.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry but thats impossible you cant find someone sexually attractive unless you are sexually attracted.
> ...


No you can if you are gay or bi.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > You just said he didnt say it was an insult but he did.
> ...


Sorry dude. You said you thought it was an insult. Here is your quote. You are free to report me.



Boss said:


> Then he claims I must be a homophobe *because I think it's an insult.*



Your words.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 18, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...


Is something wrong with him because he cant take me at my word when I say that I dont find any men sexually attractive?  Just curious.

I thought seniors were old people?  I'm in my 40's


----------



## AVG-JOE (Feb 18, 2016)

*I've pulled the off-topic sidebar and moved it here * if any of y'all want to continue that conversation.  This thread also moved to General Discussion because this conversation is not exactly based on a current event.  *

*Try to stay on topic, and if anyone says something that you don't believe, go and mock them in The FlameZone, 'k?  That's what it's there for.*


**  Off Topic Sidebar from: In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?*


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> JustAnotherNut said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



IF I were bi, I'd follow thru by WANTING to have sex with her .....that's not the case.


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

G.T. said:


> *If you desire cock while not desiring pussy, you are gay. Pretty simple
> 
> if you desire vagina and dont desire dick, you are straight.
> 
> ...


No rebuttal to the simple truth, winning!!~hashtag


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

G.T. said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > *If you desire cock while not desiring pussy, you are gay. Pretty simple
> ...


Way to go, Charlie Sheen!  #winning

Now... do you have any comments related to the OP topic?


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 18, 2016)

AVG-JOE said:


> *I've pulled the off-topic sidebar and moved it here * if any of y'all want to continue that conversation.  This thread also moved to General Discussion because this conversation is not exactly based on a current event.  *
> 
> *Try to stay on topic, and if anyone says something that you don't believe, go and mock them in The FlameZone, 'k?  That's what it's there for.*
> 
> ...



Thank you for moving me back...but I'm still not sure I agree with the reasoning. but whatever.........carry on


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > G.T. said:
> ...


It addresses your o-p topic quite plainly and in the most specific and relevant of ways - which - as we all know, is why you're unable to question it but instead take issue with foul language like my 113yr. old Aunt Edna, god bless she still dances and everything!~


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

G.T. said:


> It addresses your o-p topic quite plainly and in the most specific and relevant of ways - which - as we all know, is why you're unable to question it but instead take issue with foul language like my 113yr. old Aunt Edna, god bless she still dances and everything!~



I don't care about your language. You obviously didn't get the OP because you simply posted some off-color comment defining sexuality as if none of us knew those things. That wasn't the point and if that's the point you got, you missed the point. In case I didn't make that clear enough for you.... it means you didn't get it... you missed it... the point of the OP.... which is the "original post" which was about society in 2016 and how it's kind of ridiculous to apply labels like "gay" to categorize individuals and their assorted sexuality. Missed it... like a loser... the loser you are... not a winner...


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > It addresses your o-p topic quite plainly and in the most specific and relevant of ways - which - as we all know, is why you're unable to question it but instead take issue with foul language like my 113yr. old Aunt Edna, god bless she still dances and everything!~
> ...


No false, you threw your hands in the air when someone answered your simplistic inquiry.............which was you somehow not knowing what gay means anymore. That's your lack of "winning," and letting sound pollution clearly distort your inner "what is."


Now you throw it on me? lolol. 


You're an amateur.


----------



## rdean (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


Full of shit:

GOP candidates go to kill the gays rallies
Google


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

G.T. said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > G.T. said:
> ...



You can't throw your hands in the air on a message board. So already, we see you're lying. Not unusual for you. I've corrected three or four of you idiots already on this... I understand what the definition of homosexual is. Most adults do. That amounts to a simple-minded and idiotic interpretation of the thread title and shows a lack of any comprehension with regard to the posted OP. But you don't really have any intention of discussing the thread topic, either you lack the maturity or intellect to do so, therefore you're going to troll the thread and do what you can to insult me because I'm someone you don't like on your playground. I really do wish this place would get rid of the children.


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

^whine


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

rdean said:


> Full of shit:
> 
> GOP candidates go to kill the gays rallies
> Google



Another shining example of why I think we need to rid ourselves of labels like this. We really don't need them anymore. The term "gay" is either used to insult people, discriminate against people... or in this case, as a banner of righteous indignity to attack other people. As the thread shows, there is no clear definitive outline as to what makes a person "gay" or "not gay" and it's all a matter of opinion and self-identification...or labeling. 

People do what they want to do, they are sexual in the way they feel like being... they don't need for anyone to define them or label them. All this ever does is cause problems, one after another... as exemplified in this very thread. We can't have a civil  conversation about it anymore. Too much hate and anger, prejudice and vitriol. Too much need to bash and trash, or ridicule and insult.


----------



## G.T. (Feb 18, 2016)

lets "eliminate" a word because..

righteous indignation



^^^hard hard hardcore irony.


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

We first should eliminate useless TROLLS from USMB.


----------



## skye (Feb 18, 2016)

In 2016 Gay means  homosexual.

Didn't you know that??


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

skye said:


> In 2016 Gay means  homosexual.
> 
> Didn't you know that??



Number 5 of people who didn't read the OP. 

Please people... READ THE DAMN OP FIRST!


----------



## skye (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > In 2016 Gay means  homosexual.
> ...



oh? ok
I will now....read it


----------



## skye (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > In 2016 Gay means  homosexual.
> ...




Gay is gay

not gay is not gay.

I read it ok?

I'ts that simple


----------



## Boss (Feb 18, 2016)

skye said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > skye said:
> ...



Thanks. Goodbye.


----------



## skye (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> skye said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...




Arrivederci caro !!


----------



## Alex. (Feb 18, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.



This encompasses far more than one 3 letter word. No painting in corners but assigning an identifier with  a narrow scope. For example a man pinches me in my ass I think he is a gay man three seconds later he is a gay man with a black eye. Neither are bigoted but the popular use of those words are applied. Or I could think that is a homosexual with periorbital hematoma.

Gay to my understanding is Homo. Used to mean happy but what the hell.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Well if you know what homosexual means then you are trollilng your own thread. Homosexual is the technical term for gay which I also pointed out to you is what gay people determined they preferred to be call.  So all your fake outrage isnt disguising the fact you are trying to come to terms with the your sexual orientation.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Well if you know what homosexual means then you are trollilng your own thread. Homosexual is the technical term for gay which I also pointed out to you is what gay people determined they preferred to be call. So all your fake outrage isnt disguising the fact you are trying to come to terms with the your sexual orientation.



I'm not outraged and my OP wasn't any sort of confusion about what homosexual relations are. I fully understand what homosexual means. What I don't understand is this term "gay" in 2016, and what it means from a societal standpoint. So far, in this thread alone, it has been defined numerous ways... persons who engage in homosexual activity... (butt sex... cock sucking, etc.), persons who have a physical attraction for same gender, whether they act on it or not, and even people who are completely heterosexual but simply recognize sexual attractiveness in others of their same gender. 

Now this tells me that, as a society, we really don't have a definitive answer and the term is completely ambiguous depending on viewpoints and opinions. And your continuation of trying to insult me by implying that I am "trying to come to terms with my sexuality" is evidence that for some people, the term is a convenient weapon in which they can attack and denigrate others. I have asked you several times to stop doing this and it merely seems to encourage you to do it more... that tells me your intentions are to flame and harass me because you think it gets under my skin and that's why you're here... to be a nasty little troll.  

So... I am going to continue to report your posts each time you do it and hope that a moderator will take action so that mature adults can discuss the thread topic without having to read through your trollery.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Well if you know what homosexual means then you are trollilng your own thread. Homosexual is the technical term for gay which I also pointed out to you is what gay people determined they preferred to be call. So all your fake outrage isnt disguising the fact you are trying to come to terms with the your sexual orientation.
> ...


Complaining about gay people calling themselves gay and pretending you dont know what it means is merely a disguise for you to try to come to terms with your sexual attraction to the same sex. You were already told what it means numerous times. You shouldnt be insulted because I think you are gay (more likely bi) but you have my permission to report me. You are the one that said you find other men sexually attractive. I ask again. How do you not know what gay means if you claim to know what homosexual is?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Complaining about gay people calling themselves gay and pretending you dont know what it means is merely a disguise for you to try to come to terms with your sexual attraction to the same sex. You were already told what it means numerous times. You shouldnt be insulted because I think you are gay (more likely bi) but you have my permission to report me. You are the one that said you find other men sexually attractive. I ask again. How do you not know what gay means if you claim to know what homosexual is?



I've not complained about anyone calling themselves anything. I didn't say I didn't know what homosexual meant. I'm not trying to come to terms with my sexuality. I'm not insulted by bigots and homophobes. I will continue to report your harassment and flaming. I do find other men sexually attractive but I am not sexually attracted to them. 

My OP is actually about assholes like YOU who use and exploit "gay" in order to insult and denigrate others. Assholes like GT and redan who like to parade around the "gay" banner with pride in supposedly "defending" them against conservatives and evil righties and religious folk... because it's such a convenient weapon to use. 

I have numerous friends who you would define as "gay" and they never refer to themselves as gay... I've not heard it once. They are some of my best friends. I go to their house all the time, we've gone camping together, I've slept in the same tent with them. I realize, to a homophobe like you, that probably makes me gay. But I am as heterosexual as they come, I just have an open mind when it comes to individual sexuality. I don't fear their "gayness" is going to rub off on me. 

Several of them are relatively young people... Millennials. They don't seem to be all hung up on these labels and categories. It's not important to them, they respect each other as individuals and don't judge them based on sexuality. I don't really give two shits who came up with "gay" to be honest, I think our society is moving toward a time where you won't ever hear the word... except from backward-thinking hicks like you who need to keep it in your arsenal of insults. I think time may pass you by, pops. You're going to be one of them old relics muttering about "them damn gays" and the young people will roll their eyes at you in embarrassment because you're so behind the times.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Complaining about gay people calling themselves gay and pretending you dont know what it means is merely a disguise for you to try to come to terms with your sexual attraction to the same sex. You were already told what it means numerous times. You shouldnt be insulted because I think you are gay (more likely bi) but you have my permission to report me. You are the one that said you find other men sexually attractive. I ask again. How do you not know what gay means if you claim to know what homosexual is?
> ...


Yes you did complain about the use of the term gay and gays call themselves gay. I too have gay friends, worked with gays and they call each other gay all the time. I still cant figure out why you would be insulted by being called gay. Nothing is wrong with it.  I dont believe you have done much with gay people or you would know that.  Being around a gay person doesnt make you gay. Finding the same sex sexually attractive is what makes you gay as you have admitted to as as defined by the word homosexual.


----------



## Searcher44 (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> G.T. said:
> 
> 
> > It addresses your o-p topic quite plainly and in the most specific and relevant of ways - which - as we all know, is why you're unable to question it but instead take issue with foul language like my 113yr. old Aunt Edna, god bless she still dances and everything!~
> ...




Just skimming thru the forum browsing for interesting bits. This struck me as interesting and confusing at the same time

_"which is the "original post" which was about society in 2016 and how it's kind of ridiculous to apply labels like "gay" to categorize individuals and their assorted sexuality."_

So if we're discussing characteristics of person, say his political leanings, we might say "Oh he's a wingnut conservative". Or we want to describe his psychological state we might say "Oh he's a psychopathic loon". To explain his level of intelligence, maybe "he's a know-it-all know nothing".  So if someone is curious about a person's sexuality and that person prefers a same-sex partner why is it "kind of ridiculous" to apply a label that everyone could understand? How else could we communicate the fact without applying a descriptive adjective?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Searcher44 said:


> So if we're discussing characteristics of person, say his political leanings, we might say "Oh he's a wingnut conservative". Or we want to describe his psychological state we might say "Oh he's a psychopathic loon". To explain his level of intelligence, maybe "he's a know-it-all know nothing". So if someone is curious about a person's sexuality and that person prefers a same-sex partner why is it "kind of ridiculous" to apply a label that everyone could understand? How else could we communicate the fact without applying a descriptive adjective?



Why is it ridiculous to use "colored" to describe black people? Seems we can find ways to communicate without using that word. And we're not really talking about someone who knowingly and openly prefers same sex partners and identifies as such... the term is being applied here in this thread to ME and I am heterosexual. 

Why do we need a descriptive adjective to describe someone's sexual preference anyway? Why is that anyone's business? It's a private personal matter. Why would someone need to say... _Who's he? Oh, that's whore fucker Searcher!_ Or... _That's limp dick Asclepias! Look... here comes tranny banger GT!_ I mean... WHY does it matter? 

The word "gay" is very often being misused and abused in order to denigrate and insult, as Assclap is doing all through this thread and you can read it for yourself.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Finding the same sex sexually attractive is what makes you gay



Thanks for your opinion on that. I think a lot of people disagree.


----------



## Seawytch (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Again, the point of the OP is, why do we need to define these orientations at all in 2016?



What does it matter if we do? I'll stop "defining" myself as gay or lesbian when everyone else stops assuming heterosexuality. 





> Can't we just accept people as they are without categorizing what they are?



Why can't you accept people when they are categorized? 


> Why do certain men have this hang up with acknowledging the sexual attractiveness in other men? Is that homophobia?



Yes.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> What does it matter if we do? I'll stop "defining" myself as gay or lesbian when everyone else stops assuming heterosexuality.



 I don't care what individuals want to call themselves. That's up to the individual. Does it not bother you when bigots use the term to denigrate and insult other people? Wouldn't it be better if people respected you as a person regardless of your sexuality? 



Seawytch said:


> Why can't you accept people when they are categorized?



I accept people as they are, I don't have to categorize them based on their sexuality. Not sure why you find that important to be honest.


----------



## Seawytch (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Seawytch said:
> 
> 
> > What does it matter if we do? I'll stop "defining" myself as gay or lesbian when everyone else stops assuming heterosexuality.
> ...



Of course I want people to respect me as a person regardless of sexuality. Why are you asking rhetorical questions? What does that have to do with anything? And of course I would prefer people stopped using gay or lesbian as a pejorative...so? 

Look, I don't walk around telling people I'm gay. In fact, other than my parents, I've never told anyone I was gay that didn't either 1) First assume I was straight or 2) asked me outright if I was gay. Should I lie?




Seawytch said:


> Why can't you accept people when they are categorized?





> I accept people as they are, I don't have to categorize them based on their sexuality. Not sure why you find that important to be honest.



But what if "as they are" is that category?  If you can accept people as they are, you should be able to accept that people categorize themselves with all kinds of lables. Straight, gay, married, single, conservative, liberal, and on and on....


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> Of course I want people to respect me as a person regardless of sexuality. Why are you asking rhetorical questions? What does that have to do with anything? And of course I would prefer people stopped using gay or lesbian as a pejorative...so?
> 
> Look, I don't walk around telling people I'm gay. In fact, other than my parents, I've never told anyone I was gay that didn't either 1) First assume I was straight or 2) asked me outright if I was gay. Should I lie?



Nope. But you are actually reinforcing my OP commentary. What does it even mean in 2016? Why even have it around from a societal standpoint? So that some people can use it as a pejorative? So some people can feign righteous indignation and attack others? So that we can put people in little boxes and label them? Why not grow the fuck up and accept people for who they are without judging them based on often prejudice stereotypes? 

I'm not suggesting that individuals stop identifying themselves intimately to other people in this way, but rather, as a societal definition. I hope you get what I am saying here. Not trying to be offensive, I just think it brings about more harm than any good it does. 



Seawytch said:


> But what if "as they are" is that category? If you can accept people as they are, you should be able to accept that people categorize themselves with all kinds of lables. Straight, gay, married, single, conservative, liberal, and on and on....



Again, this is not about self-identification.


----------



## Seawytch (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Seawytch said:
> 
> 
> > Of course I want people to respect me as a person regardless of sexuality. Why are you asking rhetorical questions? What does that have to do with anything? And of course I would prefer people stopped using gay or lesbian as a pejorative...so?
> ...



Sounds more like you're suggesting gays just go back in the closet. 

We identify ourselves because there is safety in numbers. We identify ourselves because there is comfort in community. We identify ourselves because we don't want society doing the labeling for us.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Seawytch said:
> ...



Well no... I don't know how clearer I could have made it to you... I asked that you not take offense. I said that it's not about your self-identification to others intimately... I reiterated I am only talking about societal aspects... I really don't know what else I could have done to convey my sentiments on this. 

I guess you're going to join some of the other more liberal morons here and condemn me because I am a conservative and you don't like my politics... so fuck whatever I have to say about anything. That's really a sad state of affairs if that's the case. 

Here I am making a point about how much I think we have evolved as a society and how we should throw off these labels and stereotypes and I discover that we've not changed any at all... there are still backward-thinking people who aren't going to let go of the past.


----------



## JustAnotherNut (Feb 19, 2016)

Some people don't get it, don't want to get it, and never will get it. WHY??? Because they need to group or categorize or limit subjects they don't fully understand and are afraid that if they agree on one very small point, they too will be labeled within that very same group they fear.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> Sounds more like you're suggesting gays just go back in the closet.



Well see... I don't actually think you're out of the closet. I think you kicked the door off the closet but you're standing there in the doorway of the closet, protected by the framework around you, afraid to step out and be yourself without the safety of the closet you were so comfortable in. I want us to tear down the closet and have you be part of the rest of us in the room. Where you're not the weirdo standing in the closet doorway. 

And to be completely honest, I think you're going to see society move in the direction I have outlined here. The new generation is not concerned with labels and identifiers like the older generations. Sexuality is not a big deal to them. Your gay? So what? Who cares?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 19, 2016)

Gay?

I consider the word "gay" as representing a certain sense of insouciant savoir faire -- and effortless expression of bon vivance with such an unerringly positive outlook on life as to warm the cockles of hearts everywhere.

Like Spongebob, for instance.

Why do you ask?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > Finding the same sex sexually attractive is what makes you gay
> ...


Well its not my opinion.  I got that from the definition of homosexual which tells me you are in the minority of people that disagree which would place you in the category of being wrong.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Seawytch said:
> 
> 
> > Sounds more like you're suggesting gays just go back in the closet.
> ...


Evidently you care. Why would you start this thread and try to tell people how to self label?


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Again, the point of the OP is, why do we need to define these orientations at all in 2016?
> ...


.
Well he claims he has gay friends and they dont call themselves gay. He also claims that since people use the term to insult or denigrate people that label themselves as gay those people should be cowed and not use the word gay as a description for themselves.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Seawytch said:
> 
> 
> > Of course I want people to respect me as a person regardless of sexuality. Why are you asking rhetorical questions? What does that have to do with anything? And of course I would prefer people stopped using gay or lesbian as a pejorative...so?
> ...


Do you think that if gay people stop calling themselves gay and the word was stricken from the dictionary that people wouldnt still use the word gay as an insult?  Hell. Even if the word was stricken from everyones memory they would just come up with another label to use on people.

Here is the problem with your suggestion. People label  automatically. Its instinct and the reason humans survived without fangs and claws for protection. The human that couldnt label a lion as dangerous didnt live to pass on his/her genes.  To this day everyone utilizes this labeling ability in the nano seconds the brain needs to process information when meeting someone.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Seawytch said:
> 
> 
> > What does it matter if we do? I'll stop "defining" myself as gay or lesbian when everyone else stops assuming heterosexuality.
> ...



If people who are attracted to the same gender choose to call themselves gay, are you saying that the rest of society should not use that term?

If I were to say that society should stop categorizing people as men and women, would you agree?  After all, we're all humans, why do we need to categorize by gender?  Sometimes people use those terms as insults.  It's 2016, why do we have to label people by their gender, can't we simply accept them as people?  Yes, this is a bit of a silly analogy, but hopefully it gets the point across.

The idea that people are more than any label or characterization, that we should respect people for who they are as individuals rather than whatever group we might categorize them as, is laudable.  However, I think you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater, so to speak.  Labels can be useful and a reasonable means of description.  I'm not sure why you would fight to remove all labels, at least in this particular instance, rather than just hope to stop people from using those labels in a pejorative manner.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Seawytch said:
> ...


I dont think you should categorize yourself as human. Thats a label that separates us from the other primates.....Hell. Where does the labeling stop?


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Searcher44 said:
> 
> 
> > So if we're discussing characteristics of person, say his political leanings, we might say "Oh he's a wingnut conservative". Or we want to describe his psychological state we might say "Oh he's a psychopathic loon". To explain his level of intelligence, maybe "he's a know-it-all know nothing". So if someone is curious about a person's sexuality and that person prefers a same-sex partner why is it "kind of ridiculous" to apply a label that everyone could understand? How else could we communicate the fact without applying a descriptive adjective?
> ...



The word 'colored' is rarely used any more.  However, that doesn't mean society stopped using labels to describe race or ethnicity, those labels simply changed.  You don't seem to be advocating a change in label from 'gay' to something else, you seem to be advocating an end to sexual orientation labels.  You colored example is therefore poor.

Why do we need a descriptive adjective to describe anything?  It's easier than a long definition for everything we might describe?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Seawytch said:
> ...



I'm saying that regardless of what you or I think, society is going to eventually move away from sexuality identifiers. The younger generations already are. I'm not "calling for" anything... this isn't some ham-fisted crusade... I don't really give a shit one way or another. I just think we're moving into an era where sexuality is not that big of a deal and people will eventually get over their hang ups with it.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


No. that will never happen. People have an instinctive need to label things as I explained before.  People may cease to see it as a point of interest but they will never stop labeling themselves and their behaviors.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Maybe.  At this point I think that we're actually moving to a period of more labels, rather than less, but maybe it's just a transition.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Maybe.  At this point I think that we're actually moving to a period of more labels, rather than less, but maybe it's just a transition.



All I can go on is what I observe in my personal experiences. The younger generations, those who are college-age now or in high school, simply don't seem to care that much with regard to each other's sexuality. There is not the same stigma to being gay as there was back in my younger days, that's for sure. Now, maybe I just happen to know a lot of really cool and hip young kids who are ahead of their time but this is Alabama, that seems a bit odd. I really think most of the younger generation is not as hung up on this as my generation or the older generations. 

I'd love to get some input here from the young generation.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe.  At this point I think that we're actually moving to a period of more labels, rather than less, but maybe it's just a transition.
> ...



I agree that the young tend to be much more accepting about what a person's sexuality is, but I have seen a lot of new labels in recent years for gender and sexuality.  A quick example would be the expansion from LGBT to LGBTQIA.

I think that both can coexist : the use of labels for sexual orientation and acceptance for whatever orientation a person may be.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

I think it's more than just acceptance. They are more accepting but it almost seems like they don't want to define their own sexuality... sexuality without borders... like maybe it's a 'mystery' thing or something. Pansexual is a word mentioned earlier. That seems to describe it best. Perhaps sexuality is going to blend to the point there is no gay or straight and those will simply be preferences of the individual.. like blondes and brunettes?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> I think it's more than just acceptance. They are more accepting but it almost seems like they don't want to define their own sexuality... sexuality without borders... like maybe it's a 'mystery' thing or something. Pansexual is a word mentioned earlier. That seems to describe it best. Perhaps sexuality is going to blend to the point there is no gay or straight and those will simply be preferences of the individual.. like blondes and brunettes?



I doubt that.  Gay people are actually only a very small percentage of the overall population.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> I doubt that. Gay people are actually only a very small percentage of the overall population.



But again, going back to the OP... What IS gay? As we have seen in this thread alone, the definition can be all over the board. Is it someone who is sexually attracted to same gender? Is it someone who physically participates in homosexual activity? If so, to what degree? Heavy petting and making out, anal sex and blow jobs? And is there a threshold, does it have to be multiple encounters or just one? Or... is it someone who simply acknowledges that people of their gender are sexually attractive? What makes a person "gay" in 2016?

I agree that it's a small percentage who are actually engaged in exclusively homosexual relations...  but are those the only true gay people? If so, how do you define this with women? I mean, with men you have an organ that goes somewhere... not to be crude, but you see what I am saying? How can you define a woman as gay? If you reach orgasm with another woman? Do you just have to be intimate to qualify? What about just kissing or making out?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I doubt that. Gay people are actually only a very small percentage of the overall population.
> ...



Truly gay people would be those who are exclusively sexually attracted to the same sex.  Those who are attracted to both sexes would be bisexual, and those who are only attracted to the opposite sex are heterosexuals.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Truly gay people would be those who are exclusively sexually attracted to the same sex.  Those who are attracted to both sexes would be bisexual, and those who are only attracted to the opposite sex are heterosexuals.



Well that's certainly ONE of the definitions that has been presented.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

What if you are sexually attracted to people who are sexually attracted to same gender?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Truly gay people would be those who are exclusively sexually attracted to the same sex.  Those who are attracted to both sexes would be bisexual, and those who are only attracted to the opposite sex are heterosexuals.
> ...



I'm pretty sure those are the proper definitions.  I don't know why you would find it confusing.  If a person is only attracted to the same sex, that would mean the person is gay.  Right?  If a person is only attracted to the same sex, then that means the person is straight.  Right?  

Now, some people might experiment with sexual relations with the same sex, but that does not necessarily mean the person is "gay" but just perhaps curious.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> What if you are sexually attracted to people who are sexually attracted to same gender?



A fag hag?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



So you can be a homosexual without ever having engaged in a homosexual activity?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Yes.


----------



## Searcher44 (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Searcher44 said:
> 
> 
> > So if we're discussing characteristics of person, say his political leanings, we might say "Oh he's a wingnut conservative". Or we want to describe his psychological state we might say "Oh he's a psychopathic loon". To explain his level of intelligence, maybe "he's a know-it-all know nothing". So if someone is curious about a person's sexuality and that person prefers a same-sex partner why is it "kind of ridiculous" to apply a label that everyone could understand? How else could we communicate the fact without applying a descriptive adjective?
> ...



_
"Why do we need a descriptive adjective to describe someone's sexual preference anyway? Why is that anyone's business? It's a private personal matter"._

2016 is in your OP title but a statement like that quote seems nostalgic for the good old days when "gays" and "queers" were confined to the closet. They've gone through a long and painful cultural struggle to live openly as who they really are and I think most appreciate the freedom to discuss their lives openly.

_"The word "gay" is very often being misused and abused in order to denigrate and insult..."_

Unfortunately we're still in a transitional phase during which gays remain targets for a spectrum of insults ranging from extreme homophobic hate and ignorance to stand-up comics pushing the boundaries of "political correctness". Included in that spectrum are keyboard warriors like we denizens of USMB who are always reaching for insults and refuse to be confined by that "political correctness". I'm guilty myself once in awhile of slyly hinting a male antagonist might have lower than normal levels of testosterone. And having read a few of your posts I don't picture you as a great champion of political correctness either, unless of course
you want to use a line like that to bash one of your antagonists.

_"Why would someone need to say... Who's he? Oh, that's whore fucker Searcher! Or... That's limp dick Asclepias! Look... here comes tranny banger GT! I mean... WHY does it matter?"_

What? Have you had an epiphany of conscience and decided to retire as one of USMB's masters of the flaming non relevant  wisecrack, always reaching for the perfect libel? I doubt if you can drag your muck-raking butt out of the dirt, groping for the next insult like the rest of us, hoping it will be more anger inducing than the last.


----------



## Searcher44 (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...




Of course you can, just as you can be heterosexual without ever having engaged in a heterosexual activity.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> I don't know why you would find it confusing.



Are you going to now join the bigot and start this shit again? I don't find it confusing what homosexuality is. I find it confusing what society views as "gay" in 2016. I agree with your definition but I don't think everyone agrees with us. The bigot claimed I am a homosexual because I can look at another man and recognize he is sexually attractive, even though I am not sexually attracted to him... that conflicts with our view that there has to be a sexual attraction. And I am still unclear on bisexual people, are they not homosexual when they are attracted to the same gender? So by our definition, you can be homosexual and never engage in a homosexual act, or you can engage in homosexual acts and never be a homosexual.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know why you would find it confusing.
> ...



Go read the definitions.  Good grief!


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know why you would find it confusing.
> ...



How can you be so confused?  It's a pretty simple concept.  Bisexual.  Bi equals 2.  Bisexual means attraction to BOTH sexes.  Easy.  There is absolutely nothing to be confused about.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Searcher44 said:


> _"Why do we need a descriptive adjective to describe someone's sexual preference anyway? Why is that anyone's business? It's a private personal matter"._
> 
> 2016 is in your OP title but a statement like that quote seems nostalgic for the good old days when "gays" and "queers" were confined to the closet. They've gone through a long and painful cultural struggle to live openly as who they really are and I think most appreciate the freedom to discuss their lives openly.



So why do you think it would even be possible to go back into the closet? Why would I be suggesting something that just isn't even possible to do anymore?  

Sounds like, you WANT me to be some kind of homophobe so you can hate me. I don't think I am being "nostalgic" when I say our sexual relations are a private matter. I'm thinking that's pretty much common sense. 



Searcher44 said:


> Unfortunately we're still in a transitional phase during which gays remain targets for a spectrum of insults ranging from extreme homophobic hate and ignorance to stand-up comics pushing the boundaries of "political correctness".



And you don't think this might have anything to do with arbitrary labels we place on people based on their personal (and private) intimate preferences? 



Searcher44 said:


> _"Why would someone need to say... Who's he? Oh, that's whore fucker Searcher! Or... That's limp dick Asclepias! Look... here comes tranny banger GT! I mean... WHY does it matter?"_
> 
> What? Have you had an epiphany of conscience and decided to retire as one of USMB's masters of the flaming non relevant wisecrack, always reaching for the perfect libel? I doubt if you can drag your muck-raking butt out of the dirt, groping for the next insult like the rest of us, hoping it will be more anger inducing than the last.



Okay, so this is sounding more and more like you just want to reject anything I say based on your prejudice against me because of my 'colorful' past. Look, I have been around these kind of forums for more than 20 years... I can dish out some mean smack. I'm not big on political correctness, I am a conservative who has libertarian social views. I consider myself open-minded and, generally speaking, I mirror the respect or disrespect I receive from others. But why does any of that have anything to do with the serious topic I posted? Can you not overcome your prejudice enough to have a mature conversation with me?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know why you would find it confusing.
> ...



I think you need to be a bit less defensive.  Lol.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Why do you keep saying I am confused? I totally get it... a homosexual person can be homosexual and never engage in homosexual activity and a bisexual person can engage in homosexual activity and never be homosexual. And if two homosexual males and two homosexual females engage in an orgy, none of them are homosexuals anymore. Got it!


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> I think it's more than just acceptance. They are more accepting but it almost seems like they don't want to define their own sexuality... sexuality without borders... like maybe it's a 'mystery' thing or something. Pansexual is a word mentioned earlier. That seems to describe it best. Perhaps sexuality is going to blend to the point there is no gay or straight and those will simply be preferences of the individual.. like blondes and brunettes?



Ah, but there you go....pansexual is another label.  I've also seen queer used to describe someone who refuses to categorize sexuality ( NOW Updates Acronym: LGBTQIA | National Organization for Women ).  I don't think that sexuality will reach a point in which heterosexuality and homosexuality go away any time soon, if at all.  Certainly there may be some people who don't want their sexuality to be labelled, but I think that most are fine with it.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



In your last example, the participants would still need to be attracted to the opposite gender.  It is possible for people to have sex with someone they feel no attraction towards.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> In your last example, the participants would still need to be attracted to the opposite gender. It is possible for people to have sex with someone they feel no attraction towards.



Okay... so this raises the question... how are you and I (society) aware of what someone else finds sexually appealing? How can WE make that determination? How can anyone, other than the individual? If we can't... aren't the labels superfluous?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...





What is your problem?  There are valid definitions.  Go look them up!!!  

God, you try to help a person out . . . .


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> What is your problem?  There are valid definitions.  Go look them up!!!
> 
> God, you try to help a person out . . . .



Good lord, girl.... How many times to I need to point out the thread OP is not about what the dictionary defines as homosexual. Do you think I don't have enough sense to be able to look that up? I am trying to have a bit of a deeper conversation here... maybe that's over your head? Getting butt-hurt because I won't just accept some smart-ass quip of what the dictionary defines, is a little bit child-like and immature. I really thought you had more depth... was I wrong?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > What is your problem?  There are valid definitions.  Go look them up!!!
> ...



What are you asking then?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> What are you asking then?



I guess I am asking why we, as a society, need to label people? I mean, to distill it down to a single question, I guess that's what I am asking. I really wanted to just have an open discussion about this between mature adults without all the banal jawboning.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Ah, but there you go....pansexual is another label. I've also seen queer used to describe someone who refuses to categorize sexuality ( NOW Updates Acronym: LGBTQIA | National Organization for Women ).



OMG... I think I am going to form the LGBTQIA-CDEFHJKMNOPRSUVWXYZ!  fuck it! lol


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > What are you asking then?
> ...



There are many different reasons why we would "label" people.  One is for convenience sake.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> There are many different reasons why we would "label" people. One is for convenience sake.



What do you mean? Explain please.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > There are many different reasons why we would "label" people. One is for convenience sake.
> ...



What do YOU mean, what do I mean?  There are many different reasons why we label people, one being for the sake of convenience.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

I consider a "descriptive" adjective rather than a "label."  Lol.  I would say, "that guy is gay" rather than saying, "that guy prefers to have sex with other men."


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > What are you asking then?
> ...



You sound like a libtard.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



I mean, explain what you mean by convenience? Why do you need a convenient label to apply to someone regarding their personal sexual preferences? What difference does it make to you? Why is it important to distinguish them with a label? How do you even know if your label is completely accurate? Maybe you're assuming something that isn't actually true based on a presumption or hearsay? Maybe you are assuming based on a stereotype? How are you certain about it?  You said yourself, "gay" is when someone is sexually attracted exclusively to the same gender.... how do you know this for sure if you're not that individual?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > ChrisL said:
> ...



Well now, that was just totally uncalled for!


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > In your last example, the participants would still need to be attracted to the opposite gender. It is possible for people to have sex with someone they feel no attraction towards.
> ...



Generally a person will self-identify.  How can we make the determination that a person is a liberal?  How can we make the determination that a person is a Christian?  When it comes to someone's beliefs, we either take their word for it or we make a judgement based on their words and actions.

What makes the labels superfluous?  Generally that word is used to mean extra, more than needed.  If anything, these types of labels are an attempt to avoid superfluous explanation about a person.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



I don't think anyone is claiming that labels are always completely accurate, or that one person can know the inner thoughts of another.  

Do you have this issue with labels about other aspects of a person, or only sexuality?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



If a friend said about a gay guy, "oh that guy is really cute!"  I would say, "he's gay."


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



Well, with a person's political views or religious views we can discern what we believe they are... but with their sexual desires, it's a different matter. Unless they express those desires, we don't know. And even if they express them, we still don't know if they are being honest. 

I think 'superfluous' is appropriate because, what do we need the labels for? We don't even know for sure if they are accurate. What purpose do the labels serve? With religious or political labels, at least they serve to let us know how to converse or behave around a person.... you don't want to go hurling the f-bomb around a Christian or strike up a conversation about conservatism around a liberal... but with an ambiguous and possibly inaccurate label regarding sexual desire, what purpose does it serve socially? And again, I don't mean intimately... that falls under self-identification. 

While some gay people will tell everyone they are gay, a lot of gay people never mention it. I have a lot of friends who I suspect are probably gay because of what I observe but I don't KNOW they are... they've not told me they are. It doesn't matter to me, I'm not going to treat them any differently or think differently about them. I've never asked them because it's none of my business.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> I don't think anyone is claiming that labels are always completely accurate, or that one person can know the inner thoughts of another.
> 
> Do you have this issue with labels about other aspects of a person, or only sexuality?



I'm not big on labels in general because I think labels often denote stereotypes. If people wish to apply their own label, that's fine... I don't have an issue. I think my issue is with other people assuming things and applying labels... that seems bigoted and prejudiced to me. 



ChrisL said:


> If a friend said about a gay guy, "oh that guy is really cute!" I would say, "he's gay."



How do you know if someone is gay? Did they tell you they sexually desire same gender exclusively, or did you presume they are gay based on something you saw or something they did or said? And... can a guy not be really cute AND gay at the same time? What if he is not really gay but bisexual? How do you know what that person's sexual desires really are?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think anyone is claiming that labels are always completely accurate, or that one person can know the inner thoughts of another.
> ...



Because they are GAY.  Duh.


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

You are annoying.  Wicked annoying.  Anyone ever tell you that before?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



So you don't want to answer my questions?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Your questions are stupid.


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> You are annoying.  Wicked annoying.  Anyone ever tell you that before?



Look.. Chris... at the top of the page is a link "unwatch this thread" ...all you need to do is click that link and you are no longer following the thread. You can go on about your business and not be involved in this thread anymore. I'm not keeping you here against your will. If this conversation annoys you or you're not comfortable discussing it... leave! 

Okay?


----------



## Boss (Feb 19, 2016)

ChrisL said:


> Your questions are stupid.



All I did was ask you how you know someone is gay... exclusively attracted sexually to same gender... and if he can be cute and gay at the same time? I don't see how that is stupid. 

You're the one who said you need the label for convenience... convenience was described as, if someone says a guy is cute, you can say he is gay... So I am asking you a pertinent question about that and you're getting upset about it and call my question stupid. Did I hit a nerve, dear?


----------



## ChrisL (Feb 19, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > You are annoying.  Wicked annoying.  Anyone ever tell you that before?
> ...



Okay fine!


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



Why can you discern a person's political or religious views but not their sexuality?  How do you know someone is being honest about their political or religious views?  You seem to be trying to make sexuality different in ways it is not.

We don't know for sure that political or religious labels are accurate, either.  In fact, I would say that political labels, in particular, are probably more often inaccurate.  Just look at the posters on this site and how often they toss out liberal or conservative based simply on a person who disagrees with them on a single issue.

You have, on multiple occasions, been given examples of what purpose the labels serve.  I don't know why you seem to have dismissed those.  To once again give another one, if you see someone who has been labelled gay, and you are of the opposite gender, you won't try to hit on them.

I don't refrain from swearing around someone because they are a Christian.  I don't refrain from talking about any particular political subject because a person is liberal or conservative.  

It's strange how you seem to be arguing against all labels at one point, then only against labels regarding sexuality at another.  Here's an idea : Think about what purpose labels serve in general, then figure out if you can explain why those reasons apply to other things but not to sexuality.  Because at this point, your distinction between labels based on sexuality and other things don't seem to make sense.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


This has been explained to you multiple times.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > In your last example, the participants would still need to be attracted to the opposite gender. It is possible for people to have sex with someone they feel no attraction towards.
> ...


No dummy. They say they are gay or bi or straight.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > What are you asking then?
> ...


Because its a survival instinct for humans to label things. As a matter of fact you cant even think without labeling.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > What are you asking then?
> ...


For the same reasons you just used labels "we", "society" and "people".


----------



## Weatherman2020 (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> I am serious here... what does it actually mean this day and age? Is a person "gay" because they are attracted to the same gender? Or do they have to act upon their attraction and have a homosexual relationship to qualify? If someone acknowledges that someone of the same gender is sexually appealing, does that make them gay? What if you are physically attracted to both genders? Are you gay by default? Do you have to engage in actual sexual relationships and how far can you go without being actually gay? What if you get turned on by making yourself intentionally attractive to same gender but you're not interested in having sexual relations? Like a gay tease? Is that gay? Does that make you a gay person? What if you enjoy the mystique of the closet gay lifestyle, slipping around and frequenting gay bars to have promiscuous sex with same gender but you are happily married to the opposite gender? Does that mean you're gay or straight? What if you are completely heterosexual but you enjoy entertaining people dressed as a transgender? Are you gay then? What if you are straight but attracted to same gender transsexuals? What if you don't have sex at all and you love all people of both genders and see them as equally appealing sexually? Is that gay? What if you have been straight your entire life, always knew you were straight, never had any desire to be with the same gender physically and you get drunk one night and have homosexual relations... are you made gay by that one-off? What if you're in high school and you don't really know what you are and you experiment with homosexual relations but decide you didn't like it... can you become "ungay" or are you forever gay?
> 
> Just curious... it seems we've painted ourselves into a rather bigoted corner.


Same reason they took the rainbow symbol from the time God destroyed civilization because of rampant sexual perversions - it's all about spinning lies and deception.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...


Youre asking rhetorical questions. You apply labels so you dont have to explain all the specifics. Labels are understood to hold generally accepted specfics plus or minus what others may add or detract. When you say a guy is gay the specific is that he finds only other men sexually attractive. Telling someone you are bi is the same as saying you find both men and women sexually attractive.


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Why can you discern a person's political or religious views but not their sexuality? How do you know someone is being honest about their political or religious views? You seem to be trying to make sexuality different in ways it is not.



What you are doing is conflating "self-identification" and "applying labels" which are not the same thing. Sexuality is different from religious and political views because it is intimate. I'm sorry if you don't get that. I tried to explain but I guess I didn't do a good job. The simple fact of the matter is, you don't know about a person's sexuality unless you are intimate with them or they tell you.



Montrovant said:


> You have, on multiple occasions, been given examples of what purpose the labels serve. I don't know why you seem to have dismissed those. To once again give another one, if you see someone who has been labelled gay, and you are of the opposite gender, you won't try to hit on them.



Oh I know I've been given the example by ChrisL that it serves as a convenience for gossip... like, if someone says "that guy's really cute" and she says "He's gay!" And now here, where you give the example of how the label helps you determine whether to be sociable to someone. Assclap finds it beneficial to be able to apply the label to people in order to insult them or get under their skin. I'm sure there are dozens of other reasons to apply the label... like when you're renting a house or hiring an employee. So yep... lots and lots of reasons to apply labels to people. Great point!


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Why can you discern a person's political or religious views but not their sexuality? How do you know someone is being honest about their political or religious views? You seem to be trying to make sexuality different in ways it is not.
> ...



Apparently you have no idea what the difference is between hitting on someone and being sociable to someone.  

There are indications of sexuality just as there are indications of religious and political views.  In every case, you can either use those indications, or a person can tell you about their sexuality/religion/politics, and also in every case, there is no real way to know if they are being honest with you.  So what?

You are clearly determined to equate labels for a person's sexuality with discrimination and bigotry, yet seem to be perfectly fine with labels for other things.  Again, why only with sexuality?  Why must those labels be about bigotry?  It's easier to say someone is gay than they only are attracted to the same gender.  Saying a person is straight is not any kind of automatic insult.  

People use labels and stereotypes of all kinds for various reasons.  Are they sometimes used as an insult, or a reason not to interact with a person?  Of course!  That is true of pretty much any label, any stereotype, any descriptives used for a person.  Again I wonder why you are so focused on the categories of sexual attraction and seem to consider them so very different from others?  Sexuality is often an intimate thing, so what?  Why does that somehow mean that words used to describe sexuality are automatically bigoted or insulting?

Yes, gay has been used as an insult a lot.  So have quite a few other labels for sexual attraction.  That doesn't mean those labels are inherently insulting, particularly if many of the people who fit in the labels are comfortable with the terms themselves.  I said this before, but I have seen the terms liberal and conservative used as insults on this site many, many times.  They seem to be considered insulting terms by quite a few posters here.  Should we do away with them as well?

Oh, one last thing.  What makes you describe ChrisL's example as gossip?  If she knows a person is gay and tells her friend, how is that gossip?  This appears to be another example of you trying to fit what people are saying into your predetermined idea of what labels about sexuality are used for.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...


I think he is focused on the sexual aspect because he found out that he was gay or bi. This, for some reason is an insult to him. He doesnt want people to know so he is trying to do away with sexual labels all in one fell swoop.


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Apparently you have no idea what the difference is between hitting on someone and being sociable to someone.
> 
> There are indications of sexuality just as there are indications of religious and political views. In every case, you can either use those indications, or a person can tell you about their sexuality/religion/politics, and also in every case, there is no real way to know if they are being honest with you. So what?



Actually, there are not any indications as to what any given individual finds sexually arousing unless they tell you in intimacy. You can judge them based on stereotypes or hearsay... gossip... like your friend telling you they are gay. With political and religious views they are telling you socially and that's how you can tell. But most people you meet aren't going to say.. _Hi, I am sexually aroused by same gender, happy to meet you! _Generally, you have to find this out by conversing with them and getting to know them better. If you are attracted sexually to them and you "hit on them" but they don't reciprocate, they might be gay... but what difference would it make if they aren't interested in you sexually? 

What you are really  saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them. 



Montrovant said:


> You are clearly determined to equate labels for a person's sexuality with discrimination and bigotry, yet seem to be perfectly fine with labels for other things. Again, why only with sexuality?



Well, no... I think I said in a previous post that I am not a big fan of labels in general. They typically mean you are applying some stereotype to people and I think individuals should be judged on the basis of individual merit and not a stereotype, that's all. You seem to think we can't get by without labels so that we can figure out who we should discriminate against. 



Montrovant said:


> Again I wonder why you are so focused on the categories of sexual attraction and seem to consider them so very different from others?



Because it is personal and intimate. You have no way of knowing this unless someone tells you they are gay or you are being intimate with them. Assuming someone is gay because someone told you they were... or because they LOOK gay... or ACT gay... is discrimination. Plain and simple. So why do we need this label again? 



Montrovant said:


> Yes, gay has been used as an insult a lot.



Yep.. and it is very often used to discriminate and stereotype people that you don't have any idea about other than speculation or gossip. It is just an easy and socially acceptable way to discriminate against people. There is no other pertinent function it serves.



Montrovant said:


> I said this before, but I have seen the terms liberal and conservative used as insults on this site many, many times. They seem to be considered insulting terms by quite a few posters here. Should we do away with them as well?


Liberal and conservative are political labels applied on the basis of stated political views. No, I don't think we should assume someone is liberal or conservative unless they say they are or express viewpoints which clearly indicate they are. I don't think we should use those labels as weapons but I am guilty of this as are you and most everyone here. I am mature enough to admit I have faults and that's one of them. I often stereotype people based on their stated political views and I know that it's not right. But again, an openly stated political view is far different from an intimate and private sexual desire. I don't understand why you're not seeing the difference there. Seems pretty fucking obvious to me. 



Montrovant said:


> Oh, one last thing. What makes you describe ChrisL's example as gossip? If she knows a person is gay and tells her friend, how is that gossip?



Well, I asked her how she knows the person is gay and she said my question was stupid and refused to answer. Has she been intimate with them and they told her they were only attracted to same gender? In that case, maybe it's not gossip, but I got the impression that's not the case... she assumed they were gay because someone said they were gay or she observed something that she thought made them gay. And what does it have to do with them being "really cute?" She never said. Again, the way she presented it, seemed like it was a convenient way to stereotype and discriminate on the basis of hearsay or gossip.


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I think he is focused on the sexual aspect because he found out that he was gay or bi. This, for some reason is an insult to him. He doesnt want people to know so he is trying to do away with sexual labels all in one fell swoop.



No, it's really more about people like you who are homophobic bigots. You like to use sexuality to insult people because it makes you more secure in your masculinity. 

As for "trying to do away with sexual labels" ....how the fuck do you think I can do that? I don't control what society does any more than you do. I'm just stating my viewpoint on the subject and trying to have a civil conversation with other mature adults about it. This is how man becomes enlightened, by sharing ideas and opinions with one another. Of course, closed-minded bigots don't comprehend how this works, so it's no surprise you formulate crazy notions like this. 

I nailed your ass as a bigot and you can't handle that so you're now pissed off and responding by trying to attack me with the label of "gay or bi" because I exposed your bigotry. Numerous people here have weighed in and they disagree with your continued attempts to denigrate me by calling me names. I've decided to pretty much ignore you because bigots aren't worth my time.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Actually, there are not any indications as to what any given individual finds sexually arousing unless they tell you in intimacy.



Really?  So if you see that a person dates individuals of the same gender, that isn't an indication they might be gay, or at least bisexual?



Boss said:


> Generally, you have to find this out by conversing with them and getting to know them better.



Or someone you know will know they are gay and tell you, or you will see them dating people of the same gender.  There are other, less accurate, more stereotyping indicators as well, obviously.  Maybe you think the only way to know if a person is gay is if they tell you or you are intimate with them, but it simply is not true.



Boss said:


> What you are really saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them.



I am not saying this at all.  I'm not even hinting at it.  You are so certain that your notion of sexual labels only being about bigotry is true, you are applying it to things even if they don't fit that narrative.



Boss said:


> Well, no... I think I said in a previous post that I am not a big fan of labels in general. They typically mean you are applying some stereotype to people and I think individuals should be judged on the basis of individual merit and not a stereotype, that's all. You seem to think we can't get by without labels so that we can figure out who we should discriminate against.



Not being a fan of labels is different from indicating labels are only useful for discrimination.  And again, I have neither said nor hinted that I think labels are only useful for discrimination, that's you.  



Boss said:


> Because it is personal and intimate. You have no way of knowing this unless someone tells you they are gay or you are being intimate with them. Assuming someone is gay because someone told you they were... or because they LOOK gay... or ACT gay... is discrimination. Plain and simple. So why do we need this label again?



You can keep repeating this, but it isn't true.  I have more than once been told that a person was gay, not because someone assumed it, but because they knew.  So obviously there is at least one other way to know a person is gay.  And, as with religion and politics, there are indicators that can be used to guess, should a person feel the need.  As homosexuality is more accepted by society, people feel less need to hide their sexual preference.  That will lead to conversations which indicate their sexuality without needing to just blurt out, "I am gay". 



Boss said:


> But again, an openly stated political view is far different from an intimate and private sexual desire.



Why must a sexual desire be private?  Simply talking about a spouse is a pretty good indication of someone's sexual desires as far as gender is concerned.  If a man talks about his boyfriend, you can reasonably assume that the man is either gay or bisexual.  Do you think people never talk about their sex lives, dating lives, or spouses/partners in public conversation?



Boss said:


> Well, I asked her how she knows the person is gay and she said my question was stupid and refused to answer. Has she been intimate with them and they told her they were only attracted to same gender? In that case, maybe it's not gossip, but I got the impression that's not the case... she assumed they were gay because someone said they were gay or she observed something that she thought made them gay. And what does it have to do with them being "really cute?" She never said. Again, the way she presented it, seemed like it was a convenient way to stereotype and discriminate on the basis of hearsay or gossip.



Or perhaps someone who knew the person told her they were gay.  Or she knows the gay man herself and, as I've already pointed out, she found out about their sexual orientation in any of a number of ways.  This once again appears to be you dismissing what someone says because it doesn't fit into your narrative that using the label gay must be for discrimination.

A person's politics can be intimate and private if they don't like to openly talk about it, and a person's sexuality can be open and public if they want it to be.  Why you think a person's sexual orientation must be a private thing, why you think the only way to know a person's sexual orientation is for them to state it to you or to be intimate with them, why you think labels for sexual orientation must be used in a discriminatory way but other labels must not, I don't know.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Really? So if you see that a person dates individuals of the same gender, that isn't an indication they might be gay, or at least bisexual?



Well... earlier, you defined "gay" as someone who is exclusively sexually attracted to the same gender. Now, you want to include people who might be bisexual... or people who might be asexual and just like to have a good time with whomever. Unless you become intimate with them, there is no way for you to really know what turns them on.... maybe they're "faking it?" Maybe they're still trying to figure out their sexuality? Or maybe what you perceive as a date really wasn't a date? I've "gone out with the boys" to pick up women... if you were my next door neighbor, would you assume I am gay because you saw me dressed up and getting in the car with another guy? 



Montrovant said:


> Or someone you know will know they are gay and tell you, or you will see them dating people of the same gender. There are other, less accurate, more stereotyping indicators as well, obviously. Maybe you think the only way to know if a person is gay is if they tell you or you are intimate with them, but it simply is not true.



Well, we just covered how you could be mistaken about "dating" and your other assertion is hearsay or gossip... you're going by what a third party tells you about someone. Then, if that's not bad enough, you go on to justify stereotyping people and applying a label based on your stereotypes. Do you honestly not see anything wrong with that? 

I will say it again... the ONLY WAY you can KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to same gender is if they intimate this to you themselves. Otherwise, you are assuming. 



Montrovant said:


> You can keep repeating this, but it isn't true. I have more than once been told that a person was gay, not because someone assumed it, but because they knew. So obviously there is at least one other way to know a person is gay.



But the fact that someone told you that someone else was sexually attracted exclusively to same gender is HEARSAY! GOSSIP! IT'S COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY! What part of this are you failing to comprehend?  



Montrovant said:


> Why must a sexual desire be private?



What the fuck man? Because it IS... that's why! No one knows what turns you on except YOU!  Jeesh! You can fucking be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what ACTUALLY turns you on! That's something that resides in your own mind. You might not care for anyone to know you get turned on by midgets in drag! That might be information you wish to remain private and not divulge to anyone else. 



Montrovant said:


> Or perhaps someone who knew the person told her they were gay. Or she knows the gay man herself and, as I've already pointed out, she found out about their sexual orientation in any of a number of ways.



But you're STILL missing the point that the information is coming from a third party who is NOT the individual in question and they may have no idea what they're talking about. Maybe they heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else? Can you not comprehend this or something? What the fuck is wrong with you? You can't understand that personal private information is not something you can assume based on what other people tell you? 

Was it you who was talking earlier about hitting on a female Marine and after being rejected you found out that "most all of them are lesbians?" How the fuck do you *know* that? Based on some goddamn stereotype? Is THAT how you judge EVERYONE?


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?



I don't profess to know what people's motivations are for applying labels... as we see in this thread, a particular poster continues to insist I am "gay or bi" based on something I said. People can have all kinds of different reasons for applying a label to someone else. The question is, why do you think it's acceptable to stereotype people and judge them based on your stereotypes? Why do you think it's okay to believe gossip and hearsay as opposed to direct information intimated to you from the individual directly? 

I think this is a really big problem we're having today in society.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?
> ...



Actually, you have professed to know exactly what people's motivations are multiple times.  It's what brought about my comment.  Here, let me show you :


Boss said:


> What you are really saying is, you need this label to apply to people so that you can discriminate against them.



Who said anything about judging?  I can say someone is gay without judging them based on it.  I can say someone is straight without judging them based on it.  You keep making shit up.

It is not necessarily 'gossip' if someone you know tells you that someone else is gay, any more than it is 'gossip' if someone you know tells you someone else is a Baptist, or a mechanic, or originally from Canada.  What crazy definition of gossip are you using that anything one person tells you about another person is gossip?

You are still, clearly, going to force any comments into your narrative.


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Montrovant said:
> ...



Uhm... NO... that is me relaying my take on what you said based on what you said. I have no idea why you feel compelled to stereotype and label people so that you can discriminate against them, that's something only you can know. I have no idea why you think it's perfectly okay to accept hearsay and gossip about someone and make judgments based on that... it's something only you can know. 



> Who said anything about judging?  I can say someone is gay without judging them based on it.  I can say someone is straight without judging them based on it.  You keep making shit up.



Well, you said that the label is useful to you so that you could know whether or not you should "hit on them" and that means you're basing your decision on a stereotype you've established which is based on hearsay. And you pretty much admitted that you discriminate against female Marines because you've heard they are mostly lesbians. So, yes... you are judging people based on it, whether you admit that's what you're doing or not. Most people don't like to admit they are judging people... that's human nature. And let's be clear, there isn't anything wrong with judging people, it's only when we do this based on stereotypes and hearsay or gossip that it's unfair and wrong. 



> It is not necessarily 'gossip' if someone you know tells you that someone else is gay, any more than it is 'gossip' if someone you know tells you someone else is a Baptist, or a mechanic, or originally from Canada.  What crazy definition of gossip are you using that anything one person tells you about another person is gossip?
> 
> You are still, clearly, going to force any comments into your narrative.



But it _*IS*_ necessarily gossip because that is what defines gossip. 
*gossip*
_noun_
1. idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.

So... IF someone tells you that someone else is gay... that IS gossip... it's the very definition of gossip. I don't need a special definition, that IS the definition of gossip! And you continue to try and justify judging people and stereotyping them based on gossip. I'm not forcing your comments into anything... you are clearly saying this in no uncertain terms and defending it to the hilt.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Well... earlier, you defined "gay" as someone who is exclusively sexually attracted to the same gender. Now, you want to include people who might be bisexual... or people who might be asexual and just like to have a good time with whomever. Unless you become intimate with them, there is no way for you to really know what turns them on.... maybe they're "faking it?" Maybe they're still trying to figure out their sexuality? Or maybe what you perceive as a date really wasn't a date? I've "gone out with the boys" to pick up women... if you were my next door neighbor, would you assume I am gay because you saw me dressed up and getting in the car with another guy?



I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender.  You claimed there are no indicators that a person is gay other than them telling you so or being intimate with them.  I provided an example of that being untrue.  I added bisexual because being gay isn't the only possibility for dating someone of the same gender.

As far as 'faking it', well, fuck.  Anyone could be faking anything about their beliefs or thoughts.  That is not exclusive to sexuality.  Someone could be 'faking it' regarding their religion or politics or preference in sports.  By that standard, you can never know if someone is gay.  Ever. 

Sure, it's possible someone might be mistaken about what is a date.  As someone known for complaining that other people focus on minutia, you certainly do it a lot!  If, over time and multiple dates/partners, a person seems to choose exclusively the same gender for romantic encounters, it's certainly an indication they may be gay.  If a man talks about dating other men, having boyfriends, and never does so about women, it's a good indication they may be gay.  Obviously the further removed from a person's life you are, the more difficult it is to make these kinds of determinations.  Why does it have to be just a neighbor who sees a person getting in the car?  You seem, again, to be trying to fit this into your narrative, in this case with gossip.



Boss said:


> Well, we just covered how you could be mistaken about "dating" and your other assertion is hearsay or gossip... you're going by what a third party tells you about someone. Then, if that's not bad enough, you go on to justify stereotyping people and applying a label based on your stereotypes. Do you honestly not see anything wrong with that?
> 
> I will say it again... the ONLY WAY you can KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to same gender is if they intimate this to you themselves. Otherwise, you are assuming.



Pretty much everyone uses stereotypes.  I'm not justifying their use, that they are used is just reality.  Beyond that, depending on how they are used or what they are used for, they aren't necessarily bad.  

More, I specifically said there are 'less accurate' indicators of a person's sexual preference.  I didn't say those should be used exclusively or that anyone should be judged as a person based on such indicators.  

The only way to KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to the same gender is to be that person.



Boss said:


> But the fact that someone told you that someone else was sexually attracted exclusively to same gender is HEARSAY! GOSSIP! IT'S COMING FROM A THIRD PARTY! What part of this are you failing to comprehend?



Again, I wonder what your definition of gossip is.  If I know someone is gay because they have told me, or I am in a homosexual relationship with them, is it automatically gossip to tell that to someone else?  Should what someone I trust tells me be automatically dismissed, and is that true only when it comes to sexual orientation?



Boss said:


> What the fuck man? Because it IS... that's why! No one knows what turns you on except YOU! Jeesh! You can fucking be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what ACTUALLY turns you on! That's something that resides in your own mind. You might not care for anyone to know you get turned on by midgets in drag! That might be information you wish to remain private and not divulge to anyone else.



You cut off my quote before it went on to clarify how sexual desire might not be private.

Your religious beliefs, your political ideology, you have already described as not being private and intimate, yet they are also things that no one else knows except you.  You can be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what you ACTUALLY believe about god.  You can be married to someone for 50 years and your partner doesn't know what you ACTUALLY think about how government should be run.  That's something that resides in your own mind.

Your inconsistency, or perhaps it is hypocrisy, on this subject is clear.



Boss said:


> But you're STILL missing the point that the information is coming from a third party who is NOT the individual in question and they may have no idea what they're talking about. Maybe they heard it from someone else who heard it from someone else? Can you not comprehend this or something? What the fuck is wrong with you? You can't understand that personal private information is not something you can assume based on what other people tell you?



You keep harping on this third party thing.  Do you not trust anyone?  If a woman tells me her husband is straight, should I dismiss that because the husband isn't telling me himself?  Yes, we can be lied to.  Yes, people might be mistaken about things.  I'm not making any claims to total accuracy, knowledge beyond the slightest shadow of a doubt.  I think we've already pretty much agreed that such a thing is impossible anyway, since a person could always be 'faking it' about their orientation.  So what the hell is your point?  The only thing I can see is that, for whatever reason, you don't want to admit that your two options for knowing a person are gay are either not the only ways, or that there are really no ways to know another person is gay since you cannot tell what they may be lying about.

And again, do you feel the same way about any other thing a person might think or feel?  If my father tells me his wife is a Buddhist, should I ignore that because it's hearsay?  She hasn't told me herself, I'm getting it from a third party, so clearly it is unreliable, right?



Boss said:


> Was it you who was talking earlier about hitting on a female Marine and after being rejected you found out that "most all of them are lesbians?" How the fuck do you *know* that? Based on some goddamn stereotype? Is THAT how you judge EVERYONE?



I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.  I've never said anything remotely like that.  Are you arguing with me, or just arguing against whatever crap happens to pop into your head?


We've gone over the fact that one person can never be truly certain about what another person thinks or feels.  Strangely, you only seem to apply that to sexual orientation, and you do it inconsistently.  This in a thread which you start by asking what it means to be gay, where you don't want to discuss what it means to be gay.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 20, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Boss said:
> ...



And now you are just a lying ass.  Well, since you feel compelled to attribute arguments to me which I clearly have not made


Boss said:


> Uhm... NO... that is me relaying my take on what you said based on what you said. I have no idea why you feel compelled to stereotype and label people so that you can discriminate against them, that's something only you can know. I have no idea why you think it's perfectly okay to accept hearsay and gossip about someone and make judgments based on that... it's something only you can know.



Here you are again, doing exactly what I said.  You say I feel compelled to stereotype and label people to discriminate against them.  That is professing your belief about why I use labels.  I have not said that, you decided it is true based on your own insanity.



Boss said:


> Well, you said that the label is useful to you so that you could know whether or not you should "hit on them" and that means you're basing your decision on a stereotype you've established which is based on hearsay. And you pretty much admitted that you discriminate against female Marines because you've heard they are mostly lesbians. So, yes... you are judging people based on it, whether you admit that's what you're doing or not. Most people don't like to admit they are judging people... that's human nature. And let's be clear, there isn't anything wrong with judging people, it's only when we do this based on stereotypes and hearsay or gossip that it's unfair and wrong.



No, I gave hitting on someone as an example of the usefulness of knowing someone is gay or straight.

I've also never said a thing about female marines being lesbians, you lying sack of shit.  



Boss said:


> But it _*IS*_ necessarily gossip because that is what defines gossip.
> *gossip*
> _noun_
> 1. idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.
> ...



Ah.  So you would consider anyone telling you anything about another person to be gossip.  I hate to break it to you, but that is not the definition most people use for the word.  We're not talking about a rumor, it doesn't have to be a salacious discussion.  

Since you clearly feel compelled to lie about what I've said and argue with that, I'll leave you to it.  You don't need me to argue against shit you make up.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Feb 20, 2016)

"In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?"

Wrong question. 

Correct question: why in 2016 are many on the right still making the non-issue of being gay an 'issue.'


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender.



Except that you keep arguing that you can define someone as gay based on what someone else tells you, or based on presumptions you make regarding their actions. The only way you can KNOW what someone is exclusively attracted to is if that person tells you. You go on to reel off a bunch of crap about things that might imply someone could be gay... that's not them telling you... that's YOU making an assumption and then labeling them accordingly. 



Montrovant said:


> Again, I wonder what your definition of gossip is.



I posted the definition from dictionary.com. 
*gossip: idle talk or rumor, especially about the personal or private affairs of others.
*


Montrovant said:


> Your religious beliefs, your political ideology, you have already described as not being private and intimate, yet they are also things that no one else knows except you.



Religious and political views might be private. However, if you are expressing them openly to others, it is not private or personal. Same with your sexuality... if you are openly telling everyone you are gay... that is self-labeling and not what I am talking about here. You keep trying to draw some correlation and there isn't any. 



Montrovant said:


> You keep harping on this third party thing. Do you not trust anyone?



It's not about trusting. Gossip is third party information of a personal nature about someone else. I'm sorry if you don't get that... it's what gossip IS. 



Montrovant said:


> The only way to KNOW if someone is truly exclusively attracted to the same gender is to be that person.



Yay... you finally got my point! So why do you feel compelled to label someone based on anything else? Why do you believe that is perfectly okay and acceptable? Why do you keep arguing with me about it? Are you just trying to be as obtuse as possible or disagreeable to the point you can't be objective? Why not just say... Boss, you make a good point... we shouldn't judge people based on gossip and stereotypes when it comes to sexuality... or anything else, really, but especially something intimate and personal like sexual desire? If you did that, I'd have a lot of fucking respect for you... but you totally refuse.


----------



## Boss (Feb 20, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> "In 2016... What the hell does "Gay" even mean?"
> 
> Wrong question.
> 
> Correct question: why in 2016 are many on the right still making the non-issue of being gay an 'issue.'



Sorry, that's not the thread OP... start your own thread if you want to rant about the right.


----------



## Montrovant (Feb 21, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > I continue to define gay as someone exclusively attracted to the same gender.
> ...



Why don't I just say you make a good point?  Because you dance around your point and don't simply state it, and then the point you make is worthless for conversation.  No one can truly know anything about another person's thoughts and beliefs.  We can only assume or guess or conclude based on available information.  Fine, how does that help the conversation about what does gay mean?

I notice you didn't even mention the fact that you twice lied about me and attributed things I did not say to me in an attempt to make a point.  Why didn't you just say, "Sorry, I was wrong"?  I'm going to assume it's because you are a dishonest dick....of course I can't know that for sure, you might be faking.

I'll unwatch the thread now.


----------



## Boss (Feb 21, 2016)

Montrovant said:


> Why don't I just say you make a good point?  Because you dance around your point and don't simply state it, and then the point you make is worthless for conversation.  No one can truly know anything about another person's thoughts and beliefs.  We can only assume or guess or conclude based on available information.  Fine, how does that help the conversation about what does gay mean?
> 
> I notice you didn't even mention the fact that you twice lied about me and attributed things I did not say to me in an attempt to make a point.  Why didn't you just say, "Sorry, I was wrong"?  I'm going to assume it's because you are a dishonest dick....of course I can't know that for sure, you might be faking.
> 
> I'll unwatch the thread now.



I don't dance around my point, the conversation has never been about "what gay means." It's called a literary device known as a "rhetorical question" which is more of a statement argued in the accompanying editorial. So when you get into the OP you see that what I am talking about is why do we feel compelled to attach this particular label when we have a generation or more of young Americans who don't really 'identify' with labels on who they are. Sexuality is becoming a 'whatever' kind of thing... we are progressing as a society... so why have this label 'gay' at all? What purpose does it actually serve in modern times? 

Demonstrated in the thread, are assorted "opinions" on what "gay" is useful for. We see it can be used as a weapon to attack people who have a different perspective... We see it can be used to spread gossip and as a source of discrimination. These seem to be terribly unuseful things. It can be used to promote special rights or awareness of inequity but again, our young people simply are less and less aware of it or concerned with it. As a 'social' issue, it's kind of becoming dead. Even more the reason not to cling to tradition because our grandfathers did. 

It's like the N-word... now there was a label for the ages... it worked out very useful for many people who could denigrate and attack, discriminate against and oppress. It was convenient as hell. Now... black folks probably used the word back then like they use it now, but we got rid of it because it was offensive and prejudiced. It created more unuseful things than beneficial ones. We realized that it's not right to label people and discriminate based on our stereotypes... or at least, some us did, I'd like to think.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 22, 2016)

Boss said:


> Montrovant said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a question Boss : If a homosexual man uses gay to describe another man he believes to be homosexual, is he doing it because he wants to discriminate against homosexual men?
> ...


I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.


----------



## Boss (Feb 22, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.



I find them to be sexually attractive, I am not sexually attracted to them. That has been explained to you countless times but you insist I am gay or bi. The definition some have given for gay is sexually attracted to same gender. I'm not sexually attracted to them, so how am I gay? It doesn't insult me but you obviously think it is a way to insult me. As I told Monty, I don't know what your motives are, maybe it's to make you feel more secure in your own masculinity? Or perhaps it's your homophobic bigotry shining through? 

In any event, I think it is a great illustrative example of how useless the label has become.


----------



## Alex. (Feb 22, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.
> ...



Can you qualify this statement?



> I find them to be sexually attractive,


----------



## Boss (Feb 22, 2016)

Alex. said:


> Can you qualify this statement?



Just what it says. I can look at a person, male or female, and recognize qualities or attributes that make them sexually appealing to others. Finding someone sexually attractive doesn't necessarily mean you are sexually attracted. Earlier, I presented two very good prime examples, one male and one female... Halle Berry and Channing Tatum.  I recognize they are both very sexually attractive people but I am not sexually attracted to them. I can see why other people might be. I don't think that makes me gay or bi, but a certain poster here believes it does.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 22, 2016)

Boss said:


> Asclepias said:
> 
> 
> > I only insist you are gay or bi because you told me in specific terms you find other men sexually attractive which fits the definition of gay or bi. You keep calling me a homophobe for calling you what you yourself described. Why you feel insulted is beyond me.
> ...


You cant find them sexually attractive unless youre sexually attracted. Thats like saying the top of your car is hot before you even touch it to find out.  How are you able to tell they are sexually attractive if you are not attracted? Of course you are gay or bi if you are a man and find men sexually attractive and of course you are sexually attracted. Its the same exact thing if not for the tense.


----------



## Asclepias (Feb 22, 2016)

Boss said:


> Alex. said:
> 
> 
> > Can you qualify this statement?
> ...


*Finding* another man sexually attractive is not the same as *guessing or recognizing* a woman may find that same man sexually attractive. *Finding* another male sexually attractive is what gay or bi men do. You have already been provided the definition.


----------



## Boss (Feb 22, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Boss said:
> 
> 
> > Asclepias said:
> ...



Well, sorry... YES you CAN!  It's like saying "that food looks delicious" even if you're not hungry or you're on a diet and can't eat it. I am able to tell because I recognize sexually attractive characteristics. That does not make me gay or bi, that's just your homophobic bigotry shining through. 

Most everyone who is sexually attractive knows how to make themselves that way or enhance that aspect... they don't just fall out of bed looking sexy as fuck by accident. Now, maybe YOU do? I don't know... you don't seem to think you're aware of how to make yourself sexually appealing to women. But there is an entire industry.. fashion, cosmetics, fitness, grooming and hygiene... all thriving on people who are trying to make themselves more sexually appealing to someone. It's a natural thing... we see it in every creature of nature... it's the basis for all reproduction. 

So, it seems perfectly logical to me, if you are going to try and attract a mate, you need to have some kind of idea of what turns them on sexually. Maybe YOU don't but I think you're in the overwhelming minority there bro. And I don't think knowing those things makes you gay or bi. It just makes you normal and natural. Denying that you know these things or pretending there is something "gay or bi" about knowing them, is a sign of homophobic bigotry. You're probably the kind of guy who would never be caught dead wearing a pink shirt because you would be too afraid people might think you are gay. You should really try opening your mind more and join us in the 21st century.


----------



## Boss (Feb 22, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> *Finding* another man sexually attractive is not the same as *guessing or recognizing* a woman may find that same man sexually attractive. *Finding* another male sexually attractive is what gay or bi men do. You have already been provided the definition.



Nope... Finding someone sexually attractive is not the same thing as being sexually attracted. Gay or bi men are sexually attracted. Heterosexual males can find another male sexually attractive without having sexual desires for that male. I don't know how else that can be stated. If we couldn't do this, we'd never be able to attract a female mate because we wouldn't have any idea of how we needed to look or be.


----------



## Boss (Feb 22, 2016)

Asclepias said:


> Thats like saying the top of your car is hot before you even touch it to find out.



That's a terrible analogy. You can't look at something and tell the temperature of it. There are no visual characteristics... unless you see the little heat ripples... then you might presume it's too hot to touch. Now... just because I can look at a male and recognize visual characteristics which are associated with what women find sexually appealing, doesn't mean that I am sexually stimulated. If I looked at a picture of Channing Tatum and said, "I bet he is really good in bed!"  That would be a little weird... that might indicate I am gay or bi. I don't know Channing Tatum, I have no desire to engage in sex with Channing Tatum, so I have no idea whether he would or wouldn't be good in bed. Lots of very sexually attractive people are terrible in the sack... that's just a fact of life. Many of  them aren't but lots are. Sexual attractiveness doesn't always equate to "good in bed." 

I had an ex-girlfriend who told me she could tell I was good in bed when she first saw me. For the life of me, I don't know what she meant... I have looked myself over and I can't really see anything that denotes I am good in bed... I'm sexy as fuck... I dress to the nines... I enhance aspects of my sexual attractiveness to appeal... but I don't see what makes me look like I am good in bed. I AM good in bed... but I have no idea what makes me LOOK that way. Maybe she meant that my (obvious) sexual attractiveness just appealed to her in a way she found very sexually stimulating? I don't know. In any event, I can't look at another male and determine if they are good in bed... I can't even tell with women most of the time. lol


----------

