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

[Boss]

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]

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]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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

 

[ChrisL]

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.

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]

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

A fag hag?

 

[Boss]

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.

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.

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

 

[ChrisL]

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.

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.

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

Yes.

 

[Searcher44]

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.

"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]

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.

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.

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

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

 

[Boss]

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]

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.

Go read the definitions. Good grief!

 

[ChrisL]

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.

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]

"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.

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?

"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]

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.

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

 

[Boss]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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.

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.

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!

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.