Sucking straight friend....

[motorcityboy]

If that was the case how do you explain homosexual people. Are you saying that arnt born one way or another because I know there is a whole bunch of people that would disagree with you.

I think people are born what they are whether they be straight, bi, gay, trans or what ever else there is. The guys that lead a public life of being straight but do things with men on a regular basis are still bi and they most likely know it but just choose to not share it.

Some might even just say that they are straight because they know gay men like even thought they know it's not true.

So every woman that tries something with a woman is "bi" ?
There's plenty of women that "try" stuff in college and plenty of women that "try" stuff because their husband /boyfriend thinks it hot with two chicks , so all of these woman are gay or bi ?

 

[motorcityboy]

I do agree with the banned fella above, when you're having sexual experience with a so called straight friend, he is not. If your friend is a vegetarian and he eats meat, he's not a vegetarian.

So every woman that tries something with a woman is "bi" ?
There's plenty of women that "try" stuff in college and plenty of women that "try" stuff because their husband /boyfriend thinks it hot with two chicks , so all of these woman are gay or bi ?

 

[1Steve]

Sometimes it's difficult to put labels on people. In recent memory there were a few politicians that left their wives for men and called them selves "gay", not bi. From my point of view if you can have sex with a woman and father a child you are not gay, if you also go off with men you are bi. I consider myself gay. I am not at all attracted to women. I couldn't get an erection with a woman drunk or sober. Put me with an attractive man and I'm instantly hard as a rock. I wish I could fake it and get married and have kids. life would be so much easier than living closeted and making excuses for not being married. So I can't see those politicians with kids saying they are gay instead of bi. As for gay labels I don't fit the top or bottom profile either. I am not the least bit interested in anal sex, neither giving or receiving. No one is going to fuck me or vise verse. But I love to suck dick. I like to be in control, giving the pleasure, and really don't much enjoy having the favor returned. I'm very shallow too, in that I'm all about looks. I don't like effeminate twinks nor old fat dudes. I like really attractive guys either thin of muscular, but not fat, and not over 40. I don't care how big or small your dick is, as long as physically I think you are hot looking (more about facial handsomeness than anything else)

 

[deleted15807]

So every woman that tries something with a woman is "bi" ?
There's plenty of women that "try" stuff in college and plenty of women that "try" stuff because their husband /boyfriend thinks it hot with two chicks , so all of these woman are gay or bi ?

Behavior doesn't equal orientation. But you can't tell him that.

 

[Hatt_101]

So every woman that tries something with a woman is "bi" ?
There's plenty of women that "try" stuff in college and plenty of women that "try" stuff because their husband /boyfriend thinks it hot with two chicks , so all of these woman are gay or bi ?

Does the term bi curious mean nothing to you? Because that's exactly what you are describing. The same applies for both men and women. Also you posted the same comment twice.

Everyone needs to read 1Steve's post what he just said is exactly what every straight man here has said just in the role of a gay man. Like he said there are many political figures or famous people that were married before they came out. And 1Steve considers them not to be gay because they were once with women. Leslie Roberts is an example, he's a news anchor in Canada and he was married but left his family when he came out as gay.

Being bi sexual doesn't mean you have to like both men and women equally you can sway to one side or the other. But people that are gay do not like the opposite sex just like how people who are straight do not like the same sex.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with being bi so I don't know why some people here try to demonize being bi sexual.

 

[Onyxpumper]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with being bi so I don't know why some people here try to demonize being bi sexual.

I believe some may do that to attempt to even the "sides" between Straight and Gay...well that would be my guess why some try to demonize bi-sexuality.

 

[td400]

I know a number of "vegetarians" that eat fish.

People are complicated. If you have a problem with the way someone thinks of themself, I suggest the problem is with you.

 

[Silvertip]

^^^ AMEN!!! ^^^​

Sometimes it's difficult to put labels on people ...

And at all times it is rude and disrespectful to "put labels on people"!

 

[BaronSaber]

Anyone ever have suck off a best friend or straight friends cock. How did it happen. Love to her all the detail...... I Have!!

well that would mean he wasnt straight, also if they guy is straight why are you trying to change him? that is like if i had a gay friend and i tried to force him to sleep with a woman

 

[Exbiker]

I know a number of "vegetarians" that eat fish.

People are complicated. If you have a problem with the way someone thinks of themself, I suggest the problem is with you.

But those are sometimes called icthyophagists ? or pescatarians?

And you don't get too many threads on "Vegetarian Dating".com where people talk about how their date is a committed vegetarian, but very much likes eating sirloin or porterhouse steak, "as the chef would have it" ... ?

Are we not allowed to suggest that words mean something? Is that word-ist?

:redface:

 

[Hatt_101]

But those are sometimes called icthyophagists ? or pescatarians?

And you don't get too many threads on "Vegetarian Dating".com where people talk about how their date is a committed vegetarian, but very much likes eating sirloin or porterhouse steak, "as the chef would have it" ... ?

Are we not allowed to suggest that words mean something? Is that word-ist?

:redface:

+1

 

[td400]

I have an in-law who is vegetarian all year except on Christmas when she has a bit of ham.

I know, some of you will be outraged that she calls herself a vegetarian and will come up with latinate words - medicalized words, words from a dead language - to describe behavior of the living. But for those of us who don't split hairs, who don't run to the dictionary to beat people over the head with it when they don't use language the way we'd like them to - who think it's fine to live your life and then look for words to describe it, rather than living your life according to the proscriptions of a dictionary - we're okay with cutting people a little slack when the words just don't feel right. When it doesn't describe what they see in the mirror.

Heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual. Or the friendlier straight, bi, gay - they're not the last word on human sexuality. If you're lucky enough never to have hit a bump on the road to your sexual identity, god bless. You'll love current English. Transexuals, on the other hand, are still working through how a binary set of pronouns (he / she) work for them when gender is clearly not binary. Some people use "queer" because they don't see themselves in the traditional het-bi-homo nomenclature; other people use it as a term for all forms of sexuality other than heterosexual; some people will smack you if you use it in reference to them.

Words change. They change spelling. They change meaning. In spite of Daniel Webster's best efforts to pickle English, new words are born. Old words fade away. The lucky ones get their meanings tweaked for a new day. Some words point to something pretty easy to define - "toaster", for example. Some are harder - "disestablishmentarianism", say. Or "existentialism."

We live in interesting times, with people exploring nooks and crannies of sexuality. Why would we limit ourselves to terminology developed in the 19th century with a 19th century understanding of sex (heterosexual / homosexual / bisexual) or even the mid-20th (straight / bi / gay)? Sexuality is more like "existentialism" than like "toaster." And I wouldn't call it wordism. I'd call it philistinism.

Maybe in 50 years we won't worry about sexual labels - we'll all just be sexual. Maybe a straight bisexual will signify someone who lives a heterosexual social life, but is an inactive bisexual. Or an active bisexual. I don't know. Here we are at the beginning of the 50 years, and I think we should start now trying to figure out what's changing and what the language isn't allowing us to express rather than leave it for the 49th year like we usually do. Or maybe that's just me.

I still remember when Michelangelo Signorile was on his "outing" rampage in the mid-80's - a very different time than this - and named an LAPD officer as his latest victim. The cop killed himself not long after. It's bullying to try to define another person's sexuality against their will, if not something worse.

 

[AlteredEgo]

Words allow us to communicate our thou thoughts and ideas clearly. If the words don't always mean what we agree they mean, languages are useless. Straight/heterosexual people do not seek out sexual contact with other members of their sex. That is what those words mean. Other situations have their own words, and if they don't, we can give them words. That is how language grows, not by suddenly saying that words mean the opposite of what they actually mean.

 

[AlexDB9]

I guess I used to be the "straight" guy getting blown. I remember one day I was down at the beach, still lived with my last GF. A gorgeous blond stud started chatting me up and the next thing I knew, he was blowing me in his 67 Mustang convertible. I couldn't believe how he swallowed my cock whole. As this homosexual act was being performed on me, I didn't feel a bit straight. The next day while I was fucking my GF, I knew she'd never suck my cock that good. Not long after this I let the guy fuck me.

 

[Silvertip]

I am a word Nazi by nature. I hate it when people distort, mispronounce and otherwise butcher the language. But I'm also a realist and I understand that language is (as td400 so eloquently points out) a living, fluid, evolving thing. So I bite my tongue and accept my distress over the language hackers as symptomatic of just being an old curmudgeon. And while I fully agree with AlteredEgo that effective communication relies on words having specific meaning, effective communication also relies on one's depth of discourse. Thinking that you can meaningfully describe something as complex as another person's sexual orientation with a single syllable (straight, gay, bi) is a tragic mistake and an affront to the party being so described. Arguing with people about how they choose to label themselves is equally offensive.

 

[firsttimecaller]

Arguing with people about how they choose to label themselves is equally offensive.

No one ever answers this, but ill ask again anyway...

How far does this go?

Can I call myself king of England And axpect to be treated as such?

Can I be devoutly Muslim, but call myself a Hindu?

Can I call myself a vegetarian if my diet is 100% carnivorous?

At what point does "allowing" every precious snowflake call themselves whatever they want become ridiculous?

 

[Methe]

Wooooooow issues. Can't you simply agree on "mostly straight"?

 

[td400]

Think of a toaster. You might picture an electrical appliance capable of toasting bread. Does it include a toaster oven? Sometimes I toast bread in a skillet or under the oven grill. Are they toasters?

Colored, black, Negro. They all mean the same don't they? Or do they? Every word has a denotation - the meaning it has in the dictionary - and a connotation - the associations that go beyond definition that accrue through usage (sometimes, but not always, hinted at in the dictionary). I understand these words to denote the same thing - someone of African heritage - but with radically different connotations. Colored was the word associated with racist Jim Crow laws and especially signs of the time; Negro was the term of the classic civil rights era, Martin Luther King's word, but came to be associated with accommodationists; black was the word chosen by people of African heritage who rebelled against the accommodationists, and wanted America to know they weren't going along with gradual change; there was also African- American, which emphasized the duality of heritage and citizenship. There's another word for people of African descent that is widely acknowledge to be offensive. But means he same as the rest, with a very different connotation.

What were really talking about is labeling people. A toaster won't take offense being called an appliance. But someone of African descent likely knows the connotations of the above words - maybe not all of it, but enough to be offended when it contradicts their understanding of themselves.

In the transsexual community, they've started referring to "cis" men and women. Cisgendered refers to people whose gender matches that which they were assigned at birth. Transgendered refers to people whose gender doesn't match. While I recognize the value of such a term, to the very core of my being I don't identify as cisgendered, or cismale, or a cisman, or a man with any kind of prefix. No one has the right to label me with any of these terms and expect me accept it. Maybe in a few years - or decades - I'll change my mind. Or not. Maybe future generations will come to accept the term. Or not.

Straight was originally a term gay people used for heterosexuals. I think the word heterosexuals used for themselves at the time was "normal." They probably didn't fully understand the implications of their word choice. They were just using the dictionary definitions.

No one has a right to force a label on me. I don't care what the dictionary says. You can refer to me as a cismale because - someday - I may meet the criteria of a dictionary definition (It's in Wikipedia). But I have every right to reject the label.

 

[Matsi]

If you want to suck cock or want your cock sucked by another guy, I don't consider you straight, just in denial. :wink:

 

[td400]

No one ever answers this, but ill ask again anyway...

How far does this go?

Can I call myself king of England And axpect to be treated as such?

Can I be devoutly Muslim, but call myself a Hindu?

Can I call myself a vegetarian if my diet is 100% carnivorous?

At what point does "allowing" every precious snowflake call themselves whatever they want become ridiculous?

King of England isn't as black and white as you seem to think. Many people have tried to claim the title. When the Tudors took the throne, their claim was tenuous at best. After Richard III died, they launched what we might call a PR campaign today, claiming Richard III was a very bad king and they would do better. It worked. So you may want to hire a PR firm in your quest to be regent.

I'm not certain if Muhammed ever restricted his followers from calling themselves Hindus, but, the way things are now, I would think you could be beheaded for it. Certainly you could try it, but expect dire consequences. In the US there are enough people who claim to be Christian without any evidence of Christ's presence in their lives, to make this seem obvious.

I'm not sure why you would want to call yourself a vegetarian if you're actually a carnivore - not even an omnivore. You would be served inedible dinners by well meaning friends. But, yes, you, can call yourself anything you want as long as you're willing to suffer the consequences.

Snowflakes have no consciousness. You can label them at will. The Inuit languages have long be reputed to have many more words for snow than languages originating in milder climates. This has been disputed - apparently they have generally the same number of words for snow as in English, but many more options for combining those words for far more subtle descriptions of snow than in English.

So you don't have to call a snowflake whatever it would like to be called, as it's inanimate, but there might be more accurate things to call it than a snowflake, because some people pay more attention to snow and have a more subtle understanding of it.