Sucking straight friend....

[td400]

Matsi, what's he in denial about? Happily married guy, kids, dog, tract house, two cars, once every six months he gets an itch for a good blow job. He goes to a bookstore after work - his wife knows about it or knows he does it but doesn't want to be told every time - takes care of it, goes home. He's not secretly gay, doesn't want to date a man, hug a man, kiss a man, fully enjoys sex with his wife. It's just a blow job. That's no reason to redefine yourself as bisexual for some. For some it is.

But what's he in denial about?

A lot of people, as part of their coming out process, call themselves bisexual for a while, and eventually come out as gay. As a result, it's common to assume everyone who calls themselves bisexual is really gay. But in denial.

Some people really are bisexual and are totally into sex with both men and women. Some people want something less. Like a good blow job with no strings. They've got all the strings they want.

 

[NIMBUS]

King of England isn't as black and white as you seem to think.

... and, just being picky, there is no such title in the British monarchy. There hasn't been a King or Queen of England for centuries!

The correct title is '... of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland ...' (abbreviated).

List of titles and honours of Queen Elizabeth II - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[AlteredEgo]

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.

The words have meanings. As a polyglot, I especially know the frustration of needing a word that doesn't exist. If there is no word that exists for something, a new word can be coined. But to co-opt a word that already has a meaning and to assign it a contradictory definition is inappropriate because it is horrendous for communication. A desire to engage in same sex sexual contact is anonymous to heterosexuality. A person with such a desire is NOT straight, no matter how pitifully he or she denies it. I never felt that stra ight nor bisexual was quite the right fit for my sexuality, so those are not the words I use except in the rare situation where I must be succinct AND avoid confusion. Generally, I describe my orientation with a qualifier, such as mostly straight, or somewhat bisexual, but when I feel my meaning will be understood, I use a term which seems more accurate- heteroflexible. I would welcome an even more acuurate, less hetero-normative descriptor in the future.

 

[Hatt_101]

I really hope everyone reads Alteredego's post because she couldn't have made it any more clear than that.

 

[td400]

I really hope everyone reads Alteredego's post because she couldn't have made it any more clear than that.

It's the same old twaddle: This works for me, therefore it's a universal truth.

Look beyond yourself. It would be easy enough to bow to the dictionary bullies. Why is it important to stand up to people like you?

 

[AlteredEgo]

It's the same old twaddle: This works for me, therefore it's a universal truth. Look beyond yourself.

It would be easy enough to bow to the dictionary bullies. Why is it important to stand up to people like you?

Has it occurred to you how it feels to be a heterosexual, who knows what it means for himself or herself, who expresses his or her description of orientation as such, and then have to deal with constantly being pressured by the LGBT community to accept alternate definitions? How annoying do you think it is to be told by others who want same sex sexual interactions with them that it doesn't mean they aren't sometimes attracted to the exact situation they have tried to express is the antithesis of their sexual desires because some other people who misuse the only words they have for describing themselves are in fact attracted to those situations, but are too scared or ashamed to use the correct words, or find better ways to describe themselves. This is not semantics, nor is it up for debate. Words either mean something, or they are completely useless. Same sex sexual activity is homosexual activity, and is not, by definition, heterosexual. That's why we have the words homosexual and bisexual, and where those words fail, new words should be sought.

 

[Hatt_101]

Did you read her post? There's isn't anything that can be said that she didn't already explain

Wrote the first part before she commented again. And again I say she explained this perfectly

 

[bloodshot69]

Has it occurred to you how it feels to be a heterosexual, who knows what it means for himself or herself, who expresses his or her description of orientation as such, and then have to deal with constantly being pressured by the LGBT community to accept alternate definitions? How annoying do you think it is to be told by others who want same sex sexual interactions with them that it doesn't mean they aren't sometimes attracted to the exact situation they have tried to express is the antithesis of their sexual desires because some other people who misuse the only words they have for describing themselves are in fact attracted to those situations, but are too scared or ashamed to use the correct words, or find better ways to describe themselves. This is not semantics, nor is it up for debate. Words either mean something, or they are completely useless. Same sex sexual activity is homosexual activity, and is not, by definition, heterosexual. That's why we have the words homosexual and bisexual, and where those words fail, new words should be sought.

Thank you for saying this. It's unbelievably frustrating that we have to continue to debate and defend what straight/heterosexual means.

To me it's all about respect. I've been in situations online and in the "real world" where gay men have tried to flirt with me. If a gay guy hits on me once, no harm, no foul, I'm not that sensitive. If he keeps hitting on me after I tell him I'm straight, and/or he tries to argue with me about what straight means, I lost patience quickly. I'm respectful of others and I expect the same respect in return. The gay community has made such huge strides in terms of acceptance and respect, which is great, I think bigotry in all forms is unacceptable, so why can't gay men show some of that same respect back to straight men? When you try to change the definition of a word it DOES create problems in some situations. If the gay community is too tone deaf to get that, then that's on you, but don't expect those of us who are straight to have much tolerance for it.

 

[TBOwi]

After I came out at 30 it shocked all my friends... After a bit a few of my guy friends wanted to try stuff & see if it what it was like.. A couple just plain and simple wanted to get off & there wasnt a chick around.. I dont see experimenting or just wanting to get off as making someone gay..

That being said.. I dont care what anyone wants to call it...

So lets hear some stories...

 

[td400]

The Moderation team asks that if you suspect another member of deceiving the membership through gender faking or other means, that you submit a detailed report and let us investigate, rather than make public accusations which could be construed as harassment of another member.

 

[td400]

I'm not as ugly as you imagine. I've had both men and women take an unwanted interest in me. It's not that there's a lack of clarity around what "straight" means. It's that - maybe for the first time - you're the object of desire for a human male. Pretty intense, huh? We're not like women! I have told men I'm straight. I've also told them I have a communicable disease, a personality disorder, and a fondness for knives. I've said I had to catch a plane, you'd best get away from my front door before the police arrive, and I don't know how you got on my third floor balcony, but use the same means to leave it before I release my pitbulls Killer and Satan on you. Men can be relentless. I suppose it's possible women can be too, but usually they require a severe personality disorder. There are a lot of men out there - of all sexual stripes - who think, If I find you hot, the feeling must be mutual. And for some straight men there's something of the "gay panic" when they flash their I'm Straight sheriff's badge and the little gays don't all scamper away.

Very attractive women have it way worse than you. Next time you're in a social situation with a very attractive woman ask her - in a way that doesn't sound like a creepy come on - about situations where a guy wouldn't take no for an answer. Straight men often try the argument But straight women are attracted to straight men - that's right, ALL WOMEN are available to a straight men (Including lesbians, and not just in woman on woman porn). But straight men aren't attracted to gay men. And that's when we veer toward sexism and homophobia.

AlterEgo, you said "...and then have to deal with constantly being pressured by the LGBT community to accept alternate definitions?" Really, the whole of the Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender community? Not just a handful of rude, maybe drunk, gay men having a lark online?

Bloodshot69, you said, " The gay community has made such huge strides in terms of acceptance and respect, which is great, I think bigotry in all forms is unacceptable, so why can't gay men show some of that same respect back to straight men?" So, the behavior of a very few gay men reflects on all gay men? That reminds me of the bad old days when black people were told to be a "credit to their race."

As for Why can't gay men show you the respect your heterosexuality deserves? Well, in fact, they do. Everyday. Think about how infrequently this happens in real life and how many gay men are out there NOT relentlessly coming on to you. Online has pretty much always been the wild west. That's why most sites have a mechanism for ignoring assholes - gay ones, straight ones, bisexual ones, transgender ones, etc.

I think the LGBT community has all the words it needs. The people who are still working out language are the ones on the periphery. The ones who aren't LGB or T full-stop. They're not likely the assholes bugging you online, playing flirtatious games. They're out there trying to figure it out.

 

[AlteredEgo]

You're obviously grasping at straws. I have had verification-style photos up in the past, and have met several members over the years. I'm a woman, and you're an ass for making a stupid assumption.

If you care enough/have the free time to explore my post history, you will see that though I describe myself as an attractive girl-next-door type facially, I have plenty of experience with street harassment from men, including the frequent refusal to let go of my hand if I allow it to be shaken, being followed, having a guy walk behind me mumbling the details of a sexual assault he wanted to perpetrate against me, etc. I haven't had a stranger show up at my house, probably because I do not go home when I'm being followed, but I have had them return to my job where they met me in the course of my work. At a swingers venue I have had problems to the extent that the man I was with had to dangle another man over the roof so I could get the photos he was secretly taking of me, and I had to convincingly threaten violence against another man who wouldn't stop trying to join in when I was fucking my dude. I've been fending off grown men who ought to know better since I was a child. I've also been persistent with a man who wasn't initially interested. Actually, I married him. I should have let it go though.

Anyway, your assertion that it is to simply be accepted as male behavior is both sexist and silly. That is not behavior to accept from anyone, nor does it invalidate my point that words mean what they mean, and the inappropriate co-opting of the word heterosexual by people who should really use a word that admits to their inclination toward same-sex dalliances creates inconvenience for those for whom the word heterosexual is the only accurate descriptor. Engaging in gay sex acts or desiring to is just not done by straight people.

Yes, there are men who don't take no for an answer. They see an opportunity as long as there is any glimmer of hope. However, they just want to sell themselves, not convince the woman of something false about her orientation based in the self-delusions of others.

 

[td400]

My apologies if I made a incorrect assumption. I tried to say it in a light-hearted vein, but I can see that it upset you.

My point is not that you have to accept abusive / harassing / boorish behavior from men. It's that abusive / harassing / boorish behavior comes usually from being the object of male desire. Being straight isn't a get out of jail free card anymore. And, maybe as an object lesson, it can make men more sensitive to what harassment feels like, not to specifically be harassed, but to understand it in these terms.

These harassing men aren't redefining the word "straight." They're using it as a pretext, an excuse to harass.

Others are living lives that don't fit neatly into the hetero/bi/homo boxes society laid out well over 100 years ago. They're the ones I would argue for.

(I apologize for my gender. It's tough being beautiful.)

 

[bloodshot69]

I'm not as ugly as you imagine. I've had both men and women take an unwanted interest in me. It's not that there's a lack of clarity around what "straight" means. It's that - maybe for the first time - you're the object of desire for a human male. Pretty intense, huh? We're not like women! I have told men I'm straight. I've also told them I have a communicable disease, a personality disorder, and a fondness for knives. I've said I had to catch a plane, you'd best get away from my front door before the police arrive, and I don't know how you got on my third floor balcony, but use the same means to leave it before I release my pitbulls Killer and Satan on you. Men can be relentless. I suppose it's possible women can be too, but usually they require a severe personality disorder. There are a lot of men out there - of all sexual stripes - who think, If I find you hot, the feeling must be mutual. And for some straight men there's something of the "gay panic" when they flash their I'm Straight sheriff's badge and the little gays don't all scamper away.

Very attractive women have it way worse than you. Next time you're in a social situation with a very attractive woman ask her - in a way that doesn't sound like a creepy come on - about situations where a guy wouldn't take no for an answer. Straight men often try the argument But straight women are attracted to straight men - that's right, ALL WOMEN are available to a straight men (Including lesbians, and not just in woman on woman porn). But straight men aren't attracted to gay men. And that's when we veer toward sexism and homophobia.

AlterEgo, you said "...and then have to deal with constantly being pressured by the LGBT community to accept alternate definitions?" Really, the whole of the Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender community? Not just a handful of rude, maybe drunk, gay men having a lark online?

Bloodshot69, you said, " The gay community has made such huge strides in terms of acceptance and respect, which is great, I think bigotry in all forms is unacceptable, so why can't gay men show some of that same respect back to straight men?" So, the behavior of a very few gay men reflects on all gay men? That reminds me of the bad old days when black people were told to be a "credit to their race."

As for Why can't gay men show you the respect your heterosexuality deserves? Well, in fact, they do. Everyday. Think about how infrequently this happens in real life and how many gay men are out there NOT relentlessly coming on to you. Online has pretty much always been the wild west. That's why most sites have a mechanism for ignoring assholes - gay ones, straight ones, bisexual ones, transgender ones, etc.

I think the LGBT community has all the words it needs. The people who are still working out language are the ones on the periphery. The ones who aren't LGB or T full-stop. They're not likely the assholes bugging you online, playing flirtatious games. They're out there trying to figure it out.

So basically you're condoning being an asshole. I have sisters, I've had to step in and ask guys to back off more than once when they weren't taking no for an answer. It's unacceptable when assholes do it to women and it's unacceptable when assholes do it to other men, period.

 

[td400]

It's unacceptable when assholes do it to women and it's unacceptable when assholes do it to other men, period.

Exactly. It's no more or less unacceptable when a man is an asshole to another man, than when a man is an asshole to a woman.

But maybe - just maybe - when a man is an asshole to a woman, it's because he's defining her as straight, which means she's attracted to men. Therefore she's attracted to him.

If only words weren't so rigid in their meanings....

 

[td400]

My apologies if you came here looking for JO material.

Anybody want to get us back on track for the OP's intent?

 

[AlteredEgo]

Exactly. It's no more or less unacceptable when a man is an asshole to another man, than when a man is an asshole to a woman.

But maybe - just maybe - when a man is an asshole to a woman, it's because he's defining her as straight, which means she's attracted to men. Therefore she's attracted to him.

If only words weren't so rigid in their meanings....

Don't be obtuse. You know full well that straight doesn't mean attracted to all members of the opposite sex. It means sexually orientated exclusively toward the opposite sex. Yes, words do have very rigid meanings, but one man's pretense at stupidity does not alter that meaning.

 

[Silvertip]

I am very sorry to disagree with all you word Nazis about the "rigidity" of the meaning of "straight", but I must vehemently do so nonetheless. The brand of heterosexuality that Hatt_101, AlteredEgo and the rest of your ilk adhere to is not "straight", it is "homophobic". Any man or woman who leads a straight life with romantic and passionate feelings for only the opposite sex remains "straight" in my book even if he or she has the occasional "dalliance" into a physical homosexual act.

"Ever", "never", "any" and "only" are absolutes. "Straight" is not an absolute. Whether you like it or not there are varying degrees of "straightness" within the realm of what constitutes a straight sexual orientation. As a postulation consider a man who is totally virgin, having had no sexual contact with anyone, and becomes a Catholic priest. He is a good and sinless priest who does everything by the book. He lives out his entire life without ever having any sexual contact with another human being. By your word-Nazi definition he would be "asexual". Yet he may well have very strong sexual feelings for the opposite sex, same sex or both sexes and therefore actually be straight, gay or bisexual. He just chooses to exercise his willpower to not act on his sexual attraction.

A straight individual can "dally" into a homosexual act or acts without invalidating their true orientation.

To say otherwise is to say that a person cannot be called a vegan if they suckled their mother's teat as a baby or were fed Pablum™ after being weaned. And to say otherwise is to say that anyone who is not a teetotaler is an alcoholic.

 

[Brisler]

Td400, okay, I'm not bringing anything new to the table, but do you believe there are people who live up to the current definition of heterosexual? I mean, people who are attracted to the opposite sex exclusively? If not, then I think I understand your posts. If yes, then what's the problem with the word? If such people exist, we need a word for them. We need it to be able to communicate. Simple as that.

All the taboos and social pressure to live by a hetero-normative code, that is the problem. It is a problem that people have to fear for societies reaction if they choose to stand by their sexuality. The ones who claim to be straight while having same sex relations, those are the ones who are concerned with labels, they are the ones who try to fit into a box that doesn't really exist, and rightfully so as their world is likely to shatter we're they to go public with their sexuality. This is a problem of discourse, not about words having too rigid of a definition. Words are rigid. They need to be. Don't blame the words, cause frankly it makes no sense. Put that energy into making this world a better place, where men don't have to fear for their lives if they have a preference for sucking dick. We need to arrive at a point where people don't care one bit about another's sexuality (in a non sexual context), and changing the dictionary isn't the way. Trust me, the labels will
Be there always. They are there for a reason.

 

[firsttimecaller]

A straight individual can "dally" into a homosexual act or acts without invalidating their true orientation.

To say otherwise is to say that a person cannot be called a vegan if they suckled their mother's teat as a baby or were fed Pablum™ after being weaned. And to say otherwise is to say that anyone who is not a teetotaler is an alcoholic.

So, can someone have a drink once a week and still accurately claim to be a teetotaler?