I think we have a difference of opinion as to what constitutes sexuality. I would agree that the "act" is a homosexual act. But I don't think engaging in a homosexual act automatically makes you homosexual, even in the moment, any more than I believe engaging in a Heterosexual act makes you straight.
To me, sexuality is about sexual attraction, not about having sex. Virgins can, and normally do, have a sexuality. I would guess that you considered yourself straight, even before you had sex. Having sex for the first time with a girl didn't "make you straight". Same for me, I knew that I was gay long before I had sex with a man. Having sex with a man didn't "make me gay". I am sexually attracted to men, not to women, that is what makes me gay
Now, I could go out tonight meet a random girl, and have sex with her. I am more than capable of thinking of something else to get the motor running. But I would not be sexually attracted to her. For me, the experience would be little more than masturbation with the girl as a sex toy. Even if I did this, I would still have been gay before, I would be gay during, and I would be gay after, because I would still be attracted to men, not women.
It is the same thing here. If the guy is straight, and sexually attracted to women, not men, using someone's mouth as a masturbatory aid would not make him gay. He would be the same straight person before during and after.
I agree, the act itself does not define a person's sexuality. But in order willfully to permit/participate in a homosexual act, you can no longer define your self as being 100% straight, at least not for that period in time that you thought it was okay.
and I apologize in advance for using the following scenario , I know it has no correlation, but say a man was sexually frustrated and resorted to use a rubber duck to relieve himself that man would be a rubberduckyphile at least for that duration of time that he consented to be pleasured by a rubber duck even if it had all the parts needed, the parts were attached to a rubber duck.
as a straight male you would Not consent to the askers behavior under any circumstance.
It is not the fact that he did the act with another man, but the fact that he consented to do it that makes him gay/not straight.
I am unsure of your sexuality and It's none of my business, but as a straight fellow, I would not consent to the asker's behavior even if we were the only living things on earth. no more than I would do it with a duck.
Well if you read my response you would know my sexuality. I said right in my post...
"To me, sexuality is about sexual attraction, not about having sex. Virgins can, and normally do, have a sexuality. I would guess that you considered yourself straight, even before you had sex. Having sex for the first time with a girl didn't "make you straight". Same for me, I knew that I was gay long before I had sex with a man. Having sex with a man didn't "make me gay". I am sexually attracted to men, not to women, that is what makes me gay
Now, I could go out tonight meet a random girl, and have sex with her. I am more than capable of thinking of something else to get the motor running. But I would not be sexually attracted to her. For me, the experience would be little more than masturbation with the girl as a sex toy. Even if I did this, I would still have been gay before, I would be gay during, and I would be gay after, because I would still be attracted to men, not women."
There is no way you will convince me that using as girl as a form of masturbation makes me straight. I know very well that I am not straight.
Also your rubber duck scenario doesn't work for me. People do use rubber objects to get off. Flesh lights and pocket pussies are popular sex toys. If a man masturbates with a flesh light it does not make him a "fleshlightaphile".
I'm sorry didn't mean to offend, in my fictional scenario think of the rubber duck as another gender(it's only a stand in due to lack of appropriate scenarios.)
I get your point and agree with you, having sex with a man would not make you gay, but wanting to do it ,i.e. consenting to do it would. right ?
I can not claim if the same is true for a gay man sleeping with a woman(would that make him straight or not) but for a straight man to do it, he would no longer be straight for wanting to sleep with a man. until he decided/realized that he only wanted to sleep with women.
our wordings may be different, but I think we're both saying pretty much the same thing
You have not offended me at all. But no, we are saying very different things.
You think a straight man has to be gay to engage in a meaningless sex act with a man. But a gay man does not have to be straight to engage in a meaningless sex act with a woman?
They are exactly the same thing to me. What is the difference in your mind?
I am not trying to offend you. You are entitled to your own views and opinions, you don't have to agree with me. I am only trying to understand your views and opinions because I don't get the double standard you seem to be applying.
though they may seem the same they quite aren't especially from a straight person's point of view.
try thinking of it like virginity(not a good example, but I rarely have had any today)
being straight is like a virgin, you can only be straight if you have not slept with a guy or to an extent thought about sleeping with a guy, everybody is considered straight unless proved otherwise. if a person who was not straight declared himself straight you must accept their word. but if you claim to be straight but fancy men, or do not mind sleeping with men, you can not be considered straight.
since having gay thoughts makes you un-straight, just like getting naked and doing stuff would mean that you are no longer a virgin even if you really want to be one.
I apologize again for my very terrible comparisons and such but thanks for replying to my comments all this time, I hope I haven't been disturbing you or keeping you from any important work. =P
I don't agree that everyone is straight until proved otherwise. I don't even know what proof would be. There is no point in my life where I would consider myself straight. I did not prove myself otherwise.
I feel like what you are really saying is that you personally as a straight man could never see yourself doing something like that, and you have determined in your mind that if you are straight and you would not do it, than no straight man would.
But I just don't believe that. There are straight men that are comfortable enough with their sexuality that they can separate sexuality from the act. They are horny, a mouth is available, and they know a mouth feels good. It is all about getting off. They disassociate the person, close their eyes, and imagine a woman or what ever they want is on their dick and just enjoy the pleasure. It is not much different than a guy imaging another hot girl while getting a bj from an ugly chick he is not attracted to. It is all about them and has NOTHING to do with the person hanging off their dick.
You might not be comfortable with that scenario, and that is cool, many straight guys aren't. But there are also many straight guys that are comfortable with it. Though because of fear that people will make assumptions they are gay, very few will speak of it openly.
he chose option 1 , hence he Chose to have sex with a man, that cannot be considered straight behavior, as a straight person I would not choose option 1 unless I had some acceptance for sleeping with the same gender, in which case I would not be 100% straight to begin with.
IIN to let a gay guy suck your dick even though you are straight?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I think we have a difference of opinion as to what constitutes sexuality. I would agree that the "act" is a homosexual act. But I don't think engaging in a homosexual act automatically makes you homosexual, even in the moment, any more than I believe engaging in a Heterosexual act makes you straight.
To me, sexuality is about sexual attraction, not about having sex. Virgins can, and normally do, have a sexuality. I would guess that you considered yourself straight, even before you had sex. Having sex for the first time with a girl didn't "make you straight". Same for me, I knew that I was gay long before I had sex with a man. Having sex with a man didn't "make me gay". I am sexually attracted to men, not to women, that is what makes me gay
Now, I could go out tonight meet a random girl, and have sex with her. I am more than capable of thinking of something else to get the motor running. But I would not be sexually attracted to her. For me, the experience would be little more than masturbation with the girl as a sex toy. Even if I did this, I would still have been gay before, I would be gay during, and I would be gay after, because I would still be attracted to men, not women.
It is the same thing here. If the guy is straight, and sexually attracted to women, not men, using someone's mouth as a masturbatory aid would not make him gay. He would be the same straight person before during and after.
--
JM13087
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I agree, the act itself does not define a person's sexuality. But in order willfully to permit/participate in a homosexual act, you can no longer define your self as being 100% straight, at least not for that period in time that you thought it was okay.
and I apologize in advance for using the following scenario , I know it has no correlation, but say a man was sexually frustrated and resorted to use a rubber duck to relieve himself that man would be a rubberduckyphile at least for that duration of time that he consented to be pleasured by a rubber duck even if it had all the parts needed, the parts were attached to a rubber duck.
as a straight male you would Not consent to the askers behavior under any circumstance.
It is not the fact that he did the act with another man, but the fact that he consented to do it that makes him gay/not straight.
I am unsure of your sexuality and It's none of my business, but as a straight fellow, I would not consent to the asker's behavior even if we were the only living things on earth. no more than I would do it with a duck.
--
VinnyB
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Well if you read my response you would know my sexuality. I said right in my post...
"To me, sexuality is about sexual attraction, not about having sex. Virgins can, and normally do, have a sexuality. I would guess that you considered yourself straight, even before you had sex. Having sex for the first time with a girl didn't "make you straight". Same for me, I knew that I was gay long before I had sex with a man. Having sex with a man didn't "make me gay". I am sexually attracted to men, not to women, that is what makes me gay
Now, I could go out tonight meet a random girl, and have sex with her. I am more than capable of thinking of something else to get the motor running. But I would not be sexually attracted to her. For me, the experience would be little more than masturbation with the girl as a sex toy. Even if I did this, I would still have been gay before, I would be gay during, and I would be gay after, because I would still be attracted to men, not women."
There is no way you will convince me that using as girl as a form of masturbation makes me straight. I know very well that I am not straight.
Also your rubber duck scenario doesn't work for me. People do use rubber objects to get off. Flesh lights and pocket pussies are popular sex toys. If a man masturbates with a flesh light it does not make him a "fleshlightaphile".
--
JM13087
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I'm sorry didn't mean to offend, in my fictional scenario think of the rubber duck as another gender(it's only a stand in due to lack of appropriate scenarios.)
I get your point and agree with you, having sex with a man would not make you gay, but wanting to do it ,i.e. consenting to do it would. right ?
I can not claim if the same is true for a gay man sleeping with a woman(would that make him straight or not) but for a straight man to do it, he would no longer be straight for wanting to sleep with a man. until he decided/realized that he only wanted to sleep with women.
our wordings may be different, but I think we're both saying pretty much the same thing
=]
--
VinnyB
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
JM13087
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
You have not offended me at all. But no, we are saying very different things.
You think a straight man has to be gay to engage in a meaningless sex act with a man. But a gay man does not have to be straight to engage in a meaningless sex act with a woman?
They are exactly the same thing to me. What is the difference in your mind?
I am not trying to offend you. You are entitled to your own views and opinions, you don't have to agree with me. I am only trying to understand your views and opinions because I don't get the double standard you seem to be applying.
--
JM13087
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Not offended here either.
You seem to have understood my point perfectly.
though they may seem the same they quite aren't especially from a straight person's point of view.
try thinking of it like virginity(not a good example, but I rarely have had any today)
being straight is like a virgin, you can only be straight if you have not slept with a guy or to an extent thought about sleeping with a guy, everybody is considered straight unless proved otherwise. if a person who was not straight declared himself straight you must accept their word. but if you claim to be straight but fancy men, or do not mind sleeping with men, you can not be considered straight.
since having gay thoughts makes you un-straight, just like getting naked and doing stuff would mean that you are no longer a virgin even if you really want to be one.
I apologize again for my very terrible comparisons and such but thanks for replying to my comments all this time, I hope I haven't been disturbing you or keeping you from any important work. =P
--
VinnyB
8 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
I don't agree that everyone is straight until proved otherwise. I don't even know what proof would be. There is no point in my life where I would consider myself straight. I did not prove myself otherwise.
I feel like what you are really saying is that you personally as a straight man could never see yourself doing something like that, and you have determined in your mind that if you are straight and you would not do it, than no straight man would.
But I just don't believe that. There are straight men that are comfortable enough with their sexuality that they can separate sexuality from the act. They are horny, a mouth is available, and they know a mouth feels good. It is all about getting off. They disassociate the person, close their eyes, and imagine a woman or what ever they want is on their dick and just enjoy the pleasure. It is not much different than a guy imaging another hot girl while getting a bj from an ugly chick he is not attracted to. It is all about them and has NOTHING to do with the person hanging off their dick.
You might not be comfortable with that scenario, and that is cool, many straight guys aren't. But there are also many straight guys that are comfortable with it. Though because of fear that people will make assumptions they are gay, very few will speak of it openly.
The asker had a choice:
1) he could consent, say Yes
or
2) refuse, say No
he chose option 1 , hence he Chose to have sex with a man, that cannot be considered straight behavior, as a straight person I would not choose option 1 unless I had some acceptance for sleeping with the same gender, in which case I would not be 100% straight to begin with.