Weird gender attraction question

melmelw03 wrote: »

thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »

Peacekeepers, please intervene before I do a Hingle McCringleberry up in here. Because I'm close.

Or you could just step away...

lstrat115 wrote: »

thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »

_birdie__ wrote: »

thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »

Francl27 wrote: »

jenmar22 wrote: »

saragreen012 wrote: »

OP, you are the only one who gets to determine (and label) your sexuality. If you were to just reading through a list of sexualities, based only on what you've told us, demi-sexual may be the best fit.

Orrrr, OP, you could just not label it and just go with it.

Why is our society so obsessed with labels? It seems very odd to me that we desire to stick labels on very complex parts of who we are (everyone must have a sexuality label, a religious label, a political ideology label....blah)

Labeling/categorizing EVERYTHING is very anti-queer imo

I don't care about the label. I'm just trying to figure out what is 'normal' as a heterosexual person, and what could be sign of bisexuality. I suppose it's harder to figure out when you don't necessarily feel much sexual attraction for anyone though.

I think normal heterosexual is to be attracted strongly on a deep sexual level to people of the opposite sex, with a more neutral, curious or muted attraction to their own sex. Heterosexual women can say, wow, she is hot! And like her boobs, but or personality, but has no deep desire to pursue sex. That's who so many college girls can try out lesbianism and it doesn't stick. Because they are just heterosexual.

Bisexual, I think, I have a stronger desire to pursue sex with members of both sexes. This is different from overheated people who are "open for whatever," who actually strongly prefers one sex over the other.

Homosexuality is the polor opposite of heterosexuality, in that they have a strong desire to pursue sex with members of the same sex, although they can also "try out" heterosexuality.

These sexual labels are about actions. You can have hetero,homo,and bisexual "feelings" without acting on any of them.

Like I said earlier, it takes some age to know that navel gazing is detrimental to your happiness.

You are enough.

its so weird to me when people seem to think they understand all the people and all their disparate life experiences and their many choices based on both free will and circumstance and then distill it down to a paragraph

post it on the internet

like 'this is how people are, i put them in these groups, i categorize, file away, organize'

do you know how messy people are? like their minds and their histories? how is it possible to have so little information and think you know

but the worst part
the part that makes it bad and not just ignorant
is when people tell you individually that their experience is different or their history is different from the narrative you created and you deny them

like

they can't exist if they don't fit into the way you've organized people in your head

Because unless you reached out and helped a lesbian not get pummelled by authorities, or weep for your gay friend having sex in an alley with a stranger behind a porn shop running his way toward self-destruction, or pleading with a relative to stop putting herself in dangerous situations with men, don't lecture me.

I think that you are proving her point. None of us know anyone else's entire story. You listed off these things but how do you know she hasn't experienced them as well? You don't.

GnothiSeauton23 wrote: »

thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »

_MistahJ_ wrote: »

thisonetimeatthegym wrote: »

_MistahJ_ wrote: »

Deep thoughts from a shallow mind. You categorized all people into three, poorly constructed, stereotypes. Please educate me on what causes homosexuality and bisexuality while you're gracing with your vast knowledge. Try to use coherent sentences, proper spelling and grammar as well. Oh, you lose points for citing Wikipedia as a reference.

I believe what I quoted earlier was the LGBT foundation. Not a liberal enough source for you? Are they too shallow a source for your depth?


Here's a dictionary for you to spew your hangry on:

col·lo·qui·al·ism
kəˈlōkwēəˌlizəm

a word or phrase that is not formal or literary, typically one used in ordinary or familiar conversation.
the use of ordinary or familiar words or phrases.

So, just as I expected, not an intelligent thought of your own.

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser."
Socrates

I find it interesting you would consider that slander when literally the majority of the post you referenced you did in fact copy verbatim from the site

---

The LGBT foundation is not exactly Westboro, which is where you can find out more about lesbian bed death.

http://lgbt.foundation/lesbian-bed-death

"If you’re lucky enough to be unaware of the term, “lesbian bed death” is when lesbians in long-term relationships either stop having sex altogether or have it very infrequently. Coined by Pepper Schwartz in 1983, it has its own Wikipedia page debating whether it’s a lesbophobic myth or a genuine problem and there's even a rock band of the same name! The general consensus is that whilst there may be statistics to indicate “bed death” is more prevalent in lesbian relationships, couples of all orientations experience it.

So is there any reason that female same-sex couples may be more likely to stop having sex? Well, maybe. Combine two menstrual cycles and (eventually) two menopauses, or even one of each, and there’s a lot of fluctuating hormones that could lead to sex drives dropping off. "