And to make it relevant, just close your eyes. You can’t be sure it was a man’s penis or butt or mouth. No need for any questions about your sexuality in the morning.
I knew this guy. He always wanted to suck my Schlong or f with me. Told him i ain't gay. He replied he neither, he just finds vaginas disgusting (Women in general, Vaginas just being the "most disgusting" part) and schlongs beautiful, hence it's not gay at all. He just prefers guys coz they have said dingdongs.
Told him that was somehow very gay. He got really really really pissed at me for hinting he might be gay. He hates gays and find them repulsive.
It was at this point that i realized, he verbally held me hostage. How to reply to that? I didn't know.
EDIT:
That wasn't a joke or satire, he was dead-serious about it. That level of cognitive dissonance is hard to find, even in religious people :-)
The question that now comes to my mind:
What is gay exactly? Is this specifically just when you like dicks? Or are also looks coming into okay here?
Are you also gay if you like people who look like women but have a penis? If yes, are you then straight if you prefer people that look like men but have a vagina?
Afaik there are also people that have both. If you fall in love with them without having ever seen their genitals, are you then still automatically gay?
Man, the more society progresses in open and honest conversations about sexuality, the more I'm sure that "spectrum" doesn't even begin to do justice to the vast, bizarre complexity of human sexuality.
It's more like...that crazy 3 tier chess they play in Star Trek.
Yeah, I even felt weird using the word spectrum. I'm visualizing a 3-dimensional gradient where each individual point in space reflects a unique sexuality. It's about as unique to you as your fingerprint. It's insane to me that we had such black and white categories for so much of our history.
There are actually different models of talking about sexuallity. The one most common that you know where there's stuff like gay, lesbian, bi... But when you have trans folks that doesn't nessisarily give much credence to genital preferences. It's more a reference to the cultural gender expectations. A cis man and a pre-medical trans man is still gay where a cis man and a trans woman in the same situation is straight... But when you are non-binary this model doesn't serve because if I am culturally neither male or female is me liking a specific presentation gay or straight? If you're defaulting to what my body type is then neither is correct. I am not pan or bi because I don't like both and I am not straight or gay because those things frame relationships between physical sexes not fitting neatly into the changing cultural landscape of gender.
The other less used model just describes what someone finds sexy. A gynophile is attracted to feminine presentation, androphiles like the masculine, Skoliophiles are into non-binary people and ambiphiles like all.
It is a little 4D chess but it's easier to pick up when you don't have to account for old rules.
It's an n-dimensional spectra, but I'm not really sure what n is in this case. It's at least two, with one dimension being masculine/feminine and the other being penis/vagina, but there are way more things to sexual preference than that. We need one for dominant/submissive, multiple dimensions for hair color, maybe age, and all kinds of other factors. Every person will have a range of preference for all of these, and they aren't just the far ends.
Spectrum is fine and all, but gay is gay. If gay would mean many things, the word would be useless. It already became useless for its original meaning, let's not kill it again :-)
Love is multiple things and is still meaningful for us.
Theoretically I can see somebody not being attracted to guys, as in masculine people, or just males, but still being turned on by penises as we see in OP's example. That person might not call themselves gay since they wouldn't want to be in a relationship with any guys, but might be interested in a hookup with a trans woman who still had their dick.
Maybe their is some nuance in what being gay is or there is room for another descriptor for this phenomenon.
Edit: reading below, this person might be hetero-romantic and homo-sexual.
Not judging or anything, i never cared who wanted to make love to whatever.
But he really wanted dudes. Women were "disgusting". whatever floats ones boat, but this is simply the definition of gay, if you like the term or not. It's just a word describing a preference.
A dude just liking cocks on a dude's body and person and gender, then it's plain gay.
Guess in his case (my generation, we both being genx) it was just the typical upbringing that said gay=bad. Guess the shit stucks deeply, hence his cognitive dissonance and extreme adversity to gayness.
If gay would mean many things, the word would be useless.
Yeah, totally. I mean, that's definitely why there aren't any words at all in the entire English language that have more than one strictly defined meaning, and that meaning has never, ever changed.
Well in his case it wasn't just the dick itself. Women were "disgusting". So the dick needed to be attached to a manly man.
What exactly is gay? To me it's when a manly man likes manly men.
If you'd fall in love with a woman and THEN see her male genitals, it wouldn't be gay. She just was an ass to not tell you earlier 😁
If you'd see both genitals or none, it wouldn't be either. And yes, there always have been those with both or none.
Sucking a cock doesn’t make you gay. Only wanting to suck dicks and finding women unattractive and NBs unappealing? Yeah, you might be pretty gay. But if you just want to fuck with the occasional dick sometimes? You’re not gay. There are a million different variations that don’t make you gay. Some of them involve penises, sure.
Yeah man. If you only find other handlebars aesthetically pleasing and maybe just want to briefly touch them that's definitely not gay. Is it gay to touch your own suspensorium? No difference and very straight.
To which the answer is that there is no gay, no straight, nothing makes any fucking sense, everyone is bisexual (or asexual) but also there is no bisexuality (or asexuality)
I honestly have no idea what it is, if it's society, if it's internal, no idea, but I'm absolutely 100% not aroused by men at all, and just knowing a m2f transgender person once had the biological parts of a man is enough to kill any arousal that could have been.
Not that it's a common question, but my "answer" to "could I ever date/sleep with a transgender person" is "I'm not mature enough to be comfortable with that." I blame myself in some way, but I am "repulsed" by the idea (not repulsed by the person, just the thought of intercourse)
I hope it doesn't need to be said, but just to be sure: I want everyone to be able to live their best life and to be happy and accepted, I have no hate for transgender people or anyone (except billlionares, private insurance companies and maybe some landlords)
Dude. Who doesn't like tatas? I understand not liking genitals -- there's nothing particularly visually attractive about most V's or P's, when you're not aroused. But boobs? Just about everyone can agree that boobs are attractive.
This begs the question (possibly a stupid question on my part since I'm not very knowledgeable on the topic): if he had a genital preference for wangs, and a sexual preference for trans women, would he in fact be considered straight, or is there another classification for this?
Dude, i honestly don't know if a guy liking an mtf-trans with a dong is considered gay.
I would prefer said mtf-trans-with-dong over a manly-man-with-vayajay. I consider myself straight. If i HAD to choose which of those only 2 alternatives would be more attractive.
So I'd guess it's more the person/gender than the primary genital.
But what do i know :-)
here's the thing, there is a perceived idea that being gay means that you fit into "gay culture" and all the aesthetic ideas that go along with it, which is not exactly what's real (at least, this is my perception as a mostly straight ally).
So these guys think, I don't like the way the sterotype of a gay person behaves in my head. I don't belong in that group of people. Sure I want to suck a dick, but I don't want to go see a drag show or act like a woman (not my opinion here) so I'm not gay. I just want to jerk off with my buds.
that's why they had to come up with the definition of MSM. People basically think "gay? I'm not gay! I fucked Jim in the ass yesterday, but that doesn't mean I'm gay."
"My understanding was that gay people are just like everybody else–decent, hard-working people who care about their communities and have loving, committed relationships," Weber said. "But, after this terrifying spectacle, I don't want them teaching my kids or living in my neighborhood."
most people are probably bisexual anyways, i mean back in ye olden days anything with a hole was prone to penetration because society accepted it (don't ask about lesbian sex tho)
I wonder how many of them have little to no sexual or romantic interest in persons presenting as their gender? Like, I'm trying to mentally map someone who likes to engage in sexual activities with someone of the same gender and yet only really have an attraction to a part of that gender, rather than be attracted to the entirety of the person as many of us are.
I like dicks a lot more than dudes in general, I think. Dudes still kinda hot but dicks are aweaome. I just go by bi, pan might be more appropriate? Idk. Whatever
I’m heteroromantic and pansexual, if that’s what you mean. I’m down to have sex and attracted sexually to people, regardless of their gender, but I don’t want to date women. I don’t get butterflies about women (maybe once or twice in my life), and I just don’t have the romantic pull towards them that I do men.
My husband is actually about the same. He’s never dated or really wanted to date men, but he does enjoy having sex with them. He tends to just identify as bi (as do I, if I’m not being really specific), but also rarely volunteers any information about it, which most people assume means straight, especially given he has a wife.
This makes sense. I've struggled to follow the different monikers and identities. Fully, I just accept people and recognize and respect what they want to be identified as to the best of my ability, and apologize if I forget as I adjust. Thank you for putting terms to it. I didn't realize Pansexual meant that in context.
Yeah, the labels are a lot, which is why I generally just go with bi. I do always get a twinge, because it’s a pretty big barrier that homophobes think LGBTQA+ people are perverts, and we need to break down the idea that it’s all about sex, but then we actually use the terms that are all about sex, but the people who know enough to know that aren’t likely to be homophobic.
Pan vs. bi is also a sticky situation, because going by etymology, bi people should be attracted to two gender poles and pan people to the entire spectrum. Most (I hope) bi people reject this and don’t see a difference between bisexuality and pansexuality, but some transphobes use it as a dog whistle. I tend to ID as bi, but if I get any kind of terf vibes, I’ll specify that I’m pan.
Fully, I just accept people and recognize and respect what they want to be identified as to the best of my ability, and apologize if I forget as I adjust.
This is why the term “Men who have sex with Men” or MSM was coined. Trying to study the spread of HIV/AIDS was impossible before that because these men don’t identify as gay.
Fucking Sconnies. Culver's vegetarian burger option is a cheese puck, which sounds great but in reality an impossible burger would taste better. But it's Culver's and they're all about the cheese. I've stopped eating there because the whole thing feels like an insult in a way and I feel like a fat ass if I just order a large cheese curd and fries.
I've ran into cis women on Grindr. My mom called them the super non-PC term "fag hags." That's the bad F word for those on Lemmy World cuz I'm pretty sure that word is censored on that instance.
The non-offensive word I have seen used for a person who seeks out relationships with homosexual people despite being the opposite gender is “beard”. This is derived from the fact that it helps the male in the relationship present outwardly as a “real man” with a “normal relationship” in settings/societies where homosexuality is not considered acceptable to one degree or another. Also, sometimes homosexual couples of opposite genders will “beard” for each other in a mutually-beneficial dynamic.
edit: it seems spoiler text doesn’t work right on a lot of mobile apps, including voyager. Anyways: watch For All Mankind. It’s great.
I'm not sure they're actually the same thing tho. Beards are used by gay men to seem straight. The term my mom used was against the women who just had a fetish for gay men.
Yeah, a beard is a mutually beneficial arrangement. You won't see straight women trying to pick up gay men on Grindr because they want to be a beard. They'll be doing it because they fetishize turning them straight or whatever.
Also, sometimes homosexual couples of opposite genders will “beard” for each other in a mutually-beneficial dynamic.
My parents had some friends who did exactly this for Prom since every attendee was required to have an opposite-sex date. They met the requirement to go through the front door then promptly split and found their actual date for the night (or their friend group if they were single)
Lemmy.world censors only “faggot” and the N word. Lemmy.ml censors “bitch” and various slurs. I believe their users can still see comments with these words in (?), though the censored words are removed if they post them themselves
Well the first one has basically one meaning that's derogatory (including the definition of a bundle of sticks used for kindling; that's literally why it became a slur as it implies you want to burn them) while the three letter word is also slang for a cigarette in much of the world.
The 6-letter version means a bundle of sticks, or a stick, which is how it came to mean cigarette. The 3-letter version is an abbreviation of the 6-letter version. Both of them mean cigarette, and both of them are an anti-gay slur.
I’m no historian or etymologist but I saw one on YouTube once who said a very similar term was used for poor older women who supposedly went around hunched over all the time picking up sticks for firewood, and then was later transferred to homosexual men to imply they were weak, effeminate, outcast, etc
Lemmy instances are able to censor words; it can’t be set per community. When viewing a comment from an instance that censors some word, that word will be replaced with “removed”. This applies to both comments sent by users of that instance, and comments sent by external users.
Bizarrely, the reason I’d asked the question at all is because your comment that I’d replied to was rendered as a top-level comment rather than a reply to another comment.
So I was wondering if, rather than individual words being censored, entire posts/comments were being hidden, but not replies to them.
I guess that’s actually just a bug or something, because I can see what you were replying to now.
I’ve had this experience of feeling like I’m not seeing the full thread / that someone is replying to something I can’t see a handful of times. It’s a weird one.
