Sexuality and Gender

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-08 09:32pm

You know, asshole, there's a reason it's called a private message.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-08 09:36pm

Oh hell he posted your PM!!!?? *looks over authors of posts*

KOJIKUN!!

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-08 09:40pm

sorry, removed.

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-08 10:08pm

I have been thinking about this long and hard all day (no jokes please). I have come to this conclusion in my mind. Sexual orentation is a prefernces, thats it, I do not believe there is a "gay" gene out there. Its the same thing as liking brunettes over blonde, or liking slim people over heavier people. Some people have stronger prefernces than others, and will not waver. I know some guys who refuse to go out with fat girls, or some that only go out with asian chicks. I see this the same way as with what sex you prefer, and I think it is as simple as that. If you put what sex a partner are on the top of your list of prefernces (like most of us do unfortunately), then you will not be able to swing the other way so to speak. Thats the way I see it, and my best explianation I can see. I still don't see why people who are gay (or straight for that matter), swing the other way.

I like dark haired girls, and I am going out with a blonde, because that is not the most important thing to me, her personality is. Part of the reason I have a hard time understanding why a person can only be one way is 3 out of my 6 girlfriends have been Bi. The one I am seeing right now is much more attracted to females than males, but she is with me. She rarely checks out guys, but when ever a cute little red head or asian girl walks by, I bust her all the time. I do not believe sexual orentaition is set in stone, like many of you make it out to be (going either way, straight or gay), I see it just as a prefernce. I doubt I could ever like a heavy woman, but if the personality was right, and the circumstance were right you never know. I doubt I could ever like a guy, but if the personality was right, and the circumstance were right you never know.

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2003-08-08 10:16pm

Sam or I wrote:I like dark haired girls, and I am going out with a blonde, because that is not the most important thing to me, her personality is. Part of the reason I have a hard time understanding why a person can only be one way is 3 out of my 6 girlfriends have been Bi.

That's probably because there's more bisexuals out there than either straights or gays.
When did you choose to be heterosexual, and why?

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-08 10:31pm

I didn't choose it, but it has always been a prefernce. Like I did not choose to like dark haired girls, but I do. Are either of these bendable, I know at least one is. I have never felt that way about a guy, but I am not saying it cannot happen (unlikely, but I am not saying it is impossible). I do not consider myself Bi-sexual by any means, I have never even thought of looking at guys like that, or larger women for that matter. (Is not politically correct, so sue me, we all have prefernces, I happen to like thin girls). Is it possible for me to change, I believe it is, but I don't want to try, I don't have the will to try.

This brings up another topic (off the subject sort of), is not liking larger people shallow if you are not physically attracted to them?

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 12:01am

Sam, your conclusion is false, because we're SHOWN there to be a genetic cause. Thus it is irrelevant what you've concluded.

But people, take this to the other threads on homosexuality, I wrote the essay to make you discuss what gender means and how the flexibility of gender affects your attraction to people and your own sexual identity.

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-09 12:40am

It has been SHOWN that other (not all) prefernce are biological as well.

My point still stands.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 12:56am

Sam Or I wrote:It has been SHOWN that other (not all) prefernce are biological as well.

My point still stands.

how does it still stand if you just said sexuality is genetic???

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-09 01:13am

There is no one exact gene that says "hey I am gay", or none found yet. It could be hormonal from the mother, or determined sometime after birth. Granted I will conceed it can be combination of likes and dislikes, which all comes back down to basic prefernce, some which you have to give up when you find a partner.

Alyrium Denryle, while on the whole subject of scents, check out male attraction to the smell of Cinimon Buns. In most males its almost a sexual attraction. Is it the sameway for gay males? Just curious.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 01:31am

sam, i agree that there is no gene that says gay, but i do think theres a gene that says "like guys" or "like girls"

and whats this about cinnamon buns? you mean straight guys eat Cinibuns and get horny?

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2003-08-09 01:35am

Interesting essay. You're gay because you like masculine people, not necessarily physical males. Makes sense to me.

As for scents, there are certain people I just want to smell real bad. They smell...attractive. I can't quite describe it.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2003-08-09 01:42am

Alyrium Denryle, while on the whole subject of scents, check out male attraction to the smell of Cinimon Buns. In most males its almost a sexual attraction. Is it the sameway for gay males? Just curious.

you cant possibly be serious...

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2003-08-09 02:05am

I think you just really like cinnamon buns, Sam...

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-09 02:19am

kojikun wrote:sam, i agree that there is no gene that says gay, but i do think theres a gene that says "like guys" or "like girls"

and whats this about cinnamon buns? you mean straight guys eat Cinibuns and get horny?

I will conceed, even though I do not think it is one gene.\

On a lighter topic

I am serious, not the taste, the smell. Its not really an "I am horny" thing, but more of an instant feeling of wanting the smell. Cinnamon scent (true cinnamon, not the candy version) has been considered a male aphrodisiacs since greek times, if not before. Here is an article showing scents that traditional straight males respond to.

http://bears.ece.ucsb.edu/personnel/ast ... umor8.html

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-09 02:23am

I find it amusing what actually stimulates people sexually.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 02:25am

Interesting essay. You're gay because you like masculine people, not necessarily physical males. Makes sense to me.

But thats not the entire point of the essay. Its meant to say that gay is an entirely inaccurate word because it restricts me to one sex (dicks) which is not the only part of a person im attracted to, and the other parts are very easilly non-sex specific, tho are usually prevalent in one sex more then the other. the essay is meant as an insight into the limitations of our present definitions, and that the definitions break down under those "special" circumstances (alot like relativity and singularities. lol)

and i think sam has an incredibly weird kinky.

::bathes in cinnamon::

Sam Or I · Post by **Sam Or I** » 2003-08-09 02:31am

kojikun wrote:
Interesting essay. You're gay because you like masculine people, not necessarily physical males. Makes sense to me.
and i think sam has an incredibly weird kinky. ::bathes in cinnamon::

hey............only once a week.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 02:36am

that infrequently? poor boy, we need to find you some cinnibons!

::watches as soi springs a boner:: Weirdo. :p

StarshipTitanic · Post by **StarshipTitanic** » 2003-08-09 03:12am

kojikun wrote:
Interesting essay. You're gay because you like masculine people, not necessarily physical males. Makes sense to me.
But thats not the entire point of the essay. Its meant to say that gay is an entirely inaccurate word because it restricts me to one sex (dicks) which is not the only part of a person im attracted to, and the other parts are very easilly non-sex specific, tho are usually prevalent in one sex more then the other. the essay is meant as an insight into the limitations of our present definitions, and that the definitions break down under those "special" circumstances (alot like relativity and singularities. lol)

and i think sam has an incredibly weird kinky. ::bathes in cinnamon::

But that's what I said, you're gay because you like people who think and resemble your sex.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-08-09 03:23am

but i didnt say that, titanic

i said that sex has no image. if that girl resembles my sex, do i not resemble a girl? do boys then not resemble girls? theres nothing inherently linked to a penis that makes up the way we look, aside from hormones, but having a penis does NOT mean you have testosterone. what i was saying in that article is that NOONE resembles my sex, and EVERYONE resembles my sex, because my sex has no fixed universal traits that every male possesses and no female possesses except a cock. theres a spectrum of looks, from masculine to androgynous to feminine, and no gender is ever entirely pushed to one extreme of that spectrum, there are always guys who look like girls, and girls who look like guys, and because of that, its a misconception to say that a girl looks like a guy, because she looks exactly like a girl, just a girl with lots of testosterone.

girls dont LOOK any specific way any more then guys do, the majority are just are bunched towards the femenine end of the spectrum. tho i think cinnabons are off of and perpendicular to that spectrum.