are we all gay

[shadowfurry23]

our "sexuality" is just another concept, like God or Money, that has an outward manifestation so we deem it REAL. then we link it to other concepts like gender, get confused and fight about it. there is no REAL sexuality...just fucking.

Uh, no.  Some boys prefer to fuck girls and some boys prefer to fuck boys and a significant portion of that is hard-wired in.  That's a reasonably measurable, observable fact that can be acted upon and that I'm inclined to call Real - as Real as anything is, anyway.

I'm a big fan of mindsculpting myself and there's a lot of leeway in there, but just as the painter has the paints they are given and the  sculptor his uncarved block of granite, there is a something at the base of it.  It's not all as loosey-goosey as you suggest.

and i made no claim as to the motivations behind our actions and desires.  obviously desire is there in some form hard wired or not.  i just see no need to differentiate. 

why catalogue our attractions? so we can feel better about ourselves? why not just drop it all and feel better? personally i can find attration in people regardless of gender--thats my trip---... but if you the need to self-identify, please, do what you like--is none of my business.

i just find all the labeling (read: concept creation) unnecessary.  i propose: fuck and forgetaboutit

Well, that's my trip too, aktually - though I am married to a girl my last long-term relationship before that was with a boy.  I too am attracted to people rather than to genders, though I have found I do tend to lean towards girls when I'm just looking at the meat and not knowing the brain behind it (e.g. pr0n).

However, our trip is not everyone's trip.  You suggestion displays a rather simple and, I hope you don't mind my saying so but a rather naive view of sexuality.

Sex is complex; sexual attraction moreso.  The labels that you are so dismissive of are symbols on a map of the sea of desire.  It helps the S&M top find the bottom, helps the gay bear find one similarly inclined, warns the nerdboy away from hitting on the bull-dyke, helps the clown-porn fetishist find their own and so on.  Without these cues and labels we would be adrift, and finding a compatible partner would be a herculean undertaking.

[Bu🤠ns]

i realize it's a gross oversimplification...but thats my point.  believe me, i understand how complex and chaotic these things can get which is why i suggest to drop the identification all together and just be.  to stop labeling emotions and just feel them.  by labeling emotions they become concepts and open to scruitney ... when all they were supposed to be was felt.

edit: understand, i'm not making ultimate statements here but offering an option.  sure, it's good to have a community but then one has to follow in line with that community's standards or risk alienation.  life isn't black and white, gay or straight.  but rather a spectrum of possibility.  to me, what is naieve, is pinning yourself down to a fixed point of view without being, at the very absoulute least, aware of other possibilities.  but comfort is comfort and like i said, i'm just offering up another option.  if someone tells me that he or she is gay or straight and, BY GOD, thats how it is, then i'm quite obviously in no position to argue with that subjectivity.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

and finding a compatible partner would be a herculean undertaking.

It kind of is, even with them, and sometimes the most compatible partners are complete and utter surprises.

[Bu🤠ns]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

Yep!

[shadowfurry23]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

Sorta sounds like a false dichotomy to me.  Isn't a person's sexuality part of their individuality?

[Bu🤠ns]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

Sorta sounds like a false dichotomy to me.  Isn't a person's sexuality part of their individuality?

there are more factors involved that go into our individual choices of picking partners than just our sexuality.

[shadowfurry23]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

Sorta sounds like a false dichotomy to me.  Isn't a person's sexuality part of their individuality?

there are more factors involved that go into our individual choices of picking partners than just our sexuality.

I wholeheartedly agree, which is why I said 'part'.  But if you click with an individual in a ton of other ways but lack a compatible sexuality you're still out of luck, unless sex just isn't that important to you - though if your sexuality involves being uninterested in sex, even then your partner should be too or you'll have problems.

This is one of my major problems with the no-sex-before-marriage crowd:  I think being compatible sexually is an important part of a long-term romantic relationship, too important to just handwave.   People are flexible though, and can be especially flexible for those they love, and learning and change can happen too so to a degree I'm overstating the case I guess.

[Bu🤠ns]

sure.  i think desire comes in many forms and although it might be useful to deconstruct and analyze we shouldn't forget to feel it.  that's really my whole point. is that after all the labels  concepts and politics it just comes down to feeling.  emotional and physical sensations are included in the totality of our experience.  it's one thing to think you love another and quite another to feel it too.  sex tends to be an expression of that but it's not the total expression of that.  thats why i said there is no real sexuality...just fucking.  obviously it's not ONLY fucking but fucking happens to be another expression.  i have friends that stimulate me intellectually to the same degree my wife stimulates me sexually.  the thing is i don't go around labeling or identifying myself as an "intellectual" in the same that that i don't go around labeling myself as a "Heterosexual."   

i hope that makes sense.  at the moment i cant seem find a better metaphor.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

it really comes down to individual and individual not sexuality and compatible sexuality.

Sorta sounds like a false dichotomy to me.  Isn't a person's sexuality part of their individuality?

there are more factors involved that go into our individual choices of picking partners than just our sexuality.

Yeah, exactly.

"Bi female" really doesn't go very far to identify compatibility, in bed or outside of it.

[Faust]

Ugh, to me sexuality discussions sounds like walking into an ice cream shop and hearing people heatedly yammering on about the  semantics of which flavor they have.

[Bu🤠ns]

Ugh, to me sexuality discussions sounds like a walking into an ice cream shop and hearing people heatedly yammering on about the  semantics of which flavor they have.

and with that i'm silent.