Bisexuals

[Yahunyahti]

I'm going to make the statement that all human beings are, by nature, bisexual. I'm sure that won't be popular among those who feel that they must project masculinity at all times, but it is true. That means that "by nature" all human beings have no preference toward either male nor female for the sexual act "when it only serves as a form of release (orgasm)" . . . If a preference exists, it is only because it serves that person's current interests.

This is proven in children when they first hit puberty. Studies show that young boys and young girls (who do not grow up in a family/environment that is for heterosexuality or against homosexuality) will allow either sex to explore their body and they will explore either sex's body, themselves.

Oral sex will feel the same, regardless of whether the mouth belongs to a female or a male (and may possibly even feel better if it performed by the same sex since the same sex knows what feels good by instinct and therefore will perform the act more effectively and with more knowledge). Anal sex, whether it is performed on a female or a male, would not feel any different since they are essentially the same in this aspect.

Now, what does this mean? This means that ALL preferences are either learned or chosen. Nobody is born straight and nobody is born gay.

The main reason I am making this thread is because I'm sick and tired of the argument that homosexuals are born gay. That is utter nonsense. It is a choice, either way. Any man who says that oral sex performed by a man would not feel good, is a liar. Oral sex is oral sex. It will feel good, regardless. Any man that says that it would not feel good to perform anal intercourse (being the "giver") on another male, is a liar. It will feel just as good as it would to perform it on a female. The hole is essentially the same.

Women who say that they would not enjoy having a woman perform oral sex on them are liars. If the act was purely physical and none of their social conditioning between right and wrong were involved (perhaps if they were blindfolded and believed that it was a man doing it), they would enjoy every moment of it. The same goes for men.

The "born gay" statement is complete and utter nonsense and people need to stop claiming it. It is a choice. One chooses who they will prefer and they pursue those preferences. It can be forced upon you by others, if you let it, but it is a choice. The word "preference" makes that fairly clear.

There is no "gay gene" and there is no "straight gene" . . .
Sex is sex is sex, whether it is homosexual or heterosexual.
All human beings are, by nature, bisexual.

[Dark_Sun]

I can't believe I read all of this but I will save my immature remarks for later when everyone else picks fun at you for the implications you brought up in this thread. I will simply rebuttal by saying this though.

Men and women have sexual organs designed they way that they are for a reason and that is to reproduce and sustain life. I agree with you that the notion that anyone is born gay is false but only because I believe that men and women are born to reproduce with members of the opposite sex. I don't believe that I was conditioned to prefer heterosexuality over homosexuality.

"This is proven in children when they first hit puberty. Studies show that young boys and young girls (who do not grow up in a family/environment that is for heterosexuality or against homosexuality) will allow either sex to explore their body and they will explore either sex's body, themselves."

I don't see how this is possible. What sources are you siting here? What does puberty have to do with a person's willingness to allow, I'm assuming, their parents view their body. I'm having a hard time understanding how a child going through puberty was used to collect data concerning anyone but their parents viewing their bodies. Last time I checked it was illegal to "explore" the body of a child.

[identity-X]

fuck trinaries...

sexual attraction and sexuality fall along a continuum.



I'd say sexual attraction is influenced by society and biology. In the end, however, who we have sex with is entirely a matter of choice. Yet another flaw in Ghet's argument in the other thread...attraction doesn't equal action.

[identity-X]

I read an interesting article in Newsweek yesterday while sitting at the auto shop getting my car inspected.

Searching now...can't find it. Will post when I do...

[UnbrokeN]

no its not the same if a man blew my dick off. if you consider its as much a mental and psychological thing, because its a huge turn on when a beautiful woman does it but a man? wtf

[Ratiko Malodic]

I like tranny porn. That's about it.

[WaxonWaxoff]

Women be lookin gooood cuz I can stuff my dick in between their tits, ass, pussy, and mouth. Sure I can fuck a guy in the mouth and ass but I don't get turned on by guys.

[Yahunyahti]

Wax, your preference has been influenced by your environment.
Your view of homosexuality has been influenced by your environment.

Every Ancient society was bisexual until religion came into the picture.

That said, I do have an argument for why homosexuality is "not beneficial" but the nature of all creatures regarding sexual release (as orgams) is non-preferential and entirely animal instinct.


As far as oral sex being performed on you by a guy not feeling the same . . . the physical feeling does not change simply because it is a female or a male performing it. A female's mouth is no different than a male's mouth. A females asshole is no different from a male's asshole.

I'm not surprised at a couple of the responses. Fear is often behind these sort of reactions. I'm talking about physical feeling and the non-preference when an individual is not influenced by society to be against it. If all of us were raised in a society that doesn't say one is right and the other is wrong, none of you would even think twice about allowing one of your boys to suck you off. That's a fact.

If you want to know what my argument against homosexuality is, ask me.
But, my argument against homosexuality is also an argument against heterosexual "casual sex" . . .

[Dark_Sun]

One thing that you are saying is correct about the similar physical comparison between certain body parts on both men and women but I guess the golden question is since you feel this way about sexuality do you experiment with guys sexually or not? If not then why don't you today or why haven't you in the past? If you don't then your reason is probably because you acknowledge the importance of the influence of your environment. I'm sure you can come up with a logical reason for killing someone today based on the events that happened in ancient history because at one point it was ok to kill someone for a reason back then without being punished. But you know if you killed someone today for the same reason there is a pretty good chance of you getting caught and going to prison for it in most cases. As a result of that you, more than likely, decided that it is in your best interest to not kill someone today for a reason that occurred hundreds maybe thousands of years ago. So you seem to have a niche for using logic from ancient history and comparing it to today when the situation has evolved into something completely different. I know your stance on life is that history repeats itself and to a certain degree that might be true but that occurs well beyond the lives of a couple of generations which is more of a reason why it is more than likely irrelevant today.

[Jordan Black]

I believe it is wrong and you'll go to hel for liking the same sex

[Sodium]

could be wrong but i tend to agree that homosexuality isnt gentic too. the kind of sexual attraction we're talking about is by nature social (as opposed to say, an attraction to bicycles or some shit - something not social). thus i think sexuality ultimately derives from a person's social interactions. if sexuality is ultimately a social expression, then social interaction must play a critical role in fleshing out sexuality. i think kinsey was going in the right direction when he said that the presence of the father was important. i think more acurately, not just the father but the failure to adopt male figures, male role-models, male friends -- in essence, the failure to experience traditional male bonding. think of it sort of as a filter. for straghit guys, perceptions of other men pass through this filter, stripping away the possibility of attraction. gay people never develop this filter. why they never do is up to debate. most people now like to say that its a combo of both genes and social interaction. i dont like that answer cuz its like a pussy answer, a non-answer. people say it to one-up other people like wow im so profound. pussies.


uh i think youre way off in thinking that sexuality is a 'choice' though. its definetly not something you choose.

[Yahunyahti]

Originally Posted by Dark_Sun

One thing that you are saying is correct about the similar physical comparison between certain body parts on both men and women but I guess the golden question is since you feel this way about sexuality do you experiment with guys sexually or not?

No, I do not experiment with the same sex (I'm a grown/married man of 25 and have no need to experiment) and I never have. Would I have as a child if I had been around other boys who did . . . probably, I was a child. Fortunately I had 3 older brothers and they all had girlfriends so I learned about girls pretty early on. I also had a very strong/masculine minded father who raised us like it was boot camp (and I grew up on military bases around the world). Homosexuality was not a norm in my environment.

I was raised in a very heterosexual environment. It never even occurred to me as a child/youth/teenager that it was an option. We didn't even discuss homosexuals in my house. It was as though they didn't exist, to be honest with you.

But, if I were raised in a home full of women and was shy (and not as outgoing as I was when I was a child) and sensitive/passive with aggressive boys around me, I'd be a very different person and that very well may have become a reality for me.

I have no interest in the same sex.
Then again, I'm not nearly as sexual as I come across on here.
Men can use their energy in two ways . . . it can go toward sex or it can move upward toward thought. I enjoy mind sex. Physical sex isn't really all that entertaining for me . . . I grew out of it.

Originally Posted by Jordan Black

I believe it is wrong and you'll go to hel for liking the same sex

You're already in hell if you believe that.

Originally Posted by Sodium

uh i think youre way off in thinking that sexuality is a 'choice' though. its definetly not something you choose.

Everything is a choice. It's just a matter of whether we make those choices consciously or unconsciously.


Oprah - I don't even take you seriously. If you had replied with a serious post I wouldn't have paid you any more mind.

[Sodium]

Originally Posted by Yahunyahti

\

Everything is a choice. It's just a matter of whether we make those choices consciously or unconsciously.
.

youre an idiot.

[x - calli]

i believe its part nature, part nurture

its complicated though.

i think by nature, some people will be oriented to same-sex relations. and plenty of people have thier sexual magnetic pole oriented towards heterosexuality.

there is still naturally room to manuever, and the culture and rules governing behavior can make a big difference in increasing or decreasing that.

i think one mistake people make when they say that something is created by cultural influence is that they assume that cultural influence is something you can easily rise above. you cant underestimate the power of it in shaping people... even if ur a sociologist fully aware of your own predispositions, that doesnt mean you can easily reprogram them.

another thing, culture often changes the meanings of actions. what im saying is, you put your hand on a guys ass, thats gay right? however, in the baseball/football world, its perfectly fine to slap your teammates ass. the action is the same as the "gay" action, but the understood meaning and context is different.

just because one person of a certain culture is completely comfortable with something thats percieved as gay, that does not mean that he is at all comfortable or tolerant with the cultural corollary of the action.. the "gay meaning".

so yea its complicated.

thats my 2¢ for now.

[ChanteBaba]

so why dont u let a man suck on yours?

[menaz]

I never liked man cock, has nothing to do with choice. Also actual studies have shown that kids who grow up in gay house holds turn out straight. I'll make it Short and sweat, You'll always be a moron!

another thing, culture often changes the meanings of actions. what im saying is, you put your hand on a guys ass, thats gay right? however, in the baseball/football world, its perfectly fine to slap your teammates ass. the action is the same as the "gay" action, but the understood meaning and context is different.

have you actually observed the difference?

I would say there is a huge difference between slapping someones ass out of the clear blue in a sexual manner compared to slapping your teammates ass/thigh for doing a job.

You really can't see the difference?