Leave your homophobia at the door, thank you...

[Allyourbase]

Because the world as defined by those in power is binary. Also, those who have fought for a bit of territory are highly motivated to keep on fighting for it, or, as they know quite well, they will lose it.

We did lose territory, so to speak, on GLBT. The straight guys came in and filled the first pages with panties and 'wish i was her' threads. And gays, lesbians, and transgendered folk have cultural issues that go a long way beyond wearing panties in private. Being gay is not merely a matter of fun times in bed.

So, we asked that there be another forum for those guys-- and me, too, I have lots of sex things that have hardly nothing to do with my sexual identity!

The guys showed up in GLBT because of applied homophobia in other forums.

Maybe you can coax the hegemony into applying fewer labels, good luck with that.

Oh sure. I get how crossdressing or similar things have its place here - and I think this fetish forum is a great idea - but that's not what I meant. I guess I wonder about the definition of 'gay' (or 'not-gay') when you say 'i'm going to label not-gay people as straight'.

Where labels are concerned, I meant that as a slightly tongue-in-cheek remark, and I'll add some nuance:

I'm not denying the hegemony exerts power by applying labels, and that can be very serious business. I do also think labels applied to oneself can restrict too. No need to help exert that power by reinforcing it in that way. I guess we all need concepts (therefore, maybe, labels?) to make sense of what or who we are, and we're not really in the position to alter the set of concepts that form our frame of reference. So we might not be able to get rid of that way of interpreting ourselves, if only for the sake of being able to communicate about it. But I do think we're doing ourselves a favor if we don't take such a label to be all we are.

Uhm, if that makes any sense, that is what I meant

ETA: long story short, maybe, the bisexuals are the next issue in glbt? would that be a bad or a good thing? (honest q)

 

[welkin]

As for why certain threads showed up here instead of GLBT in the first place, even if they are truly homosexual or bisexual in nature... so what? It's probably the posters' choice of audience... Maybe they just wanted to hear more from the straight crowd who probably don't visit the GLBT forum often. And they're completely entitled to this choice. As JM said, just because the letters "GLBT" is absent in this forum's name doesn't mean GLBT content is excluded from this forum...

 

[Stella_Omega]

Oh sure. I get how crossdressing or similar things have its place here - and I think this fetish forum is a great idea - but that's not what I meant. I guess I wonder about the definition of 'gay' (or 'not-gay') when you say 'i'm going to label not-gay people as straight'.

Where labels are concerned, I meant that as a slightly tongue-in-cheek remark, and I'll add some nuance:

I'm not denying the hegemony exerts power by applying labels, and that can be very serious business. I do also think labels applied to oneself can restrict too. No need to help exert that power by reinforcing it in that way. I guess we all need concepts (therefore, maybe, labels?) to make sense of what or who we are, and we're not really in the position to alter the set of concepts that form our frame of reference. So we might not be able to get rid of that way of interpreting ourselves, if only for the sake of being able to communicate about it. But I do think we're doing ourselves a favor if we don't take such a label to be all we are.

Uhm, if that makes any sense, that is what I meant

This is quite true. When I go looking for a recipe for home made marshmallows, it doesn't matter what my sexual identity is. On the other hand-- this is a porn site, and these forums are sexual by nature. If we tippy toe around our preferences here... what kind of idiot would come to a sex site and avoid defining their preferences?

ETA: long story short, maybe, the bisexuals are the next issue in glbt? would that be a bad or a good thing? (honest q)

The only time-- and with all due respect, and only covering the most practical of terms-- the time bisexuality is a GLBt issue is when the bisexual is swinging same-sex way, in whatever form that takes.

I say this as a bisexual dyke myself. Don't get me wrong I am ALWAYS bisexual. But a bisexual woman out with a male lover is very hard to distinguish from a straight woman out with her male lover. The social ramifications just aren't the same.

This afternoon, I saw a girl on the street-- an acquaintance, not a girlfriend. She'd started her happy hour an hour early, seems like, and was very... affectionate. In fact, she was pawing me. On the street.

Which is not a bad thing! Except that I was absolutely wary, as I always am, of any possible tomatoes thrown by some stupidass homophobe that happens to be driving down the street just then.

Or yanno... bullets.

So, I had to steel myself, a little bit, and not step back out of her zone of happiness, and put her off. In a way that I would not have had to do is some drunken male friend had started pawing me on the street.

that's a GLBT issue.

Women who marry men, and men who marry women and then find their sexuality evolving towards same sex-- those are very common things, in fact. the problem isn't their bisexuality, it's the fact that they've made a life with someone, and then become a different person than the one that made that promise.

But the issue of infidelity isn't a GLBT problem-- not alone.

I dunno.

 

[Allyourbase]

This is quite true. When I go looking for a recipe for home made marshmallows, it doesn't matter what my sexual identity is. On the other hand-- this is a porn site, and these forums are sexual by nature. If we tippy toe around our preferences here... what kind of idiot would come to a sex site and avoid defining their preferences?

I'm not saying we should avoid defining our preferences at all. There's a difference between exploring and trying a variety of boxes one might fit in. I've defined myself as something, several times, (not just when it comes to sexual identity) just to end up limiting myself because some part always falls outside of it, giving it up again, frustrated about not fitting - as I think is just human. Threads about this meta problem, as sometimes pop up in the bdsm-board, are actually very interesting. I dunno. This was a sidenote in the first place.

The only time-- and with all due respect, and only covering the most practical of terms-- the time bisexuality is a GLBt issue is when the bisexual is swinging same-sex way, in whatever form that takes. Women who marry men, and men who marry women and then find their sexuality evolving towards same sex-- those are very common things, in fact. the problem isn't their bisexuality, it's the fact that they've made a life with someone, and then become a different person than the one that made that promise. But the issue of infidelity isn't a GLBT problem-- not alone.

Fair enough. Answers my question.

Or yanno... bullets.

(speaking from a country where almost nobody carries a gun...: )

 

[korizon]

I don't think the issue was ever about labeling people, correct me if I'm wrong. It was about doing what makes the most sense in terms of delegating threads to sub forums.


Starting a thread in the fetish forum titled "Question for Married bi/cock curious guys", "Forced bi", "CD's who desire and fantasize about COCK", and The Men who Crave Cock but aren't attracted to Men Club" makes no sense to me at all.

Call me crazy, but threads that actually contain the word bisexual belong in the subforum that is dedicated to bisexual matters, GLBT. Is that not overtly obvious?

If you ask me, the only possible homophobia I see would be from people who are seemingly scared shitless of being labeled bisexual or bicurious.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I don't think the issue was ever about labeling people, correct me if I'm wrong. It was about doing what makes the most sense in terms of delegating threads to sub forums.


Starting a thread in the fetish forum titled "Question for Married bi/cock curious guys", "Forced bi", "CD's who desire and fantasize about COCK", and The Men who Crave Cock but aren't attracted to Men Club" makes no sense to me at all.

In fact, those are the very threads that gave birth to this forum-- all of the ones you've mentioned have been moved to this forum.

Call me crazy, but threads that actually contain the word bisexual belong in the subforum that is dedicated to bisexual matters, GLBT. Is that not overtly obvious?

Nope. They are fetish threads that look like bisexuality. And again, they are the reason this forum was created.

If you ask me, the only possible homophobia I see would be from people who are seemingly scared shitless of being labeled bisexual or bicurious.

those forms of homophobia are always obvious. But the desire to label something as gay because it touches even the hem of a dress-- that's a form of homophobia as well.

 

[JMohegan]

I don't think the issue was ever about labeling people, correct me if I'm wrong. It was about doing what makes the most sense in terms of delegating threads to sub forums.


Starting a thread in the fetish forum titled "Question for Married bi/cock curious guys", "Forced bi", "CD's who desire and fantasize about COCK", and The Men who Crave Cock but aren't attracted to Men Club" makes no sense to me at all.

Call me crazy, but threads that actually contain the word bisexual belong in the subforum that is dedicated to bisexual matters, GLBT. Is that not overtly obvious?

If you ask me, the only possible homophobia I see would be from people who are seemingly scared shitless of being labeled bisexual or bicurious.

I agree, those folks are not straight, as I would define that term.

But (again) I ask you - so what?

Why doesn't it make sense to you for them to be here? Are bisexuals, bi-curious, bi-whatevertheheckelse, not allowed to discuss their sexual turnons, fantasies, fetishes, and so on, in the same room with straight folks?

This isn't the straight subforum. This is fetish and sexuality subforum. So what the heck is your problem with non-straight folks posting here?

 

[korizon]

They are fetish threads that look like bisexuality.

So a thread about bisexuality, is not about bisexuality? Technically speaking, everything is a fetish. Loving big breasts is a fetish, loving vaginal intercourse is a fetish. However, neither one of those threads should be placed in the GLBT forum, because they aren't gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender matters - unless of course it was woman on woman.

I agree, those folks are not straight, as I would define that term.

They very well may be straight. If they actually carry out their bisexual fantasy and decide it's not for them, I would still call that person straight.

But (again) I ask you - so what?

Literotica is a sexual oriented forum that has sub forums dedicated to specific topics. Would you agree with that, yes or no?

If you would agree with that, does it not make sense to place threads in the appropriate sub forums?

If you said yes, should a thread that is about bisexuality go into the bisexual sub forum?

If you said no, then there's absolutely no point in having dedicated sub forums. There might as well just be one huge forum labeled "sex".

Why doesn't it make sense to you for them to be here?

Because there is already a specific sub forum for bisexuality. Again, if bisexual threads don't belong in the bisexual sub forum, then there's no point in having any sub forums at all.

Are bisexuals, bi-curious, bi-whatevertheheckelse, not allowed to discuss their sexual turnons, fantasies, fetishes, and so on, in the same room with straight folks?

Of course they're allowed to discuss them with straight folks. Straight people, as you know, are more than welcome to post in the bisexual sub forum.

 

[richard_daily]

I don't think the issue was ever about labeling people, correct me if I'm wrong. It was about doing what makes the most sense in terms of delegating threads to sub forums.


Starting a thread in the fetish forum titled "Question for Married bi/cock curious guys", "Forced bi", "CD's who desire and fantasize about COCK", and The Men who Crave Cock but aren't attracted to Men Club" makes no sense to me at all.

Call me crazy, but threads that actually contain the word bisexual belong in the subforum that is dedicated to bisexual matters, GLBT. Is that not overtly obvious?

If you ask me, the only possible homophobia I see would be from people who are seemingly scared shitless of being labeled bisexual or bicurious.

I don't see a need for a bi-specific forum. I think they fit fine in this one... There are all sorts of colors of "freaks and weirdos" and even though I'm about as cis-gendered as one can get, I don't mind one bit that those threads are in a forum that I'll probably end up regularly reading.

I don't read the GLBT forum, because it doesn't ever apply to me. However, I think the difference is that bi-curious folks have a lot of cross-over (no pun intended) with straight folks, and this board is a good meeting of those minds and opinions.

Furthermore, while I can talk to lesbians or gay men about sex... I wouldn't go to the GLBT forum to do it, this is probably where those sorts of conversations would take place.

Personally; that's something I welcome, as the blatant homophobia of the GB gets a little tiring at times.

 

[richard_daily]

So a thread about bisexuality, is not about bisexuality? Technically speaking, everything is a fetish. Loving big breasts is a fetish, loving vaginal intercourse is a fetish. However, neither one of those threads should be placed in the GLBT forum, because they aren't gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender matters - unless of course it was woman on woman.

A fetish isn't just something that you love or lust after to get off, but it's something outside of the "norm"... Therefore, vaginal intercourse couldn't really ever be considered a fetish, but loving having vaginal intercourse with a woman dressed up in a latex monkey suit while sniffing her underarms would be.

 

[JMohegan]

So a thread about bisexuality, is not about bisexuality? Technically speaking, everything is a fetish. Loving big breasts is a fetish, loving vaginal intercourse is a fetish. However, neither one of those threads should be placed in the GLBT forum, because they aren't gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender matters - unless of course it was woman on woman.



They very well may be straight. If they actually carry out their bisexual fantasy and decide it's not for them, I would still call that person straight.



Literotica is a sexual oriented forum that has sub forums dedicated to specific topics. Would you agree with that, yes or no?

If you would agree with that, does it not make sense to place threads in the appropriate sub forums?

If you said yes, should a thread that is about bisexuality go into the bisexual sub forum?

If you said no, then there's absolutely no point in having dedicated sub forums. There might as well just be one huge forum labeled "sex".



Because there is already a specific sub forum for bisexuality. Again, if bisexual threads don't belong in the bisexual sub forum, then there's no point in having any sub forums at all.



Of course they're allowed to discuss them with straight folks. Straight people, as you know, are more than welcome to post in the bisexual sub forum.

Counselor, shouldn't I be sworn in before the deposition commences?

I find your zeal for confining the perspective of non-straight folks to their own little corner rather... shall we say... revealing.

You remind me of a kid I knew in college, who was pissed off because an African American student was editor of both the periodical published by the Black Student Union and the university newspaper.

 

[Stella_Omega]

This forum is a bisexual forum. And gay, and lesbian.

Oh, and also, it's a straight forum.

Bisexual threads should be here.

 

[lustatopia]

This forum is a bisexual forum. And gay, and lesbian.

Oh, and also, it's a straight forum.

Bisexual threads should be here.

Should ALL bisexual threads be in the Fetish & Sexuality Central Forum, Stella?

You said, "As long as straights insist on viewing the entire world as a binary, I'm going to label not-gay people as straight.."

Are Bisexual people "not-gay"? Yes, logically speaking, yes, bisexuals are not totally gay because they have a het component to their sexual identity.

 

[lustatopia]

No one likes labels? Neither do I. Everyone is a unique human being.

But we need intelligent, rational language in order to investigate meaning in our world. Before we can begin a debate about sexual variety and identity, we have to establish a single language map we can all agree upon.

I propose that the world is truly divided into total polarities, by definition. This is simply a fact of nature. Men and Women are binary opposites. Yin and Yang, 0 and 1. Positive and Negative. This is the universe we live in. But between these polar opposes exists a vast swirling and shifting spectrum of colorful shades.

There are definitely two polar opposite thrones of sexual power and authority.

The first pole is the het world. That's the sole place that physical reproduction of the species takes place and because of this primacy in propagating the species it always holds the mainstream cultural power in every human and animal society on the planet. It's not a conspiracy or bigotry. It just is the way natural evolution decided to mix and match genes, by dividing the phenotype (hard copies, ie us) manifestation of our genetic codes into male and female types. We should rejoice in our sexual nature gifted us by nature.

Western Heterosexual mainstream culture is absolutist about sex taboo, especially for males. (There are growing exceptions, which we might explore later, but let's just say Het society at this point in time is exclusionary.) If a guy has sex with guys, but still like girls, one is automatically exiled from Het Island. Everything but 100% straight is "Queer." Got that? Stella coined that definition.

At the other end of this planet is the Gay Pole. Here the environment is far more accommodating of multiculturalism and sexual diversity. There is, of course, a purely gay and lesbian core who only have same-sex partners, but they, in theory, accept ALL the alt sexuality diaspora driven from behind the Het Iron Curtain. Including the fetishes, the so-called mythical beasts, "straight guys who suck cock", cross-dressers, TVs, whatever.... We're all QUEER. But NOT necessarily GAY.

The definition of true cultural Gayness should be reserved for those who gravitate very closely to ONLY same-gender sexuality.

So we have the Heterosexual pole. Only straights allowed there. Everything else is QUEER.

And the Gay opposite pole which has opened its borders up to all the queer refugees imaginable to the human psyche fleeing the police state on Het Island.

Note that the true Lesbian and Homosexual clique is a minority at the center a sea of maddeningly diverse exiles from Het Island. Yet the GAY pole holds a central position of power and moral authority only comparable to its Heterosexual opposite. That's the binary part. The North and South. The Yin and Yang. The O and 1. The Gay and Straight polarity.

The rest of us are all varying colors of the great maddeningly shape shifting rainbow coalition some of us closer (but still banished) from Het Island, others of us far more same-gender lovers closer to the high moral priests of pure Gayness.

If the above is a rationally description of the full range of human sexuality then there is no truly binary system to describe sexuality. It's not about HET-QUEER polarity. What we really have is a HET-POLYSEX-GAY range.

Maybe what Literotica needs is a GAY board where only exclusively same-sex matters can be discussed. And a polysexual board where bisexual matters, queer, transgender and fetish are given a fair go. And finally, of course, the HETs probably still prefer to be isolated on their special island of reproductive primacy. (which btw is slowly sinking due to global warming and their predilection for sharing women. Heh.)

 

[vrosej10]

The label thing is hard to fight against because humans are linguistic and categorising animals.We actually cannot think effectively without language and we seem to need to understand our universe through words. Not that this works particularly well with humans and sexuality. It is such a fluid thing.

No one particularly wants bisexuals. We are reviled and resented by both gay and straight communities. I tend to keep my straight stuff out of the GBLT thread but it is hard because my whole sex life is so interwoven.

 

[korizon]

I find your zeal for confining the perspective of non-straight folks to their own little corner rather... shall we say... revealing.

How many more times do I need to tell you that this isn't about labeling people, it's about running a website. My beef with the whole issue is about placing threads in the correct sub forums.

I actually LOVE reading bisexual threads and gay/lesbian threads. I find them incredibly erotic, and I've discussed those topics on here many times myself. My posting history here proves that your misconception of me is just that, a misconception.

You remind me of a kid I knew in college, who was pissed off because an African American student was editor of both the periodical published by the Black Student Union and the university newspaper.

Oh Jesus. So now you're bringing race into this? After saying something like this, I certainly hope that nobody on this forum takes anything you say seriously.

 

[KoPilot]

Arguing about this, especially with Stella, is a losing battle.

But what do I know... I'm just a barbaric straight.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Should ALL bisexual threads be in the Fetish & Sexuality Central Forum, Stella?

You said, "As long as straights insist on viewing the entire world as a binary, I'm going to label not-gay people as straight.."

Are Bisexual people "not-gay"? Yes, logically speaking, yes, bisexuals are not totally gay because they have a het component to their sexual identity.

There are dozens of bisexual mens' threads in the GLBT forum, right now, that aren't going anywhere else, and many of those have constant updates and lively conversation. You could join them instead of pissing all over your own shoes on the one thread you've chosen.

Get over yourself.

 

[KoPilot]

There are dozens of bisexual mens' threads in the GLBT forum, right now, that aren't going anywhere else, and many of those have constant updates and lively conversation. You could join them instead of pissing all over your own shoes on the one thread you've chosen.

Get over yourself.

How is this in any way about me? I'm not even part of the affected group.

All I have to say is that spite is spite, and a grudge is a grudge... is a grudge. I really liked you, and thought you were very smart and wise, but with every post you make that's tangentially related to this, you get uglier and uglier.

Do you honestly believe two wrongs make a right? Or perhaps three do? Or five? Or an entire bitter lifetime's worth?

 

[Stella_Omega]

How is this in any way about me? I'm not even part of the affected group.

All I have to say is that spite is spite, and a grudge is a grudge... is a grudge. I really liked you, and thought you were very smart and wise, but with every post you make that's tangentially related to this, you get uglier and uglier.

Do you honestly believe two wrongs make a right? Or perhaps three do? Or five? Or an entire bitter lifetime's worth?

I didn't quote you, lustatopia has been making a futile fool of himself, this morning.


Straight men who suck a dick once in a while are not gay, despite the straight world's insistance on labeling them not straight. So it makes sense to me at least, to make the straight world a little less comfortable by refusing to allow them to reject these guys.

And I would like you to think about why, exactly, you feel that the bisexual element in a fetish should override the fetish aspect.

 

[korizon]

I didn't quote you, lustatopia has been making a futile fool of himself, this morning.


Straight men who suck a dick once in a while are not gay, despite the straight world's insistance on labeling them not straight. So it makes sense to me at least, to make the straight world a little less comfortable by refusing to allow them to reject these guys.

And I would like you to think about why, exactly, you feel that the bisexual element in a fetish should override the fetish aspect.

Stella,

If your reasoning behind the placement of the threads is to get straight people more comfortable with others who think and feel differently than them, I'm all for that. I think that's a good thing and probably one of the main functions that lit should serve.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Noun 1. fetish - a form of sexual desire in which gratification depends to an abnormal degree on some object or item of clothing or part of the body; "common male fetishes are breasts, legs, hair, shoes, and underwear".

Now this is STRICTLY my opinion (so as to keep from getting jumped here), but as stated above, it is a fetish if you are attracted to a cock/pussy and not the person they are attached to.

In other words, liking to eat cum; liking cock, but not men; liking gay men in blue shoes (because of the shoes) are fetishes and belong here, REGARDLESS of the sexual orientation of the poster.

On the other hand, if a guy is curious about sucking cock because he is attracted to men, then THAT is LGBTQ forum appropriate (regardless if he is bi, gay or just freakin curious).

So I guess what I'm TRYING to express is that some guy talking about sucking cock ain't necessary gay (unless of course it IS! )

 

[Stella_Omega]

Stella,

If your reasoning behind the placement of the threads is to get straight people more comfortable with others who think and feel differently than them, I'm all for that. I think that's a good thing and probably one of the main functions that lit should serve.

Well, if that happens, sure. I think hetero kinksters have more in common with bisexual and gay kinksters than they imagine, that's for sure!

 

[lustatopia]

Straight men who suck a dick once in a while are not gay, despite the straight world's insistance on labeling them not straight.

No they're "not gay", if by being gay we mean, men who have sex exclusively with men.

But it's not "straight" either, if by straight we mean men who have sex exclusively with women.

Therefore, so-called "straight" men who "suck dick once in a while" fall between the polarities of Gay and Straight. This is the definition of bisexuality.

Men who engage in homosexual activity, by definition, are practicing homosexuality.

Their intent, role-playing or sexual identity is irrelevant to the actual definition of the sex acts they perform. Nor does it matter if they have "straight" personalities, are in the closet or also practice straight sex in other situations...

I think we risk obfuscating reality if we don't clear identify male on male fellatio as queer sex no matter the mental state of the guys involved.

For instance, if two "straight"guys have sex together pretending to be Joan Rivers and Lady Gaga does that make the sex acts they perform Lesbian, Het or Homosexual?

So it makes sense to me at least, to make the straight world a little less comfortable by refusing to allow them to reject these guys.

So are saying that you would like to force the straight world to accept bisexuality as an acceptable variation of heterosexuality? And how would you propose to go about that? Also if same-sex sexual activities are incorporated into heterosexuality then what is left to form the foundation of Gay sexual identity? Once MM cocksucking comes a normal part of heterosexual variation then where and how do you draw the line between heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality?

I ask those questions with sincerity, Stella. I'd really like to hear you explore the possibilities in a bit more detail.

 

[Stella_Omega]

So are saying that you would like to force the straight world to accept bisexuality as an acceptable variation of heterosexuality?

Yes. That is what I would like. Wouldn't you?

And how would you propose to go about that?

I have absolutely no illusion that this is accomplishable. So I have no proposition.

Also if same-sex sexual activities are incorporated into heterosexuality then what is left to form the foundation of Gay sexual identity? Once MM cocksucking comes a normal part of heterosexual variation then where and how do you draw the line between heterosexuality, bisexuality and homosexuality?

That line is drawn by the heterosexual majority and enforced by a myriad of legal and social strictures. The hetero majority is the reason the GLBT ghettos exist. The tiny spaces they afford us are the reason we fight for territory amongst ourselves. Because seriously, if Laurel really gave a shit or understood the issues, she would have created a lesbian subforum, and moved all of the women's threads to it. She's been as helpful as a straight woman can be, however.

When and if that kind of enlightened veiwpoint about sexuality ever happens, we can all of us simply be aware of our own preferences. The subcategoried forums will follow other divisions-- as in fact, Lit has tried to do with this particular forum. Fetish-- real fetish, the kind that substitutes for human intercourse-- trumps sexual orientation. I think that's pretty exciting