Semantics Revisited

[frikidiki]

Your opinion is needed here! This is an invitation to all on this site to contribute to an idea. I hope you think it's a good one and recognize the potential value in it, as I do.

A few months ago, I posted the following quote (edited here for clarity) as part of a reply to a question about whether a straight man who receives oral sex from another man is truly straight. The issue as I bring it is semantics--whether the guy is straight or not is in my mind subordinate to how the terms are used. Following this quote are some elaborations I'd also like to share. Finally, I have a goal in mind--the idea I teased you with above.




I distinguish "straight" from "heterosexual." The common usage of these terms doesn't, but I think it should.

Consider sexual orientation--potential, experiential, or actual--versus lifestyle, in the sense of partnering or teaming up with others for achievement of romantic or familial goals. Thus we have hetero-, homo-, and bi-sexual orientations, and lifestyles we call straight, gay, polyamorous or open, celibate, and...unpartnered. These are meant to be lists of examples, and may not be complete.

Lifestyle and orientation do not necessarily line up. So, we could have [for examples] a gay relationship between two bisexual men or women; or a straight relationship between one bi and one het or two bi people; or a celibate homo man in an apparently straight relationship with a het woman who is allowed to see other men so long as their kids aren't scandalized and he gets to watch from the closet.



Using myself as an example, I am bisexual and straight, primarily monogamous but with poly leanings. I call myself straight because, as I've often said, I cannot see myself in a deep relationship with another man, and because I also would like to have children with the woman I eventually choose to spend my life with.

In the post above, I distinguished between experiential, potential, and actual states of orientation (not necessarily lifestyle, but I'm sure examples of that can be found). These terms were presented to me in several books on bisexuality. To be clear, actuality is meant as the state of self-awareness AND consistent practice in a given orientation; potentiality would apply to the bi-curious, whether coming from a het or homo background, and regardless of experience; and experientiality refers to experience outside of curiosity or awareness of any orientation or lifestyle.

We can clarify with examples. If you've only done it, but wouldn't readily repeat it, you could say you're experientially het/bi/homo, but not actually bi. You could be potentially bi if you're interested in doing it (het or homo activity) but have only ever experienced the opposite; or perhaps did it once and didn't like it, but later in life find your interests change. Of course, if you did it, liked it, did it again, and hope to do it again soon, if not all day every day, then it may be time to consider whether actuality suits you.

It has occurred to me that there could be more to this list of terms, which is why I wrote this thread. Also, some of you will debate whether these terms really apply to you, but honestly, that's moot, because since words are only tools to help us express and share meanings, ideas, and feelings, you can freely choose, define, propose, and defend whatever terms you wish; nevertheless, your terms are equally valid and sought for this list.

It is my hope that the list we create from this discussion will be re-posted somewhere on the site and act as a guide, not necessarily the final word, on what we mean when we say what we say. People should always be free to use it, their own, or still another, but to have something on this site to point to as needed, with or without qualifications of our own added, would be valuable as a reference. If any other guide list exists, I would welcome its submission here.

Thank you for taking the time to read this.

[TaylorMade]

I think you're hitting on the premise of being a pomosexual, cause after a certain point the terms become moot.
:-*

*Taylor*

[vittoria]

There are some antics in semantics!

[AdamKadmon43]

The fuckin' world is falling apart and this is all they have to worry about.... Must be a bunch of Republicans or something.

[jem_is_bi]

This is way over done analysis of what makes you smile until you get some more of what makes you smile.

[BrotherJack]

The fuckin' world is falling apart and this is all they have to worry about.... Must be a bunch of Republicans or something.

Leaving the 'g' off the word fucking, does not make sense.......it does not make it less of a swear word....or more dramatic.

And Adam, my greatest love.......the world has been falling apart fro thousands of years......but it seems to bounce back.....and the human race seems to survive......trouble with you is.....you're such a fuckin' pessimist!!!

[frikidiki]

You can call yourself "straight" or heterosexual all you want but you're actually not and while it's your life you're only trying to hold onto something and be something that you're not and never were.

OK so you're on the DL (down low), a closet queen, and can't even be honest with yourself but again it's your life and unhappiness that you're choosing to compartmentalize and lie to yourself and others about.


The fuckin' world is falling apart and this is all they have to worry about.... Must be a bunch of Republicans or something.

I had a feeling I wouldn't get many of the kind of responses I was looking for, but I sure hope these two aren't indicative of what I can expect. Perhaps these were trolls? Moving on...

[frikidiki]

This is way over done analysis of what makes you smile until you get some more of what makes you smile.

Are you offering? :-P

I really do think a resource for some of these terms we all like to throw around so casually should be created. What's the deal, folks? This site has the potential to be a great boon to creating the practically nonexistent bi unity we bisexuals need and being a place where people can come to learn about themselves as well as other bisexuals. Education and inclusion--unless I just totally missed the point of this site, and people really are just here to suck each other off.

[NumberSix]

I had a feeling I wouldn't get many of the kind of responses I was looking for, but I sure hope these two aren't indicative of what I can expect. Perhaps these were trolls? Moving on...

I don't want to be a bitch but ...

Why bother to ask a question if you're looking for specific answers?

[frikidiki]

I don't want to be a bitch but ...

Why bother to ask a question if you're looking for specific answers?

You're kidding, right?

[frikidiki]

Sorry to burst your bubble but if you have sex with men, or want it, and you're a man, you're not straight.

You might be a closeted gay man, you might be gay, you might be bisexual, but you're certainly not heterosexual or straight.

It has nothing to do at all with what you wrote about in your first post.

Yes, it does, actually.

The definitions offered in my original post were meant to help express what I felt is a need to separate orientation terms from lifestyle terms, and challenge the idea that straight & het, as well as gay & homo, are or should be synonymous or interchangeable terms. My purpose was then and remains now very clear, if you care to comprehend. You are trying to rebut my statements by using the very associations I'm proposing are in need of correction. If you don't agree with what I proposed in my original post, I can accept that as such, but that's not what you're doing.

Also, you're going too far with it by implying that I'm in some kind of delusion about myself because my definitions don't match yours. Aside from the stretch in reasoning, you don't know me at all, let alone well enough to say one bit of what you have. Quite frankly, debating about me with someone who doesn't know me and yet thoughtlessly and arrogantly implies she has the true insight to my nature, would only be a waste of my time, so if you get no further reply, don't be surprised.

[frikidiki]

I think you're hitting on the premise of being a pomosexual, cause after a certain point the terms become moot.
:-*

*Taylor*

I actually agree to a point. I think terms are often useful to describe ourselves, but we should be careful that they don't limit us or cause us to make ourselves fit to what we may not be. We are greater than our terms, not the other way around. That's what it seems to me creating the term "pomosexual" was about.

This shows just how incomplete my list is. There are also asexuals--their orientation is basically defined as involving no sexual attractions. I'd say this parallels with the celibate lifestyle, though they don't actually mean the same to me.

Pansexuality is one term that is unclear to me. Per one of my dictionaries: "of diverse sexual expression; relating to a sexuality that expresses itself in many different forms." What is meant by "forms," exactly? The problem may be the definition, but right now, I'm too tired to look up another one, so I'll leave this subject to whomever else may want to contribute here.

[frikidiki]

You continue to be facetious, antagonistic, unwilling to try to comprehend what I've said, and overly personal when you've long worn out your welcome with me; nevertheless, I will answer you this last time.

What lifestyle terms? What do you mean by lifestyle?

This is probably the smartest thing you've presented so far, and it is a valid question that I'll answer below.


How is me being a lesbian a lifestyle? It's not like when I came out to my parents they gave me a toaster. Or when I learned how to drive it was in a truck and a Melissa Etheridge tape was playing. Or when I had my first date with a woman we moved in with each other on the 2nd date. Yes these are stereotypes...

You are really blowing this out of proportion. When I say that I feel straight, gay, lesbian, polyamorous, celibate, and others refer to lifestyle, I don't mean they are each a lifestyle conforming to stereotypes--YOU have said that, not me--nor did I ever say that these were all there is to the term "lifestyle." I put forth my idea, for example, that straight, gay, and lesbian should be defined as monogamous pairings. These are choices one makes in life, and that is one way to define the term "lifestyle," so as I see it, they are part of one's lifestyle. For these purposes, I didn't concern myself with other lifestyle choices, and specifically avoided stereotypes, precisely because (duh!) no two people are exactly alike.


...but there's no such thing as a straight lifestyle, a bisexual lifestyle, or a gay/lesbian one.

We will disagree.


This is all a rather silly thing to debate and write about since you're not heterosexual or straight at all, it has nothing to do with semantics, and sexual orientation terms/labels aren't owned or defined by me...

If it's so silly to debate about it, why are you wasting your time or bothering me with your contentious attitude? What are you trying to prove here? Do you condescend to teach me something, rather than simply debate with me in a friendly manner? And why can you not take ownership--ie, responsibility--for your terms and how you define and use them? You don't even seem to know what semantics means (to paraphrase, it is the study of meaning in language or the relationship between symbols and what they represent--quite relevant even if it's allowed that we're using the term loosely).


Or do you want to question/rebel against society's sexual orientation labels?

I actually stated several times, before and during our "conversation," that I disagreed with the way some terms are seen as equivalent. You actually think you thought of that yourself, don't you?


...and even if you go by the Kinsey scale you're not straight or heterosexual.

This statement is so unbelievably obvious that it's childish! See my profile, written and revised several times and well before you ever laid eyes on one word from me. You'll notice that your profile uses the Kinsey Scale, just like mine, and you set yours to 7, while I set mine to 3. Did you think it was an accident? Maybe yours was--I wouldn't really know.


Sorry you seem to be struggling with your sexuality and wanting to hold onto the idea that you're heterosexual/straight because you are more into women than men and want eventually to marry a woman and breed with her.

Not only are you dead wrong, but you're way out of line, and this is indicative of your bigotry toward opposite-sex couples who wish to have children. You've actually shown your contempt elsewhere. I came across such an attitude once before from a gay man I went on a date with; my response to him was, "if it weren't for 'breeders,' there would be no gays." Argue with this all you want, but the fact remains that an estimated 99% of all of mankind throughout history had a pair parents you bigoted people would call breeders.


What answers are you looking for? That you're somehow heterosexual or straight when you're really not and never going to be just because you want to be? Or are you angry and resentful that you aren't really straight/heterosexual?

Funny, I was wondering the same about you! What's that quote about someone protesting too loudly?


When/if you married a woman would you tell her that you're heterosexual/straight or that you're bisexual? What do you tell people that you date? Are men actually that gullible to think that you're straight/heterosexual? What happens when you get turned on by them and have sex?

None of this is really your business, is it? But I'll tell you a little, anyway. If I meet someone, and something--be it sex, romance, or just friendship--is brewing between us, I let them know, up front, exactly who I am, what I'm looking for, and to what extent things could go between us. It's called honesty. I tell them that I consider myself bisexual and straight, and I explain why I say it like this. That should be reasonably clear, especially since I said this where everyone else, including my girlfriend, can read it.

This is where I end our "conversation."

[csrakate]

I had a feeling I wouldn't get many of the kind of responses I was looking for, but I sure hope these two aren't indicative of what I can expect. Perhaps these were trolls? Moving on...

I hate to say it, frikidiki....but seems your thread has turned into a meeting ground for all of the multiple personalities of the troll to interact! I feel like I'm watching the movie "Sybil" or "Three Faces of Eve"! LOL! Is this the step right before the breakthrough...where they manifest into one????

[curious44]

Huh? This reminds me of a Prof. Irwin Corey skit.

[frikidiki]

I hate to say it, frikidiki....but seems your thread has turned into a meeting ground for all of the multiple personalities of the troll to interact! I feel like I'm watching the movie "Sybil" or "Three Faces of Eve"! LOL! Is this the step right before the breakthrough...where they manifest into one????

You're right! Chalk it up to pearls before swine.

I was honestly hoping for a lot of excellent, intelligent replies, but generally speaking, nobody seems interested in this subject. It's really odd to me, cuz I've seen plenty of term usage and the discussion & questioning of the uses of such terms on this website and others, that seem to at least partially back up what I'm saying. I thought it was a good time to bring this out, but I guess I was wrong.

I'm at the point to which I'd pay for membership to a site like this. Free-to-join just invites these lowlives in that have nothing better to do than antagonize us for sport. Fuck 'em! I'd rather ignore them than have to remove my brain or my heart just to match wits with them.

[frikidiki]

Huh? This reminds me of a Prof. Irwin Corey skit.

Who? What?

[AdamKadmon43]

I hate to say it, frikidiki....but seems your thread has turned into a meeting ground for all of the multiple personalities of the troll to interact! I feel like I'm watching the movie "Sybil" or "Three Faces of Eve"! LOL! Is this the step right before the breakthrough...where they manifest into one????

I hate to say it, but if not taking this dumb-assed thread seriously makes me a troll..... then I guess I am a troll.

[jem_is_bi]

Are you offering? :-P

I really do think a resource for some of these terms we all like to throw around so casually should be created. What's the deal, folks? This site has the potential to be a great boon to creating the practically nonexistent bi unity we bisexuals need and being a place where people can come to learn about themselves as well as other bisexuals. Education and inclusion--unless I just totally missed the point of this site, and people really are just here to suck each other off.

For me sex, sexual identity is not that complicated. This site is not that great for arranging sexual encounters. But, it is good for discussing some things serious about life, some things fun about life and all things about sex that we do and don't share with most all others (the straight society) that we know.

I have a long-term partner that keeps me very satisfied sexually. But, I need the companionship of others that are bisexual (even thought very rarely and only via internet). It is somewhat like why some people very actively seek to find intelligent life in the universe. They feel great discomfort not knowing if they (we) are the only intelligent creatures in the universe.

[jem_is_bi]

Friki-yeah too bad you're a closet case and on the DL (downlow).

You're not straight and while you are on the downlow I feel bad for people like you who have to hide who they are from other people and themselves and live their life as a complete lie.

Crude and rude, just like your profile.
Are you having fun now?
Why am I not impressed?

[vittoria]

Crude and rude, just like your profile.
Are you having fun now?
Why am I not impressed?

Just a troll... it has made QUITE a number of incarnations today alone... Drew has been a busy moderator!! (check most of the posts... quite impressive to create so many in such a short period of time... from SO many places to boot!!):tong:

[BrotherJack]

I hate to say it, frikidiki....but seems your thread has turned into a meeting ground for all of the multiple personalities of the troll to interact! I feel like I'm watching the movie "Sybil" or "Three Faces of Eve"! LOL! Is this the step right before the breakthrough...where they manifest into one????

Why do you have to think that everyone who doesn't post, or chat the way you would like, is a troll? If you read my post, short that it was, I was sort of taking Adam to task over his pessimisim. My post was still with the theme the OP started.

I would hate to be Adam. I thank the Lord that I am not. He is a pain in the ass. I'm female, 54, English...very English, and have three children and a grandchild. I live in a most beautiful part of the English countryside and if you have never of the Peak District, the British members will have done so.

Adam is American, 65 and lives in America. A beautiful part of the USA.

I've never been to America, he's never been to the UK. Not likely to now.

We don't even have the same posting style. I don't use the same sort of half English that some American chatters use, shortening words etc.

So get this once and for all Kate. I am an individual. Adam is an individual.

I'm not a troll and neither is he. Unfortunately, he's in a mood at the moment that makes him post irreverantly and sometimes the post is meant to be humorous and maybe that doesn't come across.

I found his post above annoying and so pessimistic.....I commented on it...but still in the vein of the thread.

[BrotherJack]

I hate to say it, but if not taking this dumb-assed thread seriously makes me a troll..... then I guess I am a troll.

Adam, there are people who see ''troll'' in every person who doesn't fit in with their norm. I think it may have been you that turned the thread into a dumb ass one...as you so eloquently put it!!! Find something useful to do.!!!