JMohegan
.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2006
- Posts
- 8,226
Your post proves my original point. If this guy is straight, then straight has no meaning at all.I think it has to do with everyone needing to label everything and every facet of their lives. I think labels ought to take a back seat in every ones lives..they are just a guide.
I like to be vegetarian but I also like to eat chicken. So why would I not be able to call myself vegetarian even if I like to eat chicken- why does a label have to be so limited to just what the label depicts?
Many of the men here are straight with bicurious fantasies.
Fantasies are only that...something thought up in his mind.
He can't truly consider himself bisexual until he's had both worlds sexually and really decides he loves both equally to not give up one or the other. He's never really HAD a FIRST opportunity with a male to even consider himself bi at this point...and many of the men here haven't either so why would anyone think a label is needed so early on in their experiences? So really, it does make absolute sense that he's calling himself straight. Because he IS.
That's my $.02
You talk about straight as if it were a non-label. But the fact is that straight *is* a sexual orientation. There *are* people who are aroused by members of the opposite sex and *only* members of the opposite sex. No body part exceptions, no equivocating. In fantasy and in real life.
Personally I find it more than a bit silly to call yourself a vegetarian if you eat meat on a regular basis. That's just not what the noun means. But you're right, with regard to that example - there's no real harm in thumbing your nose at Websters.
And as long as a guy makes clear to potential mates that his personal definition of "straight" actually includes a cock-craving twist, then there's no real harm in that either. (As long as his aversion to any non-straight label isn't borne of homophobia, of course.)