What distinguishes true homosexuals from homosexuality is love.
Think about it. Heterosexual men can fuck other men in the ass if they're in a rage and/or, if there are no women around, such as in prison, or military, etc. However, this kind of homosexuality almost never involves love. It involves anger, power, or release. At the end of the day, these men fall in love with women, not men.
In other words, being homosexual is not about sex so much as it is about love. And I don't see how something that is primarily about love can be demonized.
We need to re-frame the issue by taking it out of the sexual frame and insert it into a loving frame.
Homosexuals love the homosex
Get a fucking blog, OP.
I wore a tee shirt in the '90s that read "I'm a homoloveual", but too many people felt that it implied that I was loose.
Love is often demonized, nothing sexier than a demon.
Homoloveual. I like that.
R1, of course they love the homosex, that's part of the equation, but it's still about love.
A person can have homosex and hate the sex, and hate the person he's having sex with. More than likely that man is not a homosexual unless he is a self-loathing closet case, which in that case, he probably hates everyone therefore is incapable of love.
But there can be love between people that isn't sexual (brothers, sisters etc.)
As been pointed out on this forum, people and other species are pansexual. The hetero-, homo-, lesbian, bi-, etc. are cultural constructs of contemporary Western society, given the religious and economical constraints given us. All sexual relations, spousal arrangements and children are legally financial transactions, unromantic as it may seem. Even rape and child abuse are ultimately seen by modern society as financial, with penalties of monetary worth (criminal cases creates financial instruments in the form of bonds). Even if no cash is exchanged, there is trade in the form of pleasure being exchanged, as r1 suggests.
The OP is trying to go beyond the financial nexus, as well as trade, with Western romantic love, a Victorian era interpretation of the courtly love of the Middle Ages. This is commendable, but obviously difficult. Even if reached, the romance will end in separation, divorce or death of the partners involved. True romance always ends tragically. Even harder is unconditional love, which is really only practical for those with nothing to lose, including one's life. But the ending is more pathos than tragedy.
A balance must be struck between love and simple survival. So romantic love would be the practical middle ground between pure predatory self-interest and transcendental death. It doesn't matter who you love, as long as it's legal. Good luck, OP. Enjoy it while it lasts!
I see what you're saying, R7, but I don't fully agree. Most of us fall in love with one gender or the other, primarily and who you fall in love with is not a construct, it's inherent to who you are.
I was raised to fall in love with women but I don't. I was raised only knowing heterosexual couples Yes, I love women I've even had sex with women, but I do not fall in love with them...never have, as much as I wanted to fall in love with them. That cannot be explained away as a social construct.
As for all romantic love ending in tragedy, that's simply not true. My parents are still together and love each other very much. Of course, they had rough times, and now that they're old, and in bad health, do not have sex anymore, but they love each other more than they love anyone else.
Actually, heterosexual men who engage in situational homosexuality often do express Romantic affection for the dudes they bang. As anyone who watches prison reality shows, many heterosexual prisoners take male "wives" in prison who cook, clean, and otherwise replicate spousal relationships men tend to have with women. In some cases, the heterosexual man refers to the other dude as his "wifey" or "piece." However, there is a dtrong tendency of heterorsexual dudes to feminize or femalize men they are involved with longterm. they definitely want to establish that they are a man in the coupling. It definitely can be more than mere sex with straight dudes.
r8, social constructs are stereotypical sets of expected behaviors. I know you're not a robot and do have some degree of human unpredictability.
People fall in love with whom they fall in love with. They don't choose it. It happens. Too many preconceptions invented by others hide our real selves, as the forced heterosexuality you underwent.
No one needs to label themselves as anything. All sorts of sexual impulses course through everyone--that some people prefer this or that gender is not one's ultimate identity.
Sexual preferences tell us nothing about the sort of person one is, despite political partisans on the subject. Is the person kind or cruel? Open or closed minded? Brave or fearful? Can they be magnanimous? These are the qualities that really matter in life.
Sexual stereotypes that have an expected set of behaviors are a creation of society, through religious, political and marketing goals. "Sexual types" have become marketing demographics, just like age groups, political affiliation, religion, ethnicity. We can be real without the mental baggage. Like it or not, we will never escape being an unique individual. People will gather temporary together for common goals. But once the goals are completed, you're back to you again.
The self-interested psychopath on one end of the spectrum, and the unconditional love devotee at the other extreme can only end their lives in pathos.
Romantic love is the great middle ground. Tragedy is only possible for those romantically in love. When one partner dies, the survivor will know true tragedy.
Good luck with your journey, Sir!
We go through this monthly, if not weekly.
Most of us fuck, and fall in love with, one gender.
Some people have sex with both genders. In rare cases, that person is capable of falling in love with--not just fucking--either sex. That's what I consider a true bisexual, though most male bisexuals live straight lives, for fear of the stigma of the gay label.
(One thing straight folks have in common with DLers is that if a man had ever had sex with another man, he's gay and hasn't come out yet.)
There's one group who give bisexuals a bad name. Masters and Johnson described a category they called ambisexual. These people, predominantly male, can easily switch from one gender to another. However, they never fall in love with a person of either sex, as they're primarily narcissistic. They're only in love with themselves, in the end. Sex is simply a prop for their egos
Well, for some people, love knows no gender. I have known several people where that was true. One man I knew absolutely loved women - and men! But his relationships with men never were really serious or complicated, and he became very involved with the women.
[quote]Well, for some people, love knows no gender.
I'm sure there are people like this but they're certainly not the rule. Most people fall for one gender or the other. And I would say especially gay men, because we have to overcome societal taboos in order to act on who we fall for. In other words, even if a man prefers men, if he CAN fall for a woman, that's what he's going to do.
r4 is right
Since when are Hitler, Stalin, PolPot, Idi Amin, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc, sexy. They're the only demons I know of.
Love taken out of the sexual frame is platonic love, which can exist between all sorts of people. The bond between two committed partners usually still has an element of sexual attraction (in my case, it fckn better have). Whether or not you 'love' the dude you're banging does not determine whether you're a true homo or not. As with most things human, sexual behaviour is a little too complicated to be explained with such twee generalisations.
What if one does not enjoy the actual homosexual but is still solely sexually attracted to men and enjoys "being" with other men in a romantic way (dating, travel, etc.)?
Oops, I meant "homosex" not "homosexual".
There is homosexuality (desire for sex with members of the same sex)
And there are homophiles (desire for romantic love with members of the same sex)
There are poor unfortunate people who are homophiles but heterosexuals... and others who are homosexuals but heterophiles.
We are fat fucks and fucking fabulous. Of course we will die in middle age but Americans are fucking awesome and humble too.
I've been saying that for years, OP -- it's not who you fuck, it's who you fall in love with. I can lay on my back and a man can fuck me all day, or even go down on me and make me come. But that's not going to make me straight. Nothing is EVER going to make me straight. Because it's not who you fuck, it's who you fall in love with. And I could never, ever fall in love with a man. EVER.
OP, you stole my rant. I demand reimbursement.
"Love" is just a chemical in your brain.
Nonsense R23. Love is about thought and values, not just emotion.
The confusion around this issue is because straights always try to redefine homosexuality as only sex acts, and not anything to do with emotions, which can be non-sexual or platonic, which they try to define as some how heterosexual. In truth the love between a brother and sister has nothing to do with heterosexuality or any family paradigms it created. Romantic love is a sexualized love regardless of whether or not there is sex. Filial love is not the same thing, although I hate to use the word because its derivation in koine Greek was a different concept entirely.
Exactly, R23. Other than sex when I want it, leave me the fuck alone!
R26=man with a guilty past
You had me at "insert into a loving frame".
Every perception that you experience and every one of your responses is "just a chemical in your brain."
OP, dear, why do you feel the need to spin your personal and rather naive notions into a DL thread.
Your assumption of "love" as the basis of homosexuality in its "true" form is suspect. You may want it to be so but it is not founded in evidence. I may love all kinds of men but that doesn't mean I want to have sex with them. Does that mean I'm gay or not gay? I may have sex with men and enjoy it, and be friendly, and not "love" them. Does that make me straight? Am I gay or not gay in turns, since a man-loving man may also have gay sex with the worst intentions? And what in the world to you mean by "love," anyway? Eros? Well, from what you're saying it's not founded in erotic love. Therefore you want to idealize and romanticize homosexuality to fulfill your own personal needs and need for categorization.
You also ape the patterns posed for courtly heterosexual "love," and seek to link gay people to standards that have proven impracticable there, and to burden us with their bullshit.
And if you're talking about "the capacity for love" between same-sex partners to cover situations where the men or women don't actually love each other, you are defining yourself out of a corner and into a box. How do you quantify "capacity"?
So stop where you are and work on your own life. And admit that homosexuality or what we call homosexuality is a complex, varied, hard-to-pin-down notion that does include emotional content and attachment, and does include physical expressions of sex with people of the same sex, and inevitably is maddening to try to pin down. You know, like everything to do with being a fully fledged human being.
It isn't so much about love, but about desire. I was a homosexual long before I had sex with another man, or fell in love. Most will have sex and desires with many men before they fall in love with someone. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are a mental state of being. Many a gay man has had sex with women, married them and had children and then left, because there was only a need to be accepted as "normal", eventually their true desires for men over ruled everything else.
[quote]Heterosexual men can fuck other men in the ass if they're in a rage
You're just making shit up.
R31 hit the nail on the head, bravo!
[quote]It isn't so much about love, but about desire. I was a homosexual long before I had sex with another man, or fell in love. Most will have sex and desires with many men before they fall in love with someone. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are a mental state of being. Many a gay man has had sex with women, married them and had children and then left, because there was only a need to be accepted as "normal", eventually their true desires for men over ruled everything else.
Very true. Homosexuality is biological. Everything about me is homosexual, not just who I love. My genes are what make me gay. Homosexuality is not just a behavior. Some believe this and some closeted gay men who claim to be straight believe this because external and internal homophobia has damaged them on an intimate level where they can't love another man (like "straight" men having promiscuous gay sex), but it's our genes that make is us who we are. It goes much deeper than sexuality or emotions. It's biological.
OP is an idiot. Why are you apologizing for being gay?
One can be homosexual and never 'fall in love' with another man.
And the opposite is true. Although we're living in a very reactionary time and few heterosexual men currently speak openly about their love and admiration for other men, in other times and other cultures, heterosexual men loving other men in a non-sexual way was an idealized form of love thought superior to the love of women ie Platonic love.
IMHO Plenty of heterosexual men feel non-sexual love for other men: brothers, fathers, sons, fellow soldiers, friends, colleagues, mentors, students, etc.
OP, half to two thirds of the people posting here don't even have a clue of what you're talking about. Of course I agree with you. But, datalounge attracts the underbelly of the world homosexual community. It's all about dick, fucking and sucking. And, if one dares say that there is more to our lives than that, we become self loathing, troll freepers. Stay the course, OP, and just come here to amuse yourself from time to time. .. Anything more is wasted effort.