My liberal wife thinks all TVs are gay

[LilSissyStevie]

Yes the emotional connection is necessary for me too. But I recognize that's it's still separate from sexual arousal. The emotional connection for me is necessary but not sufficient. I love my cat but he doesn't turn me on. People are generally sexually attracted to others long before there is any kind of emotional connection. In fact they would most likely avoid any kind of romantic involvement if there were no chance of being sexually attracted.

If a woman is turned on by symbols of masculinity (like hairy chest, etc.) then it stands to reason she might be turned off when those symbols are obliterated by the things crossdressers do.

The word fetish just means "that which is sexually arousing" when you strip away all the cultural BS that privileges some types of sexual arousal over others.

[Katey888]

This has been quite an interesting excursion for me - I think there's something about the fetishistic aspects of this that highlight why muggles seem to automatically associate crossdressing with something sexual and explains why so many other sites major in that aspect. I think what Stevie is saying holds a lot of credence for me and what I've observed.

Couple of things that I'm not so sure about though...

Do we also count someone bisexual who merely fantasizes about men when dressed but again who has been and is in a relationship with a woman. If they say they are bisexual, then do we count them as such for the purpose of defining statistics. What about someone who has had same-sex once or twice, but who talks about it as if it happens all the time when participating in threads here to sort of get into the spirit of things.

On the first point - no. I think that qualifies as bi-curious if they've indicated that the fantasy may go beyond just fantasy - but it doesn't mean that everyone will act on that fantasy.
On the second point - this is exactly the same as if you ask a question, however carefully worded it may be. At some point you have to trust the answer that's given. You make it sound like there's a trend here to over-play bisexuality but I don't see that at all - if anything it's the hetero-lobby here that's more vocal...

I do take issue with the following:

So how do we count people who use men as props to heighten their fantasy of being a sexually desirable woman, since there is no attraction to men when they are in male mode? I have a difficult time defining this as bi-sexual. Are they having sex with men? Yes. Are they fundamentally attracted to men? No. And how often have they tried having sex with men ... once or twice over the course of a lifetime? Are they habitually in relationships with the opposite-sex?

This sounds like bisexual CDs are being accused of objectifying men? Which is ironic when you consider how often men are (rightly) accused of objectifying women... but especially so as a CD - so now some of us objectify men too? And purely as a fetishistic sex accessory? No - I'm sorry - I think that whole explanation of "if you just have sex of a particular type it doesn't define your sexuality" doesn't hold true for most people. There may be a few that it's true of but I somehow doubt that most people would be able to undertake a consensual sexual act without some degree of fundamental attraction to the gender they're doing it with. And just because they are not habitually in relationships with the opposite sex means little - most folk here seem to follow monogamous relationships and given that we still predominantly see married/ SO relationships on this forum, in the same way that hetero folk have regular affairs outside their main relationship, I think it's perfectly reasonable to accept that bisexual folk with an SO do not necessarily demonstrate any romantic, habitual relationships even if they were having a physical one.

One thing this debate has served to highlight again... just why the muggles might think we're all gay, or bisexual, or at least very, very confused as to what our motivations are for doing this and how much more complex they become when you do throw sex and relationships into the mix.

Katey x

[PaulaQ]

@Katey888 - bisexual people are simply people who can feel attraction to either gender. They are perfectly capable of monogamous relationships. Sure, some don't adhere to monogamy, but then neither do all straight, gay, or lesbian people.

The idea that bisexuals are inherently polyamorous is one of the more vile examples of biphobia. ReineD's claim that only people who habitually have sex with people of both genders is another common example of biphobia, and it is an attempt to erase bisexual people from existence. I've heard similar remarks from gay and lesbian people. Yeah, if up you want to know the least supported group in the LGBT alliance, it's bisexuals. Sure, trans people are frequently second class in such organizations, but literally in many bisexuals may as well not exist at all.

[flatlander_48]

PQ:

What you said is painfully true. The historical reality is that when people wanted to add B to LG, there was GREAT resistance, related to what you touched on. Sadly, in many ways, the fundamental question is one of existence. Ls and Gs didn't want to believe that it is possible to be attracted to both sexes.

RD & K:

Regarding differences in behavior for people as a function of how they are dressed, here's my take. I think dressing is a great enabler. Not unlike the process of acting, it allows different perspectives to arise. We can consider ourselves differently. We can behave differently. How many people here have said that dressing changes them into a calmer, less aggressive and kinder person? These traits were ALWAYS present, but may get suppressed or minimized as a function of our conditioning and socialization as males.

In this context, I have to view any M2F crossdresser who becomes attracted to men only while dressed as bisexual. Dressing serves as an enabler to hold the conditioning and socialization at bay. The feeling was there all the time; they just needed the right circumstances to allow permission.

As it relates to me in particular, my chronology is this. I thought I was gay at 42-43. I realized that I was actually bisexual at around 47-48. I started dressing at 54. In my case, dressing doesn't act as an enabler regarding the idea of seeking men.

What I've said is in no way intended to cast aspersions on anyone. I think as transgender people we all have a lot of things to sort through and hopefully reconcile.

DeeAnn

[ReineD]

I think there's something about the fetishistic aspects of this that highlight why muggles seem to automatically associate crossdressing with something sexual and explains why so many other sites major in that aspect.

There are lots of fetish sites out there, precisely because the CDing is fetish for so many CDers.

On the first point - no. I think that qualifies as bi-curious if they've indicated that the fantasy may go beyond just fantasy - but it doesn't mean that everyone will act on that fantasy.

First, not "everyone", and second, what does "bi-curious" mean? … Is it, "Gee, I really like fantasizing about this stuff, so I guess I'll just label it bi-curious". Honestly Katey, what do most people do when they are curious about something? They investigate and eventually determine what it means for them. If they persist in being "curious", then might it be that the fantasy aspect isn't something they are not willing to give up, because it is too much fun?

This sounds like bisexual CDs are being accused of objectifying men?

No, of course being bi does not mean that one objectifies their partner. There are bisexual men and bisexual women who have rewarding relationships with both sexes.

But we also have another type of CDer … who says that he doesn't like men in male mode. This does not sound bisexual to me. Also, of the CDers who only fantasize about sex with men, do you pay attention to the wording of some of these fantasies, (faceless men, the only part they are attracted to is the penis, they are not interested in kissing them, not interested in an emotional relationship, etc).

And again, I'm not saying that EVERY CDer is like this, just a number of them. My point earlier was not there is no such thing as a bisexual CDer, but that people who produce statistics need to take into account all factors, and not include fantasy in the results.

Which is ironic when you consider how often men are (rightly) accused of objectifying women... but especially so as a CD - so now some of us objectify men too?

Simply put, yes some CDers do objectify sex. It's not about men or women for a number of CDers. It's about the CDing and the highs derived from it. Maybe you don't feel that way for yourself, Katey, but not everyone is like you. Also, it is unrealistic to say there is not an element of fantasy on any CDer forum.

And again, to be clear, I am not saying that ALL CDers are fetishistic or fanciful. But I cannot say that NONE are either, hence the need to examine answers in poll threads carefully.

just why the muggles might think we're all gay, or bisexual, or at least very, very confused

Again, I am not thinking "all" anything. The variety in this forum proves there is no such thing as "none" or "all".

[Pat]

I wouldn't put much credence into the author Dr. Vernon Coleman.

Sorry, didn't mean to light the fuse and walk away on that one.

As I said it was a summary of the results of a newspaper poll. So, yes, the respondents were self-selecting and limited to those who cared enough to pick up a pen, fill in the form, address it, stamp it and walk it to a mailbox. All of these things would invalidate it as a study, but that's not what it was. To underscore it was a popular quiz and not a scientific survey, there were exactly 20 questions.

In his paper he publishes the questionnaire and question by question reports the results. He did not try to estimate the number of crossdressers in the general population or anything. What he did was give results that would be interesting, I think, to someone trying to understand something about crossdressers -- would they have a sex change if they could? 77% said no. Do they go out of the house dressed? 47% said yes. (Seems high to me, but as you pointed out the sample was self-selected.) He fills in with his personal commentary and with quotes from the respondents.

The value of the paper, to me, is not its scientific rigor but the information it gives to people who are just being confronted by a partner's crossdressing or a crossdresser just coming to terms with his own. Yes, you can be a crossdresser and still be straight. No, being a crossdresser is not a greased slide to a full-on transition. You don't have to like Coleman's credentials to get the benefit from this -- the fact that he's a prima face quack doesn't change his numbers. But it's accessible information and the results seem in line with more scholarly papers.

[Kimonogirl]

TV is gay because it does not support our crusade against bigotry

[Pat]

If anyone has any different referenceable material I'd love to hear from them...

Have you seen Gates (2011): http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.ed...T-Apr-2011.pdf ?
And Conway (and Winter) has a 2011 update: http://web.hku.hk/~sjwinter/Transgen...-are-there.htm

[Greenie]

The idea that bisexuals are inherently polyamorous is one of the more vile examples of biphobia. .

I thought I would just chime in on this. I am a bisexual female, in a committed relationship with a heterosexual CDer. We have been together 8 years. I have not had the opportunity to have sex with a woman or any intimacy with a woman for 8 years. That doesn't make me any less of a bisexual just because I haven't acted on it. I have been a victim of bi-phobia many times. Not "lesbian enough, but not Straight." Lesbians in particular, do not seem to like bi-women.

Lucas thinks he is bi-curious since he has had fantasies about men. However, since we are in a commuted relationship, he will remain "curious" as ot if this is actually a sexuality component or something just a part of the fantasy. He likes thinking he is the woman in sexual encounters. I do believe bi-curiosity exists. However, after the initial act of sex with the same sex, I think that curiosity turns into actual bi-sexuality, or a denial of that identity.

[ReineD]

Sorry, didn't mean to light the fuse and walk away on that one.

No worries! Was just pointing out that his estimate is out of whack with everyone else's.

Have you seen Gates (2011): http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.ed...T-Apr-2011.pdf ?
And Conway (and Winter) has a 2011 update: http://web.hku.hk/~sjwinter/Transgen...-are-there.htm

Right. These numbers agree with the studies I have come across over the years, which is 1:300, or .0033 (.3%) Trans. I think the numbers for all GLBT are between 1.5% to 5% of the population, depending on countries and size of cohort.

The trans figures cited in post #73 (McCary less than 1%, Arndt less than .5%, and Langstrom/Zucker less than .4%-women) seem to agree with the above, but the others seem very high (Janus 3%-women 6%-men, Coleman 10%, Conway 2%-5% men, Langstrom/Zucker 2.8% men).

-----------

Greenie, my bi friends are like you, monogamous when in relationships. The belief that bi equates to polyamory is maddening. As to being bi-curious, what do you make of unattached CD males (single, divorced, or widowed), who profess their bi-curiosity without actually ever determining if they are bi or not? I don't think that fantasizing about it means that someone would be male-attracted if given the chance to be in a relationship with a male, or that they could even be in a relationship with a male.

[Greenie]

I think fantasies are fantasies. Often a corner of the mind or imagination that we would never dare to reach in real life. I think that you can determine you are bi sexual without acting on it, as long as if given the opportunity you would. So if say, a CDer has never had sex with a man, because he has been married or whatever, and says he is bi-sexual or curious, that would mean to me, that not in a monogamous relationship they would pursue men as well as women for companions. If you would never approach a man in "real life" given all the right circumstances, then I do not think it would be right to say you were "bi" just because you had the occasional fantasy. The fantasy could be situational, like wanting to be dominated, not necessarily wanting to be with a man, but the brain makes it a man, since you are female presenting in the fantasy. Unless you would act like that outside of fantasy land, I would not assume fantasy's= bisexuality. Did that make any sense?

[Pat]

I always thought bi-curious meant exactly what it sounds like on the face of it: they're curious. They aren't committing, they understand that they might suddenly have a resounding "NO" as a reaction, but they're not repulsed by the idea as many men are. So they're curious to find out if they're bi, though they might not want to take any special effort to answer the question. That's fair.

There's a whole wide range of behavior that falls between the tidy boxes of SLGB. A guy who's attracted to men but only if he's dressed as a woman? There isn't a word for it, so if he wants to use bisexual, why not? I had a friend who was "straight." He was attracted to women when he was presenting male and to men when he was presenting female. There isn't a word for that, so if he wants to use straight, who am i to contradict? What about guys who are only attracted to guys when those guys are presenting as women? No word for it. Pick straight, pick bi, pick gay -- they all fail to describe the situation equally well -- you might as well say you're pineapple.

[ReineD]

Did that make any sense?

It did, except when I apply it to my SO and others like my SO. My SO also had same-sex attraction for some years, while he was in his past relationship. The CDing was just beginning then (with her blessing) but at the time it was mostly a bedroom thing. Needless to say my SO is also monogamous so he didn't act out on it when he was with her. But then years later they broke up (nothing to do with the CDing), and my SO was single for about 10 years, save for several relationships with women that lasted from 4-8 months each. Interestingly, he was not willing to date men like he did women, for the sake of forming a relationship. Anyway, throughout those 10 years he had ample time to experiment with male-sex, and he took advantage of it. It turns out that when he actually was with other males (he experimented more than once just to make sure), it was a complete turn off! My SO is not TS, yet in his fantasy he was a sexually attractive woman. But the reality of same-sex sex shattered the illusion. So now my SO knows that he is not bi even though I'm sure he still has the fantasies, which we all know can be manipulated any way we like. We can all add the details we want, and omit the details we don't want in any fantasy and it doesn't make the fantasy any less intense.

Given the above, it is not a stretch for me to deduce that the members here who do persist in being bi-curious (but only when dressed) without ever acting out on it (even when single), suspect deep-down that the reality of the experience would shatter their fantasy? I would not count these people in the "bi" camp for the purpose of coming up with statistics about how many CDers are hetero vs. not hetero. I would definitely count the people who do have relationships with same-sex and opposite-sex, regardless of what they are wearing, but they would have to do more than "try" it once or twice and then revert back to fantasies.

[Katey888]

I always thought bi-curious meant exactly what it sounds like on the face of it: they're curious. They aren't committing, they understand that they might suddenly have a resounding "NO" as a reaction, but they're not repulsed by the idea as many men are. So they're curious to find out if they're bi, though they might not want to take any special effort to answer the question. That's fair.

There's a whole wide range of behavior that falls between the tidy boxes of SLGB. A guy who's attracted to men but only if he's dressed as a woman? There isn't a word for it, so if he wants to use bisexual, why not?

^^^ This.
You ask someone a question about this and it doesn't matter how many carefully cross-referenced, double-negative check questions you add in, if they BELIEVE in their mind that they are either Bi or Bi-curious, then that is what they are self identifying as.

Given the above, it is not a stretch for me to deduce that the members here who do persist in being bi-curious (but only when dressed) without ever acting out on it (even when single), suspect deep-down that the reality of the experience would shatter their fantasy?

It's a stretch for me - you can't deduce anything about another individual's behaviour from any sample, and certainly not just because your SO exhibited one pattern of behaviour. I obviously don't know your SO, but from what you described it would be just as valid for me to deduce that repeated experimentation and fantasy is just repression at work, and that ultimately someone will experiment again, perhaps hoping that they'll eventually find the right person that will make it a turn on? (Note that I'm not saying this is the case, just that it would still be as valid to project... it's all just projection... )

I think fantasies are fantasies. ... I would not assume fantasy's= bisexuality. Did that make any sense?

Yes - it did to me. And describes one variation again.

Look - whatever causes us do the things we do is related to gender. Whether one accepts we're TG or not, even CDers must accept that they are dressing in what society recognises as opposite gender clothing. Given that gender is involved (for most people) in sexual attraction, whatever orientation you are (except bi- see later..), it's not a stretch for me that muggles would first of all expect that this condition for MtF CDers is somehow related to attracting men (ie. thinking we're all gay), but that secondly some CDers would have this internal conflict or question going on (either due to societal mores or their own feelings) about why they do this and what ultimately validates these feelings? I don't think it's a big leap to imagine that the gender presentation 'mix up' that goes on can be related to sexuality.

In fact, it might just be that the bi- and bi-curious identifying folk amongst CDers are being more honest about this confusion than others asserting their sexual polarisation (either hetero or gay). Because isn't it the case that bisexual folk are the only ones who can truly say they are attracted to the person rather than the plumbing - whereas hetero and gay are locked into a gender preselection for partners?



Katey x

[PaulaQ]

I think fantasies are fantasies. ... Unless you would act like that outside of fantasy land, I would not assume fantasy's= bisexuality. Did that make any sense?

First of all Greenie, kudos for having the courage to come out as bisexual. I've heard horrible things said about bisexuals, and witnessed some really heartbreaking examples of just how hard it is to be bisexual.

I don't think most of the labels about sexual orientation work very well with transgender people.

I'll talk about my own history, to show you what I mean.

I was assigned male at birth, a horrible medical error that I still struggle to overcome to this day, nearly 52 years later.

I was always attracted to other boys. The problem was that I kept this to myself. Why? Well, for one thing, at an early age I figured out that showing attraction to other boys tended to end our friendship, instantly. It was Texas, in the 70's after all, and hey, these kids were straight. There were a few kids I knew who were gay. I wasn't attracted to them, at all. Perhaps I feared the stigma of being gay, as the one really openly gay kid in my highschool was later murdered because he was gay. Like I said - Texas in the 70's.

I tried dating girls in high school. I thought women were attractive, because, I realize now, I wanted to be one. I had very little success with women until I met my first wife. She needed someone to take care of her, she really did. I fell for it, even though we were terribly unsuited for one another. But hey, I was in a straight relationship, so I must be straight, right? I hated our sex life. During our relationship, I had a string of crushes on various straight guy friends.I denied these were real. Everyone has fantasies like that, right?

After our divorce, I had a couple of opportunities to be with gay men. One, in particular, was a friend, and really just one hell of a nice guy. He very politely made his interest in me known, and while part of me thought "I should really want this," the truth is, I just didn't. There was just something about these men that didn't do it for me, though I was desperately lonely.

I re-married, this time to a girl I knew from high school. She was actually the first woman I'd successfully been able to date in the years following my divorce. Women just didn't like something about me. I won't say much about that relationship, because I've talked about it a lot here. But there are two things I'd note about it:
1. Our sex life was, again, to my surprise, profoundly unsatisfying. I spent a lot of time trying not to involve my penis in all that, which I'm sure was frustrating to her at times.
2. I still had crushes on guys. I'd form friendships with straight guys, and spend a LOT of time with them. So much that my wife would make "boyfriend" jokes. I never did anything, or revealed anything other than friendship towards these men, although I often would sit with them, talking, and thinking to myself, "why in the hell can't he just shut up and kiss me?"

In all those years, I identified well with the straight world. I didn't really know many gay people, nor did I spend any time in the gay world. I'd never even been to a gay bar, for example, although I'd sometimes drive through the part of Dallas where the bars were, sort of terrified about how I felt about the whole thing. Was I gay? (Turns out, ironically enough, I'd end up living in that very neighborhood that both fascinated and terrified me, and that it would be absolutely nothing like what I'd expect. For one thing, I didn't end up having sex with any of the guys here, either, although I'd make a whole bunch of friends...)

So I come out as trans, my marriage ends, again, and I just assume "Well, I've always been with women, so I must be a lesbian!", just like 2/3rds of the other trans women I came to know. Well, ok then. So I meet some actual lesbians, both cis and trans. I'm not much like them. I try relationships with a couple of different trans women, and figure - " yep, here I go, I'm just another trans lesbian."

Except I still hated my sex life. I realized, after a time, that I got NOTHING out of having sex with either of these women. I cared about them, but I was not attracted to them that way, and lonely or not (and I was very lonely - I don't do "single" well), I just did not have those types of feelings about them. In fact, being with them really upset me, a lot.

So I started looking for guys. I finally met my boyfriend last year. It is the first relationship I've ever been in where my role in the relationship made sense to me, and the first one where my sex life has actually been enjoyable. (Before I met him, I seriously considered giving up on sex altogether until after I had GCS.) He is the only man I've ever been with. He's trans. We have this wonderful, so far anyway, straight relationship. It feels just like all the other straight relationships I've ever witnessed during my life, except my part in it just makes sense now. He's a man, I'm a woman, and what follows from that ends up being very natural feeling. It just happens - and it makes sense to us both on all levels.

So I've been with cis women. I've been with trans women. I've been with a trans man. I've been with people assigned female at birth, and with people assigned male at birth. I really have no interest in women, either cis or trans, at this point.

"Straight" seems like the best term to fit me - it is certainly the world I am comfortable in. I love my little condo in the gayborhood here in Dallas, but I don't fit in here, really. But looking back over my history, if someone pressed me on that, citing the history above, I'd have to conclude that I have no goddamned idea what I am then.

As a joke - because I never do these things - I took a quiz on Facebook this week that purports to rate you on the Kinsey scale. The result surprised me. I expected some variant of bisexual as the result, given my history. I got 0 - arrow straight. I guess that decides the matter, lol.

[flatlander_48]

PQ:

It's not unusual for the Truth to be relatively easy and uncomplicated to find. The hard part is often the agreement and acceptance of said Truth...

DeeAnn

[BLUE ORCHID]

Hi Silky, I wonder why so many people think that way.

[LilSissyStevie]

I think it's perfectly natural to think CDs are gay. It's what I thought about myself. Here's my story:

When I was about 12 I tried masturbation a few times. I didn't really know what masturbation was or what orgasms were but it felt good. I didn't have orgasms, I would just get tired after a while and lose interest. One day I came across a porn novel that was essentially gay porn but it involved one of the characters crossdressing and servicing males in various ways as a "girl." This was highly arousing to me. I had fantasized about being a girl throughout my childhood but never in an overtly sexual way. Now all of a sudden I could fantasize about being a girl sexually and the next time I masturbated I had my first orgasm. It was traumatic. In fact I was suicidal afterwords because it meant that on top of all my other troubles (I was in a mental hospital at the time - long story) I was a "queer", too.

To top it off, a few months later I had my first real sexual experience (coitus) with a girl. Me and an older girl sneaked off into an empty room in the hospital to have sex. She was going to show me the ropes, as it were. It was very awkward and we were nervous about getting caught, but somehow the deed got done. It was not a very pleasant experience and added to my suspicion that I wasn't cut out for sex with women. To top it off, she felt so guilty about the incident she confessed all to the staff and I got in big trouble.

After that my sexual fantasies revolved around specific themes: Having sex as a female with men, having sex as a submissive male with dominant females, having sex as a lesbian, having sex with dominant men as an effeminate gay bottom and various combinations of these. Within the context of my own experience idioms like "bi curious," "bi when dressed," "male lesbian" make perfect sense. What was common to these themes was that my penis was never involved in the sex and masochism. My interpretation of this was that I was gay but in denial. The idea of being "transgender" never occurred to me. A psychiatrist flat out told me when I was 16 or so, even though I never disclosed any of my sexual fantasies to him, that I was a "latent homosexual." I believed him and thought I needed to get on with it. The problem was that in "real life," as opposed to fantasy, I only seemed to be attracted to women and never to men. Once I decided to be gay, I realized that there wasn't a single guy in the world I found attractive. I didn't have any idea what an attractive male even looked like. They all looked equally unappealing to me.

I eventually gave up on the idea that I was gay or even bisexual. I just didn't have any explanation for my weird fantasies, crossdressing, kinky sexual proclivities (mostly femdom), or the fact that I didn't care to use my penis in real sex. That is until I came across the transgender angle. I spent some time wondering if I were transsexual. But that's not really it either. I don't really care if people see me as a "gender." I don't think of myself as a gender either. I'm not particularly attached to my "male identity." I just happen to be a male because I have a penis and have no real desire to get rid of it. I think that whatever transgenderism I experience stems from my fetish rather than the fetish stemming from my transgenderism. I say that even though I had cross gender fantasies long before they were recognizably sexual in nature. I had cross gender fantasies because of the constant emasculation and emasculation anxiety I experienced a kid. If I were a girl, I reasoned, no one would criticize me for being a sissy. When I reached puberty, I naturally sexualized my emasculation anxiety by imagining myself in emasculated/feminized situations.

So that's all there is to it. It comes down to arousal by association to symbols of femininity/emasculation. I wasn't aroused by men, I was aroused by the idea of being aroused by men. I wasn't a gay bottom, I was aroused by the idea of being a gay bottom. I wasn't a woman, I was aroused by the idea of being a woman. The idea is the fetish. Notice this is different from autogynephila since AGP only attempts to explain "arousal by the idea of being a woman" by "erotic target location error." ETLE as an explanation for AGP is a mistake, IMO. It's not just a mistake for explaining transsexuality, it doesn't explain the fetish either.

[ophelia]

Beware of blanket statements. I await imperical evidence

[ReineD]

It's a stretch for me - you can't deduce anything about another individual's behaviour from any sample, and certainly not just because your SO exhibited one pattern of behaviour.

OK, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

You can label people who fantasize about same-sex as "bi", and I'll only label them bi when they have actually been out there doing it regularly (not once or twice ... that's called experimentation). And they're even more bi for me, when they can have same-sex sex while they're completely naked.

it would be just as valid for me to deduce that repeated experimentation and fantasy is just repression at work, and that ultimately someone will experiment again, perhaps hoping that they'll eventually find the right person that will make it a turn on?

Except that it's hard to find "the right person" when they're turned off of guys in guy mode, when they don't even want to kiss them, hold their hands, let alone have an emotional relationship with them. And why would someone want to experiment again if the actual experience didn't measure up and was a turn off (meaning a turn off, not "not the right person").

So again, we'll just need to agree to disagree.

Hope we're still friends!

[flatlander_48]

LSS:

Fascinating! Thanks for sharing. While you have been able to sum up your journey here, I'm sure that it represents a lot of time, thought and pain in getting to this point. Glad you stuck with it as it was certainly not a simple endeavor. Sadly, I think, many would have given up somewhere along the way. But further, it also speaks to the various paths that we take to arrive at this place.

One point: I would suggest that you state what I highlighted a bit differently. Clearly folks here will understand it within the context of what you have written. However, there are those who will see "decided to be gay" and it will reinforce their misinformed notion that "it IS a choice!!".

A psychiatrist flat out told me when I was 16 or so, even though I never disclosed any of my sexual fantasies to him, that I was a "latent homosexual." I believed him and thought I needed to get on with it. The problem was that in "real life," as opposed to fantasy, I only seemed to be attracted to women and never to men. Once I decided to be gay, I realized that there wasn't a single guy in the world I found attractive. I didn't have any idea what an attractive male even looked like. They all looked equally unappealing to me.

[LilSissyStevie]

rephrasing, I would say that I decided to accept and allow it.


I have some questions for those in the "when is one bi" debate. My wife had a friend whose husband announced one day after many years of marriage that he was gay, wanted a divorce, and was moving to Palm Springs to live with is new boy friend. He'd been living a lie his whole life and now he was going to be true to himself. She was completely blindsided. She had no clue. She thought their sex life, while not perfect, was pretty good. If there was a problem, it was that he wanted sex more than her. So was this guy really gay as he believed himself to be? Was he bi since he seemed to enjoy sex with women before he "discovered" he was gay? Was he always gay/bi or did he only become gay/bi the moment he acted on his same sex impulses?

[Stephanie47]

I'm a child of the 1950's and 1960's when gays, lesbians and cross dressers were scorned. As a teen I understood who a gay man or lesbian woman felt attraction to. To be outwardly gay or lesbian was hazardous to one's health, well being, employment, societal interactions, etc. With hindsight I can clearly understand why a gay or lesbian would hide in the closet.

As a young teen I dabbled in my mother's lingerie draw: bra, panty, girdle, hosiery, dress. I was totally confused. Society in the 1950's and 1960's clearly espoused the belief that men who wore women's clothing were gays. Now gay back then was to be happy and carefree. Back then society said I was a "queer, a faggot, a fruit" and other unpleasant terms. Of course violence was also rampant. I was convinced I must have been a "queer, a faggot, a fruit" because society said so. How could I be all those when I was "excited" by cute girls and hot movie actresses? Fortunately, Uncle Sam decided I should be in an all male environment for several years. Well, with all those men who were in great physical shape around, and, not at all interested it seemed something was askew. Heck, I met my wife while in the army. Back then a lot of people thought ALL women in the military was lesbians. Maybe that's a topic for another thread.

I wonder how many cross dressing heterosexual men were "pushed" into homosexual relationships because society had branded them as "queers, faggot and fruits."

Too many times people make their opinions based on a lack of knowledge, erroneous assumptions and prejudice.

[flatlander_48]

rephrasing, I would say that I decided to accept and allow it.


I have some questions for those in the "when is one bi" debate. My wife had a friend whose husband announced one day after many years of marriage that he was gay, wanted a divorce, and was moving to Palm Springs to live with is new boy friend. He'd been living a lie his whole life and now he was going to be true to himself. She was completely blindsided. She had no clue. She thought their sex life, while not perfect, was pretty good. If there was a problem, it was that he wanted sex more than her. So was this guy really gay as he believed himself to be? Was he bi since he seemed to enjoy sex with women before he "discovered" he was gay? Was he always gay/bi or did he only become gay/bi the moment he acted on his same sex impulses?

Regarding being gay or bisexual:
It isn't just about sex. There's a whole bunch of things that go into the mix. Definitely sex is part of it, but it's also who you from intimate (in the broadest sense) with, how you align yourself politically, etc. The only difference for bisexual people is that gender isn't the first gating factor. It's somewhere down the list; maybe 3rd, 4th or who knows?

When I first considered having physical intimacy with men, a fascinating thought occured to me. That was I could choose to be the active partner or the passive partner or move back and forth as I saw fit. I chose to be the passive partner and that opened up a distinctly new train of thought. It was a very different way of looking at sexual dynamics and it fascinated me. It was completely unlike the rigid behaviors that I had assumed were appropriate. That new freedom can be intoxicating. Further, if approached correctly, there is no reason that a gay relationship has to look like an opposite sex reltionship. You don't necessarily have the preset expectations (wife does this, husband does that) that you would see in many opposite sex couples. So, perhaps the husband of the friend was just responding to this new sense of freedom.

In any event, I believe ones sexuality is predetermined. And, that is independent of whether you know it or respond to it. Experiences play an important part as they help us understand what we are.

I wonder how many cross dressing heterosexual men were "pushed" into homosexual relationships because society had branded them as "queers, faggot and fruits."

No, people can't be pushed, convinced or turned. Whatever your native sexuality is, that's what it is. This ties in with the concept that homophobes erroneously believe: gay people Recruit. No way that you're going to turn someone who does not have a predisposition.

[Katey888]

Seems like we have a need for some deeper definitions to identify the sub-segments - like: you can be hetero or gay to begin with, but if you've had physical relations with both genders can you ever not be bi? If you decide it's not for you - presumably you just made a mistake, like folk that try smoking but never continue - does that always make you a smoker? No. I don't think so - I agree with Reine on this one (see - still friends ) But how about folk that start off gay, then get married, have a family, then decide they become true to themselves and go back to full-time gay? (Stevie's example) We have some high profile ex-politicos here that have been in that camp (pardon the pun)... It's complex isn't it?

And I still think that's one of the educational aspects of this discussion - I'm sure there was a time when I was 'worried' about my sexuality because of my CDing. I am sure that losing my virginity in a 'normal' hetero way and finding that I had no feelings I should be trying something different from a gender perspective was ultimately a great relief for me as a young man. (Note that I say this from an earlier, pressured perspective when there was less tolerance for being anything other than hetero) I still find it totally mind-blowing that we all do the gender-bending, dressing thing (to some extent) but we can still have all the complexity of sexuality overlaid as well. This is why muggles dismiss attempts to explain it - it's too much to grasp and much easier (especially for those with closed minds) just to think of us all as gay drag queens.

We still also adhere to stereotypes here, I find, particularly gender ones. Stephanie's point about how some see all military women as lesbians is a classic; my wife always trots out the "one butch; one effeminate" in every gay relationship (I try to educate her but.... ). The world is rife with misunderstanding and a lack of willingness to be open-minded... it's just too much effort for some.

BTW - DeeAnn:

When I first considered having physical intimacy with men, a fascinating thought occured to me. That was I could choose to be the active partner or the passive partner or move back and forth as I saw fit.

Perhaps stereotypes have got the better of you too? It's also possible for that in an opposite sex relationship...

And thanks to you and Stevie for being willing to speak so openly about your feelings and sexuality - for those that want to listen I think it helps understanding how others feel and perceive their relationships.

Katey x