Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community (https://thetfp.com/tfp/)
-   Tilted Sexuality (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-sexuality/)
-   -   The Ethics of Tempting Someone to "Switch Teams" (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-sexuality/151843-ethics-tempting-someone-switch-teams.html)

Willravel 11-07-2009 02:50 PM

The Ethics of Tempting Someone to "Switch Teams"
 
Heterosexual, bi-curious, bisexual, and homosexual. Oh and transgendered. And asexual. And those that choose not to label themselves.

So let's say you're a heterosexual male and you become friends with a homosexual female (if you're a lady reading this, switch the genders from here on in, please). Yes, it happens. You didn't become friends with this woman to "change" her or any other egotistical, chauvinistic bullshit, but simply because she's cool and you maybe have common interests and principles. In the normal course of friendship, occasionally boundaries can be broken. Maybe you go from friend to flirting, on instinct, and she reciprocates. Maybe she flirts first. The point is that you get the impression that she may not be totally homosexual and is showing a romantic, not just platonic, interest. And again it's not about ego or conquering or changing someone.

This seems very shaky ethical ground. You could play it safe/respectful and keep things at the friend level, and let the other stuff drop completely. You could test the water a bit, flirt more, ask questions, etc. You could dive in head-first and tell her that you may be developing romantic feelings and you think she might be developing the same feelings.

There are adequate arguments for each of these. Obviously not making any active movements on the subject is a sign that you respect her to understand who she is. Maybe you misinterpreted the flirting, it's happened before. The second seems equally safe, respecting her but also, in your role as friend, giving her an outside observation. The worst that could happen is the questions are too much and you move on to something else. The last, and arguably most controversial, would be about being honest about yourself, which is important in a friendship or a romantic relationship.

It's all very complicated, especially if you're not as acclimated with the idea of bisexuality and homosexuality. Recently, I found myself in a situation not totally unlike this and decided to simply bite my tongue. I've misread signals before and I value the friendship waaay too much to put it through that kind of awkwardness. I also truly respect her sexuality and feel that I wouldn't be acting consistently with that respect if I started "testing" her.

So what are your thoughts on the issue? Do you have any experience? Are you heterosexual and don't know? Are you bisexual or homosexual with any experience in this area? How would you react?

World's King 11-07-2009 02:58 PM

Will, no matter how many times you ask. I'm not switching teams for you.

Strange Famous 11-07-2009 03:04 PM

I think the only ethics of dating/screwing are that it is best not to cheat, not to lie, and not to hurt people on purpose.

I think all gay people are open to the idea of being straight - its so much the culturally dominant position that you would have to be incredibly insular not to be.

I think the real issue is liking a friend a bit more than a friend, but not being sure how she feels, and not knowing whether to risk rejection and losing a friend... but if some kind of gener/sexual politics thing is a justification for you I think it cant hurt.

grumpyolddude 11-07-2009 05:32 PM

I've seen it posted elsewhere that sexuality can be fluid for some people. Just because your friend has been same-sex exclusive up until now, doesn't mean that she could never be attracted to the right guy.

Of course, she could view your flirtatious play as simply goofing around with a friend she trusts not to take it all too seriously.

Are you content to relax and let her take the lead along these lines? Do you feel the need to resolve this?

Willravel 11-07-2009 06:00 PM

I like being honest with my irl friends, almost to a fault (I used to have a problem with dishonesty, if we're being honest). Still, I'm not stupid, I know that every lesbian in the world has to put up with guys hitting on them out of ignorance or trying to convert them out of hubris. The last thing I want to do is become another one of those guys, especially with someone I'm good friends with.

I don't want this thread to be just about my situation, though. I was hoping this might be a good conversation in a broader sense. If I glean some enlightenment, super, but I hope others can, too.

Baraka_Guru 11-07-2009 08:06 PM

It's been hinted at already, but I agree that sexuality for some is broader than it is for others. Some identify with being straight, but have interests in bisexuality, while others identify as gay but may have bisexual tendencies as well. Others simply consider themselves bisexual but may prefer one sex over the other when it comes to long-term relationships.

As for ethics, you only break human decency when you attempt to pressure someone into being something they aren't. You can fall into this trap by making assumptions and by being covert about your own intentions. Honesty is the best policy in things such as this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2726261)
I think all gay people are open to the idea of being straight - its so much the culturally dominant position that you would have to be incredibly insular not to be.

I sincerely doubt all gay people are open to being straight. By that same token, it's like saying all straight people are open to being gay based on curiosity and recent cultural phenomenon and openness about homosexuality (not to mention that in some contexts and communities it's "cool" or "fashionable" to be gay). It simply isn't true.

This is not to say that some who identify as being gay aren't interested in being straight or may want to be straight, but this can be either a healthy thing or an unhealthy thing. If you are gay and hate the idea of it because of cultural pressure, this is probably a bad thing. I can't see gays typically being open to becoming straight just because it's culturally dominant to be that way. From what I've seen, many gays are quite happy being a part of their own community. "Straightness" doesn't seem to be much of a factor. Being gay isn't a choice any more than being straight is a choice.

Are you open to the idea of being gay?

Willravel 11-07-2009 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru (Post 2726344)
It's been hinted at already, but I agree that sexuality for some is broader than it is for others. Some identify with being straight, but have interests in bisexuality, while others identify as gay but may have bisexual tendencies as well. Others simply consider themselves bisexual but may prefer one sex over the other when it comes to long-term relationships.

As for ethics, you only break human decency when you attempt to pressure someone into being something they aren't. You can fall into this trap by making assumptions and by being covert about your own intentions. Honesty is the best policy in things such as this.

I'd never intentionally pressure someone to be what they're not (except for extreme cases, like a violent racist about to hurt a black guy), but this is an area where there may be unknown unknowns. I don't want to make assumptions on the one hand, but on the other hand I've known folks that did change teams or that went from heterosexual/homosexual to bisexual.

For the time being, I'm okay simply dismissing this as mixed signals and getting back to the status quo. I'm more than willing to admit there are aspects of other people's sexuality that I may never understand, and it's not my place to make assumptions of any kind.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru (Post 2726344)
Are you open to the idea of being gay?

If I may interject for a second, have you ever spent even a moment considering whether or not you may be bisexual? I don't think that's abnormal for a heterosexual and doesn't necessarily make you bisexual or even bi-curoious. I asked myself that question when I was maybe 16 or 17 because I had my first friend that happened to by gay. After I honestly considered it, I reaffirmed my heterosexuality and moved on. I've never been sexually attracted to a man and I'm consistently sexually attracted to women. If, however, upon consideration I realized that I might be attracted to men, I would have probably been happier in the long run.

Maybe Strange, and everyone else for that matter, should in the most honest way possible ask that difficult question of him or herself. Just in case. The last thing you want to do is live a lie. Hopefully.

YellowBird 11-08-2009 04:54 AM

I was messing around with a girl for a number or months, even a year and the whole time she dead set claimed she was straight, even to me and her other close friends. She's since changed that and no longer gives herself a label. I've got to a point where I'm reasonably happy to call myself bisexual. and I met a lovely girl the other day :D


I think convincing reasonably liberal straight people to mess around with the same sex is very different to a gay person doing the same thing because they're already been through the struggle of working out what their sexual identity is and are comfortable with it.

Baraka_Guru 11-08-2009 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel (Post 2726348)
If I may interject for a second, have you ever spent even a moment considering whether or not you may be bisexual? I don't think that's abnormal for a heterosexual and doesn't necessarily make you bisexual or even bi-curoious. I asked myself that question when I was maybe 16 or 17 because I had my first friend that happened to by gay. After I honestly considered it, I reaffirmed my heterosexuality and moved on. I've never been sexually attracted to a man and I'm consistently sexually attracted to women. If, however, upon consideration I realized that I might be attracted to men, I would have probably been happier in the long run.

Maybe Strange, and everyone else for that matter, should in the most honest way possible ask that difficult question of him or herself. Just in case. The last thing you want to do is live a lie. Hopefully.

I think everyone has considered their sexuality, whether consciously or subconsciously. I don't think we simply "default" to purely heterosexual or purely homosexual and be done with it, only to have the picture muddled as we experience life.

I think it's difficult, however, to end up living against your sexual orientation based on cultural conditioning. Gay parents don't make gay children. You can't catch gay, and all that. So how could one become straight if they were already gay? Homosexuality occurs in children. It's not simply something that pops up in puberty and beyond.

There are, of course, cases where people hide their sexuality. Closeted gays, I imagine, could find themselves in a position where they are fooling not only others, but themselves.

The way Strange framed the issue seemed to imply that gays can simply consider switching teams based on peer pressure or other cultural pressures. But it's not like they chose to be gay.

seamaiden 11-08-2009 08:20 AM

I'm a straight woman, although I state that with some hesitation. I have been sexually attracted to a couple of women in my life. I've never had sex with a woman, but if a friendship had developed with these woman (in the past) I think it could have turned sexual if the attraction was mutual.

I'm not sure about the ethics issue, with regards to tempting someone to switch teams. If you're friends with this person, and express your attraction to her, I can't see how she would find it offensive. She may find your honesty endearing, even if she didn't feel the same way about you. If your hit on a woman, just because you know she's a lesbian and think it would be hot to fuck her, then you're a jerk.

Xerxys 11-08-2009 11:18 AM

Will, you should stop watching the L word.

Zeraph 11-08-2009 11:56 AM

Since we can all make our own choices I don't see much difference in approaching someone regardless of sexuality. I'm not really sure what you mean by 'tempt' as trying to force an agreeable partner is just as bad as doing it to a disagreeable one.

...unless you're a super scientist with a pheromone love potion...

Willravel 11-08-2009 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xerxys (Post 2726499)
Will, you should stop watching the L word.

I've been meaning to watch that, actually, but I don't really have time. Looks like it's not on anymore.

loquitur 11-08-2009 12:55 PM

I don't see any issue with responding to overtures. I do have an issue with invading someone else's psychic space. If she defined herself as lesbian then you're not being fair to her by hitting on her. If you are feeling sexual tension and it's difficult to handle being near her, then if you have a relatinship that enables you to discuss it, do that, and if not, you need to step back. But if you're both feeling an attraction, then she's more likely to have bi feelings than totally lesbian, and if she's ok with seeing where it goes, and you're interested, too, then go for it.

GreyWolf 11-09-2009 06:29 AM

It all depends on your approach. Just because a woman is a lesbian, doesn't mean that I, as a straight guy, can't appreciate her beauty and sexuality. If I compliment her on her that and it offends her, then that is HER problem. If that compliment makes her feel any sort of good will towards me, then it's not an issue. Same with a gay guy.

Accidentally hitting on someone whose orientation doesn't include your own sex happens, and there's nothing wrong with that if you don't persist once being rejected. If an other-oriented friend/acquaintance expresses some interest (directly or more subtly), then it's just mutual attraction. How far it goes is like any other relationship... but you have to know when you've reached the boundary. It helps to be particularly sensitive if you know this may not be SOP for the other party.

Deliberately setting out to try and seduce someone who is not interested due to their orientation is malicious, and if you're successful, could cost you a friend and possibly do some real emotional damage to the other person.

snowy 11-09-2009 07:49 AM

If a person is truly homosexual, with little to no attraction to the opposite sex, then "tempting" is really the wrong word to use. I know a number of lesbians who enjoy being friends with men, but the thought of heterosexual sex just gives them the heebie jeebies, so you're not going to tempt them with anything you have on offer. Sorry.

I think it's unlikely if a person is truly a homosexual to persuade them to somehow change teams. While sexuality is fluid for some people, it really isn't for most people. Think about it. While this situation may be every heterosexual man's fantasy, what is the likelihood that any of you heterosexual men would turn homosexual? Given the previous responses, the number looks to be zero.

All I ask of you gents is to respect homosexuality as a valid orientation, one that occurs regardless of choice, and when you think you can "tempt" a lesbian, that isn't being very respectful. And please, don't turn yourselves into homo puppy dogs. I see that often--the straight friend in love with the homosexual who follows them around like a lapdog. My college roommate did it. And watch out for lesbians looking for a male lapdog--a friend of my SO's from high school loves doing this to men because it fucks with their heads. It isn't nice, but then, what they are doing (trying to do stuff for her to get in her pants) isn't very nice to her.

So watch yourselves, and remember, it's up to the person to evaluate and change their sexual orientation, not you.

Plan9 11-09-2009 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xerxys (Post 2726499)
Will, you should stop watching the L word.

Rollins-style "L-Word" Rant:

Never stop watching the L-word, bro. It's not just another symbol you've learned to "reinforce the lie." If you use the words right, they don't use you.

...

Who doesn't wanna seduce a lesbian? They wear sensible shoes and don't waste time with hair/nails/dress. They're the perfect drinking companion.

...

OP: WillRavel having a Xerxys moment.

Cimarron29414 11-09-2009 07:56 AM

:shrug: It's not like you are pushing her to try crystal meth. I see no ethics violations at all in this. There is no "fidelity" associated with sexual preference.

Plan9 11-09-2009 07:59 AM

Calling sexual preference "a choice" is incredibly myopic. I wouldn't respect a homosexual for their "choice" as its not something they picked when they were sitting on the playground in 3rd grade. [...college muffdiving optional...] I really wish everybody would stop treating individual gays as a special fragile class of human beings that must somehow have wildly different biology and psychology involved. They're just another bunch of hoo-munz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414 (Post 2726723)
There is no "fidelity" associated with sexual preference.

No, but it's awkward as all get-out. Dude, imagine the convo:

"Hey, I know you've never been with a guy before... but I, uh, I think we should fuck. You're hot. Consider the overwhelming novelty factor."

Nothing says male pig more than trying to fuck everything female, regardless of whether or not it is heterosexual friendly.

...

Newsflash to guys everywhere: Unless you're a lawyer, you can't fuck everything.

Cynthetiq 11-09-2009 08:22 AM

what is there ethics involved? If someone is interested in you and you aren't interested in them and they continue, isn't that just them not getting the hint? Isn't it not much different then unrequited love?

Put a sexuality tendency in there, how is that any different?

If they aren't into you they aren't into you. plain and simple.

you injecting ethics into the mix seems to remove the whole idea that the other individual has a choice. This isn't much different than continually propositioning a person who is married, engaged, or has a bf or g/f.

SecretMethod70 11-09-2009 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snowy (Post 2726717)
If a person is truly homosexual, with little to no attraction to the opposite sex, then "tempting" is really the wrong word to use. I know a number of lesbians who enjoy being friends with men, but the thought of heterosexual sex just gives them the heebie jeebies, so you're not going to tempt them with anything you have on offer. Sorry.

I think it's unlikely if a person is truly a homosexual to persuade them to somehow change teams. While sexuality is fluid for some people, it really isn't for most people. Think about it. While this situation may be every heterosexual man's fantasy, what is the likelihood that any of you heterosexual men would turn homosexual? Given the previous responses, the number looks to be zero.

All I ask of you gents is to respect homosexuality as a valid choice, and when you think you can "tempt" a lesbian, that isn't being very respectful. And please, don't turn yourselves into homo puppy dogs. I see that often--the straight friend in love with the homosexual who follows them around like a lapdog. My college roommate did it. And watch out for lesbians looking for a male lapdog--a friend of my SO's from high school loves doing this to men because it fucks with their heads. It isn't nice, but then, what they are doing (trying to do stuff for her to get in her pants) isn't very nice to her.

So watch yourselves, and remember, it's up to the person to evaluate and change their sexual orientation, not you.

Quoted for mother-fucking truth. (Minus the "choice" part - I agree homosexuality, in the large majority of instances, is not a choice.)

---------- Post added at 01:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:01 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq (Post 2726741)
what is there ethics involved? If someone is interested in you and you aren't interested in them and they continue, isn't that just them not getting the hint? Isn't it not much different then unrequited love?

Put a sexuality tendency in there, how is that any different?

If they aren't into you they aren't into you. plain and simple.

you injecting ethics into the mix seems to remove the whole idea that the other individual has a choice. This isn't much different than continually propositioning a person who is married, engaged, or has a bf or g/f.

That too.

"Tempting someone to switch teams," which implies they aren't already interested in you, just makes you a sleazeball who doesn't know how to take "no" for an answer. If the person has already expressed an interest in you, but is reluctant because they previously identified as homosexual, then no one is tempting anyone. That person is merely dealing with a new dimension of their sexuality.

Willravel 11-09-2009 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70 (Post 2726796)
"Tempting someone to switch teams," which implies they aren't already interested in you,

Not necessarily. Sexuality isn't by any means a simple thing for everyone.
Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70 (Post 2726796)
If the person has already expressed an interest in you, but is reluctant because they previously identified as homosexual, then no one is tempting anyone. That person is merely dealing with a new dimension of their sexuality.

I think we have a different interpretation of temptation. If this person is dealing with a new dimension of her sexuality, any nudging could be helpful or it could be harmful. If the dimension isn't bisexuality, nudging someone toward bisexuality would be counter to their sexual nature. If the dimension is bisexuality, nudging someone toward bisexuality could be assisting someone in finding themselves. That's what the whole thread is about. This is far from a black and white issue.

Plan9 11-09-2009 11:40 AM

Nudging = sexual assault? What are you getting at here? The personal motivation still seems all like its get-some-mud-for-your-turtle.

This is perhaps the most confusing thread I've read since Host left.

Strange Famous 11-09-2009 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru (Post 2726344)

Are you open to the idea of being gay?


Personally, I dont think so.

But if I lived in a society where male homosexuality was considered was considered normal and anything else as a deviation (even if a more acceptable one that it once was) I am sure I would feel conflicted - even if my natural feelings were heterosexual, I would also most likely feel a yearning to be "normal"

I suspect that this is what most male homosexuals feel at some times in their lives. A conflict between their natural feelings, and what societal pressure says is normal and correct.

_

In any case, lesbianism is rather different to male homosexuality

The male homosexual performs a sexual act with his partner

The female lesbian really may only perform what me might call intense foreplay... a lesbian cannot have sex with another woman in the real sense of the word.

For lesbian women this must make the idea of being with a man doubly compelling even if they dont have a natural attraction to the male - on the one the societal pressure to conform, and on the other hand the fact they can only truly have sex with a man.

Willravel 11-09-2009 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2726802)
Nudging = sexual assault?

No, I don't rape lesbians.

It's about not ruining a good friendship, in my case, but in a wider sense it's about understanding sexuality.

Plan9 11-09-2009 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2726809)
In any case, lesbianism is rather different to male homosexuality

The male homosexual performs a sexual act with his partner

The female lesbian really may only perform what me might call intense foreplay... a lesbian cannot have sex with another woman in the real sense of the word.

For lesbian women this must make the idea of being with a man doubly compelling even if they dont have a natural attraction to the male - on the one the societal pressure to conform, and on the other hand the fact they can only truly have sex with a man.

Are we really arguing sexual semantics? I feel like I'm dealing with President Clinton here. Is this the 1950s legal definition of sex? C'mon, man. The lack of a penis doesn't change the setup of the wetware, bro. Just because a gay guy has a wang and a lesbian doesn't... doesn't mean anything behind the eyes. I'd imagine the urges and acts are very similar. Love saber or a hot pocket... completely irrelevant to the hetero/homo debate.

Of course, we're mostly hetero males in here talking about homo females. I'm sure we're all subject matter experts. Pfft.

Strange Famous 11-09-2009 12:34 PM

I dont agree Plan9.

Yes, heterosexuals and homosexuals of either gender are likely to have similar passions - but isnt the basic animal desire to fuck, or be fucked?

For two women this is impossible (even if one of them uses some kind of device it is an act of simulation at best)

Its true I am not a lesbian woman... but I imagine it must create a sense of conflict - to have no sexual or physical attraction to the male, but the same old animal lust must be smouldering somewhere. A man CAN fuck another man, after all... so the homosexual male must only deal with the pressure of society if their sexual feelings really are in that manner.

I think this is the reason there are far more homosexual men than truly homosexual women, and far more bisexual women than bisexual men... a homosexual man can find full sexual satisfaction with another man if he is only attracted to men. A true lesbian must be in some sense asexual.

(in fact, I am unsure that the bisexual male exists at all... other than people in certain cultural situations who claim to be bisexual, but only in the hearing of women they want to bed)

Plan9 11-09-2009 12:41 PM

Universal definition of "fuck." Animal lust. Fuck defined again. More than / less than. Bisexual pop culture phenomena.

...

... do you have any statistics to back this up or are you just referencing what you've seen via TeeVee?

The gut feelings of heterosexual white males are probably responsible for all sorts of epic fuck-ups.

I don't wanna be a data dick, but it really is relevant in this case.

...

I would ask the appropriate party about their feelings on the topic... but that would be rather rude.

snowy 11-09-2009 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70 (Post 2726796)
Quoted for mother-fucking truth. (Minus the "choice" part - I agree homosexuality, in the large majority of instances, is not a choice.)[

Yeah, I hadn't had much coffee yet, so the wording there ought to be changed; I don't believe homosexuality is a choice either, thus the point of the whole post. :)

Let's put this another way--how would you like it if a homosexual friend was trying to nudge you towards homosexuality? It would be annoying and possibly offensive, right? Well, it works the other way too.

Plan9 11-09-2009 12:45 PM

Hell, I'm still confused at the misogynistic "only dicks can fuck" part.

Strange Famous 11-09-2009 12:50 PM

misogynistic meaning the hatrid of women?

Not sure I follow how you connect my views to that. It is well known that I am an ardent feminist.

SecretMethod70 11-09-2009 01:22 PM

Strange: misogyny isn't just about hating women. What's well-known is that you feel a desire and need to protect women, and view sexuality through an extremely rigid lens. That's not feminism - first, second, or third wave. You rather clearly feel that women are generally innocent and dainty creatures who need the protection of big strong men, and that is most definitely misogynistic. It's about as feminist as any male with stereotypical 1950's sensibilities, which is to say not at all. Most of us here, however, have given up trying to get through to you when it comes to women and sexuality. Otherwise, you're not a bad guy ;)

Plan9 11-09-2009 01:48 PM

Never send a Plan9 to do a SecretMethod's job.

Baraka_Guru 11-09-2009 02:42 PM

Woah, some giant leaps have occurred in the hours I was away....

Lesbians can't fuck/have sex, eh? You should try telling that to them to hear what they say.

Is that why, deep down inside, they just want a dick inside them? And this is because they cannot be sexually satisfied without one?

Ahem. Okay.

This really trivializes this whole discussion. It assumes that the only healthy and fulfilling sexual relationship involves a cock.

Maybe homosexuality doesn't even exist.

Strange, I can't believe you even remotely associate yourself with feminism, because I sincerely doubt it wants to associate with your ideas.

Strange Famous 11-10-2009 12:14 AM

My feminism isnt the point of this thread in any case.

Sex in the real sense means penetration... which is something someone without a cock can only simulate. Women who are ONLY lesbian may well be satisfied with their lives, but it is only possible if they have very low sex drives.

In the case in point, if Will tries his luck his chances of a one night stand are probably quite good. The chances of a lasting relationship with someone who isnt attracted to men is probably quite poor. But alot of people are confused about their sexuality - a lot of people might have experiences that make them think they are one way, and then meet someone that changes their feelings.

My mother, for example, was married for 20 years and when my father left her she decided she was gay. Is she truly lesbian, and was she truly heterosexual the 20 years (and 3 kids) previous? Its hard to believe in that.

YellowBird 11-10-2009 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2726809)
Personally, I dont think so.


In any case, lesbianism is rather different to male homosexuality

The male homosexual performs a sexual act with his partner

The female lesbian really may only perform what me might call intense foreplay... a lesbian cannot have sex with another woman in the real sense of the word.

For lesbian women this must make the idea of being with a man doubly compelling even if they dont have a natural attraction to the male - on the one the societal pressure to conform, and on the other hand the fact they can only truly have sex with a man.

ok. You're wrong.

Having said that, is there any lesbians on this forum who would be willing to contribute their opinion, While I have no intention of being rude or insensitive and am purely curious, I would really like to know how they define "sex".

I've been with guy and girls and I really enjoy both, but sometime I do miss the penis when I with another women. But women can be kind of amazing. *goes to happy place*

Baraka_Guru 11-10-2009 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2727071)
Sex in the real sense means penetration... which is something someone without a cock can only simulate. Women who are ONLY lesbian may well be satisfied with their lives, but it is only possible if they have very low sex drives.

I'm sorry, but this has to be a joke. Haven't you heard of fisting?

A happy lesbian is a sexually dysfunctional lesbian. Nice.

Quote:

In the case in point, if Will tries his luck his chances of a one night stand are probably quite good. The chances of a lasting relationship with someone who isnt attracted to men is probably quite poor. But alot of people are confused about their sexuality - a lot of people might have experiences that make them think they are one way, and then meet someone that changes their feelings.
So Will's chance of having sex with a lesbian is quite good simply because he has a cock and deep down inside even lesbians want the cock?

Quote:

My mother, for example, was married for 20 years and when my father left her she decided she was gay. Is she truly lesbian, and was she truly heterosexual the 20 years (and 3 kids) previous? Its hard to believe in that.
Your mother's case isn't unique. Quite often in cases such as these, what had happened was the individual didn't understand or were ashamed of their sexuality and tried very hard to be "normal." After the '80s, it started to become more socially acceptable to "come out," and so many of these individuals decided to stop living a lie and do just that. Had you ever spoken to your mother about this? I'd find it hard to believe that she wasn't at least bisexual her whole life.

My ultimate point is, the whole idea of converting gays is ridiculous to me. I thought we were past this as a society. I don't imagine there are many gay men who get it into their heads to convert straight men. They might, sure, but I think it's just as ridiculous. I don't care how much I might like a man, if he wanted to convert me to homosexuality, he'd have a difficult time of it.

And you should meet some of the lesbians I know. I think "the cock" is one of the last things on their minds.

If anything, this whole idea should be reserved for those who truly are bisexual.

Not everyone is bisexual.

Willravel 11-10-2009 10:52 AM

Despite rumors to the contrary and despite the pure magnificence of my member, not everyone wants my cock. I hope this news isn't as devastating to anyone else as it was to me. :expressionless:

Strange Famous 11-10-2009 11:36 AM

"fisting"? I am talking about things that happen in reality, not in revolting pornographic films.

Not everyone needs an active sex life to be happy, and I am sure many lesbians can be satisfied with the simulation of activities that can take place between two women, for some romantic love or physical attraction - which they find in another woman - may be more important than raw sex.

I dont think that every lesbian "wants cock" - but I do believe that true intercourse cannot take place without one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru (Post 2727103)
I'm sorry, but this has to be a joke. Haven't you heard of fisting?

A happy lesbian is a sexually dysfunctional lesbian. Nice.

So Will's chance of having sex with a lesbian is quite good simply because he has a cock and deep down inside even lesbians want the cock?

Your mother's case isn't unique. Quite often in cases such as these, what had happened was the individual didn't understand or were ashamed of their sexuality and tried very hard to be "normal." After the '80s, it started to become more socially acceptable to "come out," and so many of these individuals decided to stop living a lie and do just that. Had you ever spoken to your mother about this? I'd find it hard to believe that she wasn't at least bisexual her whole life.

My ultimate point is, the whole idea of converting gays is ridiculous to me. I thought we were past this as a society. I don't imagine there are many gay men who get it into their heads to convert straight men. They might, sure, but I think it's just as ridiculous. I don't care how much I might like a man, if he wanted to convert me to homosexuality, he'd have a difficult time of it.

And you should meet some of the lesbians I know. I think "the cock" is one of the last things on their minds.

If anything, this whole idea should be reserved for those who truly are bisexual.

Not everyone is bisexual.


Cimarron29414 11-10-2009 12:21 PM

Will, has this friend EVER been with a guy before?

The reason I ask is this: it could be possible that this friend is curious but is looking for a safe environment to explore - a place where curiosities could be satisfied without the complications of being with someone who has long term expectations. Perhaps, those are the signals you are reading from her. Perhaps she sees in you someone who could handle that exploration and take it only for what it was - curiosity. I can envision a conversation that would get to the bottom of the flirtation, offer the opportunity for safely exploring the other side, and still framing it a way as not to offend. I wouldn't go so far as to say you would be doing her a favor, but in truth, how many people get to check out the other grass without leaving their side?

SecretMethod70 11-10-2009 12:41 PM

Strange: Fisting isn't entirely uncommon. Just because you find it revolting doesn't mean others do. Rent/download some real lesbian porn sometime... it tends to be rather kinky. Hell, the woman- (and lesbian-) owned sex toy store ono and I frequent has some rather large dildos, including a fist dildo. This is a place that does not generally contain shitty "novelty" toys. Not saying they sell a bunch of them, but they're stocked because their clientèle wants it, not because some corporate douche at Penthouse told them to stock it.

As for whether sex can take place without a penis, you're obviously free to believe whatever you want. I'd merely point out that the vast majority of people disagree with you, and with good reason. Your attitudes toward sex are absolutely in the minority, and who are you to proclaim that lesbians must be either somewhat asexual or secretly yearning for cock? I'd love to see you say that in one of the lesbian bars around here, but then they'd end up disproving your general view that women are less capable of violence too ;)

It's not that you believe what you believe about sexuality that's most frustrating, it's that you believe it in such a way as to refuse any possibility of being wrong about what other people feel.

Willravel 11-10-2009 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414 (Post 2727210)
Will, has this friend EVER been with a guy before?

Not many. And some of them are gay themselves.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cimarron29414 (Post 2727210)
The reason I ask is this: it could be possible that this friend is curious but is looking for a safe environment to explore - a place where curiosities could be satisfied without the complications of being with someone who has long term expectations. Perhaps, those are the signals you are reading from her. Perhaps she sees in you someone who could handle that exploration and take it only for what it was - curiosity. I can envision a conversation that would get to the bottom of the flirtation, offer the opportunity for safely exploring the other side, and still framing it a way as not to offend. I wouldn't go so far as to say you would be doing her a favor, but in truth, how many people get to check out the other grass without leaving their side?

So you're saying I'm like heterosexual lite, all the man without the guilt. I've considered that (including the only half-funny food reference). Still, what I might be interpreting as timidness on the issue could be me seeing something that's not there. I'm waiting for stronger signals for now, and frankly I'm just fine staying friends with her. She's good people.

Are there any ladies that enjoy the company of ladies on TFP that would be willing to offer their perspective? You can post anonymously by checking the little box on the upper right as you post.

Baraka_Guru 11-10-2009 01:00 PM

I pretty much agree with Smeth's response, but this I still don't get:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2727203)
Not everyone needs an active sex life to be happy, and I am sure many lesbians can be satisfied with the simulation of activities that can take place between two women, for some romantic love or physical attraction - which they find in another woman - may be more important than raw sex.

Your basic claim is that lesbians cannot have sex, but gays can. This is because lesbians lack the essential equipment, which is a cock.

So maybe lesbians don't exist. We need a new name for women who should be fucked by men but aren't because they aren't attracted to them and instead would like a platonic relationship with their own gender.

"Lesbian sex" is an oxymoron.

"So-called" lesbians who attempt to penetrate their partners with anything other than a cock are merely emulating something from a "revolting" pornographic film.

Maybe lesbians should switch teams. They are clearly on the losing side. They aren't even playing with the proper "equipment." How fair is that? :shakehead:

Have you notified your feminist colleagues about all of this?

Strange Famous 11-10-2009 02:08 PM

I would say that lebians do exist, but female homosexuals do not.

I do not describe lesbian sexual simulation as revolting - but "fisting" as revolting - because this is a very dangerous and violent activity which does not take place anywhere other than in the worst kind of pornography. There is nothing disgusting about two women in love engaging in physical activities... what is disgusting is violent and dangerous pornography produced for the sake of men which is liable to cause physical injury to the women who are coerced into taking part in it. Activities such as "fisting" are not natural and are physically dangerous and as such I do not approve of them. I do not approve of violence against women - I find it remarkable and incredible that you consider this an anti-feminist position.

Willravel 11-10-2009 02:41 PM

I would imagine your fist is too big for most women, SF. I don't pretend to be an expert on real lesbian sex, though, mostly because I've never experienced it and if a straight guy asks lesbians about such things he's seen as a perv and at best only gets part of the information. Some lesbians do fist in the comfort of their own home, without any ill will towards each other or without being pressured by some pornographic film. Basically anything you imagine sexually in history has likely ben performed freely and consensually. Case in point: scat.

Am I remembering correctly that you are against any acts of consensual sexual violence? I remember having a discussion about blood play and someone took a hardliner position. I like blood play, personally, and would never file a complaint against a woman that chose to partake with me.

Baraka_Guru 11-10-2009 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2727258)
I would say that lebians do exist, but female homosexuals do not.

You might be surprised to know what percentage of self-identifying lesbians consider themselves both female and homosexual. I think quite a few gays are homosexual too. But is this because of the cock thing?

Fisting might be extreme, but to claim it only happens in films to please men is naive at best. Some feminists believe penile penetration of females in any manner to be violent, so there you go.

As for lesbians, I can only assume it's usually about the tongues, fingers, and toys. Not sex, mind you, but "platonic interactions"...to orgasm...without men....which isn't homosexual at all.... :expressionless:

Willravel must have a chance after all, because all women are made for sticking cocks into. They aren't sexually complete without them.

snowy 11-10-2009 02:51 PM

Wow...as someone who's taken part in some of the sex acts SF seems to think do not happen, I am just flabbergasted.

For the record, the female vagina is designed to stretch; after all, when a woman gives birth naturally she has to push a baby--and its head--through there. Believe me, a female fist is nothing.

Willravel 11-10-2009 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru (Post 2727280)
Willravel must have a chance after all, because all women are made for sticking cocks into. They aren't sexually complete without him.

FTFY.

/joking of course.

Strange Famous 11-10-2009 03:14 PM

"Blood Play" - let's use clear language so no one is mistaken. We are talking about a male, using a sharp blade, to wound in a non critical way a woman because he finds the act of wounding and/or inflicting pain to be sexually exciting or pleasurable?

I think the majority of the people have a lot of questions and doubt about activities likes this.

It may be true that some women consent to this, or possibly even volunteer to be treated in that way - but I would question the context of that consent very strongly before I would find such activities acceptable. If we find that the man has coerced, threatened, used unfair persuasion in any way against the woman then we are talking about wounding/assault with a weapon/etc

SecretMethod70 11-10-2009 03:29 PM

Back to the feminism thing, one must clearly think women are inferior if you think most are incapable of consenting to such things without it being coersion. It may be a shock to you, but most things people do in sex - whether it's missionary, fisting, blood play, whipping, or scat - is consensual. You think the majority of people have questions... just because you do? Granted, many people probably do think blood play is "out there," but it seems most questions surrounding the activity have to do with either person's mental health, not whether or not the woman actually consented to the activity.

Funny how you also ignored the actual female pointing out her actual experience doing things you say only happens in the most revolting of porn.

Willravel 11-10-2009 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2727283)
"Blood Play" - let's use clear language so no one is mistaken. We are talking about a male, using a sharp blade, to wound in a non critical way a woman because he finds the act of wounding and/or inflicting pain to be sexually exciting or pleasurable?

That's a bit narrow as far as definitions are concerned. Blood play is any instance of the use of blood in sexuality. It can mean anything from biting the lip of a parter and breaking skin intentionally to cutting and sucking. It's, by definition, truly consensual, and practitioners take steps to be safe (which means being free of disease and ensuring that any injury will be free of infection and can't cause serious permanent damage). In my experience, it's my blood, but yes it can be the man retrieving blood from the woman. It doesn't even have to be a dom/sub thing (or a Twilight thing), though it often is.

I don't want to get off topic, though.

Strange Famous 11-11-2009 12:17 AM

In no way do I consider women inferior to men. In fact it is the opposite. Women on the whole are kinder, more moral, less violent, less greedy, more emotionally intelligent and lacking completely in cruelty compared to men.

One person made some kind of comment earlier that some lesbian would lead men on because simply because they enjoyed hurting their feelings. I think this is very unlikely... it is completely alien to the mindset of the normal female to be cruel in this way. I am not naive, I dont deny that in some occassions women may use their looks or attractions to get their way in some thing - but to suppose that any woman would do this simply for the pleasure of hurting someone is crazy. If this woman exists my feeling is that she is pyschologically male and suffering from gender identification crisis.

It is the male, aggressive and sexist on the whole - who will seek conquest purely for its sake, regardless of the othes feelings of other people. This sort of caddish selfishness does not exist in women except in very extreme cases where the woman is mentally ill. For the male this is average behaviour.

Baraka_Guru 11-11-2009 04:29 AM

WTF?

Women are generally good.

Men are generally evil.

Evil women suffer from gender identity problems and/or mental illness.

The evil in men is healthy and natural.

Good men are rare, and are mentally ill or suffer from gender identity crises.

Did I get that straight?

Cynthetiq 11-11-2009 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strange Famous (Post 2727394)
In no way do I consider women inferior to men. In fact it is the opposite. Women on the whole are kinder, more moral, less violent, less greedy, more emotionally intelligent and lacking completely in cruelty compared to men.

One person made some kind of comment earlier that some lesbian would lead men on because simply because they enjoyed hurting their feelings. I think this is very unlikely... it is completely alien to the mindset of the normal female to be cruel in this way. I am not naive, I dont deny that in some occassions women may use their looks or attractions to get their way in some thing - but to suppose that any woman would do this simply for the pleasure of hurting someone is crazy. If this woman exists my feeling is that she is pyschologically male and suffering from gender identification crisis.

It is the male, aggressive and sexist on the whole - who will seek conquest purely for its sake, regardless of the othes feelings of other people. This sort of caddish selfishness does not exist in women except in very extreme cases where the woman is mentally ill. For the male this is average behaviour.

delusional justification much?

Baraka_Guru 11-11-2009 05:00 AM

It looks like someone needs to reread Judith Butler.

pig 11-11-2009 05:07 AM

To the OP/will: I would say there's no ethical delimna involved, as long as you are clear that you're not using sneaky sneaky coercion or psych games to get her to do something that you strongly sense she'll regret. Otherwise, she may self-identify as a lesbian, but perhaps that's not entirely accurate for her? Who can know? It's ultimately up to her...I'd sort of let tensions build up until it was obvious and ridiculous, and then have THE TALK. If it never gets there, I'd let it lie fallow.

To this other bit, I'll simply repost my thoughts from previous discussions of a similar vein:

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29...rte_d_Arth.jpg

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y29...nwreck450b.jpg

with the addition that the very definition that sex is defined by the presence of a cock, and thus from a masculine perspective, is in my opinion incorrect. The act of (heterosexual) sex involves not only the act of penetration, but the act of being penetrated. Is there a fucker and a fuckee, or two fuckers, or two fuckees, or two people simultaneously being fuckers and fuckees. The Zen in me suggests the latter.

Regardless, carry on.

Plan9 11-11-2009 07:03 AM

Solid, Pig. Solid.

Cimarron29414 11-11-2009 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel (Post 2727230)
Not many. And some of them are gay themselves.

So you're saying I'm like heterosexual lite, all the man without the guilt. I've considered that (including the only half-funny food reference). Still, what I might be interpreting as timidness on the issue could be me seeing something that's not there. I'm waiting for stronger signals for now, and frankly I'm just fine staying friends with her. She's good people.

Are there any ladies that enjoy the company of ladies on TFP that would be willing to offer their perspective? You can post anonymously by checking the little box on the upper right as you post.

I'm really trying to wrap my brain around this as some sort of moral dilemma. She's been with men before sexually? Men who are gay? Is not the definition of homosexual "having sex exclusively with your own gender"? If a man is having sex with women and men, he's not homosexual. If a woman is committing sexual acts with men and women, then she is not homosexual. You aren't switching her. If you bump uglies with her, you are simply partaking in what seems freely offered to both men and women. Bag it, then bag it.

Plan9 11-11-2009 07:51 AM

Did you just reference the elusive double bag?

Cimarron29414 11-11-2009 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Plan9 (Post 2727480)
Did you just reference the elusive double bag?

I meant bag your member, then bag the cootchie. I suppose it's a bit of a hunting term :D However, it could mean double-bag yourself or double bag her. I'm certain she's a lovely, disease free girl, so the latter two definitions need not apply.

Salem 11-11-2009 10:42 AM

The only real experience I have on this issue is actually fairly recent. I identify as a lesbian, and about this time last year I had just known this girl for a month of two and she was starting to drive me bonkers.

She told me she was bisexual, and we would flirt, and we would hold hands and for months, MONTHS we kept on with this, and I would do everything I could to figure out if she liked me back, tried so hard to convince her we could be good together, that I would love and support her(she has a few emotional "problems") and eventually she decided she was more on the straight side of bisexual, and that we should just, JUST be friends. Final and firm. She's still one of my best friends.


I really think in terms of ethics it depends on the situation. If you just find someone you think its hot and you find out they don't bat for your team and you try to fix that, I don't think that's right. If you fall for someone unlikely(someone of your sex when you've identified as heterosexual, someone of the opposite sex when you're identified with homosexual, a great friend, ect) That's different, That's circumstance. Love is a force you can't deny. It happens at random, unexpectedly. You don't get to chose who you fall for.

SecretMethod70 11-11-2009 06:12 PM

Will: pig has it right. Let it reach the point where there's no denying it, if it exists, and then it's the right time to make a move. Otherwise, you just run the risk of looking like a jerk if you're reading things wrong.


Strange: I'm pretty sure I've pointed it out before, but your logic is almost exactly the same as the logic used in oppressive cultures. Islamic women aren't required to cover their faces because they're bad people, they're required to cover their faces because men are such horrible creatures who cannot resist the unintentional temptations of the innocent woman. Their mere visual existence is a temptation to the brute that is man.

Such attitudes are sexist toward both genders.

Even more telling, I find it hilarious that when someone specifically points out actual actions of another person, your response is simply, "I think this is very unlikely." What you think is irrelevant to the facts. Of course, if you knew that, you'd realize that what you think other people feel has nothing to do with the reality of the world.

The fact I need to link to a teen website to explain to you that lesbians have sex too says quite a bit: How do lesbians have sex? | Scarleteen

That was the first result for a google search of "can lesbians have sex." Here's the third result, written by a lesbian: Girl On Girl: Lesbians Can Have Sex, Trust Me | The Frisky

As she says at the end, echoing an earlier sentiment I posted, "I suggest you walk up to a lesbian couple on the street and tell them they are virgins. See what happens. I dare ya." But, again, I trust you won't believe her prediction either, since any woman who would act cruel is "psychologically male."

The sad part is you have no idea just how offensive your attitudes are.

Willravel 11-11-2009 06:22 PM

Sounds like a plan.

Chumley 11-14-2009 11:52 PM

Hi to all the TFP regulars - I'm kind of a lurker, trying to work my way outta my shell. :) A very interesting conversation. Makes me think of all the gays I have known, and the evolution of my understanding of... I don't know, what it means to be gay. :)

My best friend growing up - his mom lived with a woman, they were obviously in a relationship, but it was very cool - they felt like regular parents - this was in the mid-70s. Liberal neighborhood :). She (his mom) was very clear about her identity, and boy was it fluid. She basically swung both ways, and went back and forth in and out of long-term relationships with both women and men over the years. So there are people who do that, apparently. Haven't known a whole lot of them personally, but a few.

Then I was in a band with a lesbian rhythm section. Interesting days -- we all ogled the women together. :D One of them was butch, and yea, maybe she woulda sparked a bit if I hit on her. They were pretty .... typical... ? if you can ever say that.... typical lesbians, at least from my perspective... they were insular about themselves, a little, and I don't think I woulda tried (or wanted) to flip them.

Another band I was in, the bassist was gay (different lady) -- her girlfriend actually got us a gig at a lesbian bar -- very weird night -- they loved our chick singer, but glared like hell at the 3 guys in the band. Anyway, strangest thing, this lady actually seduced ME one night after a gig -- she said she wasn't switching teams, but wanted to... sample me, as best I understood it. She need gentleness above all, and well that's the kind of guy I am, and I made her feel safe enough, apparently. It was actually really wonderful - we had a very nice night... just once. She shared that she had some early experiences with men that were NOT gentle. This was the only time I kinda wondered if environment could play a big role in changing someone's sexual path/identity.

Anyway, to the OP --- I don't see that it's unethical -- if you can tempt someone, gfi! That was my first reaction to the thread title.... However, just HITTING on her would probably be kinda tacky, yea. I mean, putting the moves on her? Whatever that means. Yea, possibly offensive. But seriously, like any friendship, I think it's all about your relationship, and the nature of this person. Can you have a conversation with her about feelings.... at all? Heck, do you ever talk to her about her sexuality? Yours? Maybe if you don't, just try it as a conversation that isn't about anyone specific, or you and her.... just find out about her journey. I had a male gay friend, pretty close friend, and we would discuss things (there was no sexual tension - obviously a lot easier).... I would quiz him about this girl or that girl, and he would just say "I'm gay! No it doesn't do anything for me!" and laugh. But he was a mellow guy - we could talk about anything. Point being -- try and open up the subject matter of your conversations, and you may get your answer soon enough, directly or indirectly. And you know, maybe if you can't talk about that kind of stuff with her, pretty safe to say she's not interested?


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360