Sexuality Board Concept.. what do you think?

[Halx]

I'd like some input on this idea. What if we completely banned the use of labels "straight, bisexual, bi-curious, and gay" from this board? Nobody could identify themselves or others as any thing like that and we just start treating sexuality as one fluid continuum without division.

I would like opinions on if that's a good idea or not. Back up your answer with ideas on what you think would happen. Would it change someone's mentality? Would it remove bias? Would it add bias? As a policy, would it be possible to enforce? Would it be reasonable to enforce? Would it be Orwellian? Would it be like Clockwork Orange? Would it open people up?

Please write as much as you can to support your thoughts. I would like opinions on how this would affect the population, not just you in general.

[Johnny Rotten]

I think it would get confusing. Can you give us some background on your idea?

[maleficent]

A person's sexual preference, if that's what you are talking about, is part of who they are, so it sounds like a person is being asked to be less of who they are.

I'm straight, I'm also an ultra conservative Republican, it's part of what makes me me, I honestly don't care if people I talk to on here worship the devil, (gack) vote Democrat, have sexual relations with sheep, it's really not my business. If I like someone and enjoy chatting with them, their sexual proclivity is not going to change my opinion of them. I would surely hope it wouldn't change someone's opinion of me... (someone either likes me or they don't for me - not for my sexual label)

[TM875]

I'd think that it would make giving advice exceedingly difficult. While you're right, it may reduce a small amount of prejudice, I believe that the TFP is accepting enough that most people will not feel a difference.

Whereas I don't believe that sexual preference should define an individual, often it might help define a personal problem.

I think this would be like trying to eliminate race from the national scene. While a good idea in theory (hey, who doesn't want equality?), often race allows a group of people to feel a mutual togetherness and a place to belong. Sexuality is often the same way.

Once again, I firmly believe that there is not that much bias across the TFP. There's no need to protect a member from another member's prejudice.

[ARTelevision]

I don't see things in terms of words. I use them to communicate as effectively as possible. I almost never have a reason to use the sexuality-based terms listed above. I don't see them as having much usefulness. So for me, this would be simple.

However I do see most of the rest of the human race being very attached to words as substitutes for experience. I don't see people comprehending the difference between words and experience at all.

[Dawson70]

I edited this because I misread the question.
Freedom of speech and expression? Does that apply on a private forum such as this? I don't know....that's why I am asking.

[kutulu]

I'm against banning any words or phrases. Maybe it would remove bias but it would be like cutting down the forest to avoid forest fires.

[ARTelevision]

I see it as a thought-experiment, not as an imminent eventuality.
I believe we're being asked to imagine the hypothetical situation - and to envision how it might develop.
Am I right about that Halx?

[maleficent]

Labelling other people is wrong, and everyone realizes that... maybe i've got my rose-colored glasses on, but I don't see too much labelling going on here...

It's more about the labelling of ourselves, no?

[Halx]

My own thought is that labels are a form of bias. For some reason people feel the need to identify themselves as 'straight' before they make a statement that is remotely bi or gay, such as commenting on another man's attractiveness. "I'm straight, but you're a handsome fella." I wanna haul off and smack these people.

In western pop language, gay is a negative word. When you call someone gay, all of the descriptions of stereotypical gay people are suddenly applied to them. It becomes harder to evaluate this person for who they really are.

My thought on this concept is that with the absolution of labels, people will become less guarded about their own sexuality. The identity of 'straight' and 'gay' will be mixed around and blended to where it wont even matter. It wont happen over night. It wont happen in a month. It probably wont happen in a year. It probably actually won't ever happen. However, what WILL happen is a progression towards that ideal. Any step towards that is a good step.

I also wanna remind people that I'm not asking you to vote on if it will be introduced or not. I'm just looking for observation and speculation. This IS only an excercise.

[maleficent]

Interesting, but I'm curious.

How do you see that it would make people less guarded?

I would think without the label to hide behind, a person would be more guarded with their sexuality, for fear of being labelled with a stereotype that shall not be mentioned.

[Talon Valdez]

I can see your point. It is rather annoying, when people use qualifiers like that before they say something should just be, well, ok to say.

On the other hand, many people do feel that their sexual preference is an important part of their personality. Hmmm I'm struck by a thought.

Why should we have to know if you're straight or gay or bi or asexual or...whatever. I got the idea that these boards were all about being open and accepting, which is why I joined. If we're so open and accepting, why DO we need labels? If I accept you as a person, what does it matter what you do in your bedroom (Or kitchen table, office, back seat of a VW, etc.)? The only reason we have labels is so that we can make a decision. It factors into our thoughts whether we think it does or not. If the labels aren't there....Yeah. Ok, I see what you're getting at now.

Oh, and as far as advice being confusing- Meh. If someone asks whether they should break up with their boyfriend...What does it matter if they themselves are male or female? The advice should be the same shouldn't it?

Hmm. Excellent topic dude. I'm going to be pondering this one for a long while methinks.

[degrawj]

Originally posted by Johnny Rotten
I think it would get confusing. Can you give us some background on your idea?

i totally agree. it doesn't matter to me what a person's sexual orientation is. but if some one is asking for relationship advice, or some sort of other sexual advice, i think it really depends on the type of relationship going on. i mean, i've never been in a homosexual relationship, so i can't say from experience how much different (if at all) it is from a straight relationship, but i don't think i could give a gay man any advice with relationship issues because i have no idea what kind of things that relationship entails. so that's the negative side i see if we try to stop using those labels.

on the other hand, when people are just talking about their relationships, not asking for advice, and that type of thing, sure. i don't feel a need to fill in the blank that any relationship i talk about is a "straight" relationship. and if some woman is talking about her relationship with her partner (male or female), she wouldn't have to say what kind of relationship it is either.

overall, i don't really see a need to completely ban the use of those words. sure, maybe people could use them a little less, but in certain situations, it may be neccessary to use those labels.

[Halx]

I think relationships are all unique and the thought that labels such as 'straight' and 'gay' are needed in advice is pretty frivolous. There are ways to get around labels. It's called description. Weigh this: "My friend says he's straight, but I think he's turning gay." with "He's always talking about girls, but more and more he's finding guys to be attractive."

Believe it or not, you can communicate without these words. Sure, it takes more typing, but the more accurate picture is conveyed.

[*Nikki*]

I don't think it is a label so much as what that person actually is. We have a word describing everything.....including sexual preferance.

I think it is unesscecary to ban words......or labels as you call them.

[hazelman]

I think a more productive approach would be to start some discussion about sexuality labels, Kinsey's ideas on orientation, etc, instead of making a rule that you couldn't mention it. So, looks like this thread is about turning into that.

haze

[Halx]

Originally posted by hazelman
I think a more productive approach would be to start some discussion about sexuality labels, Kinsey's ideas on orientation, etc, instead of making a rule that you couldn't mention it. So, looks like this thread is about turning into that.

haze

you're not reading between the lines.. that's what this IS

[Johnny Rotten]

Well, I'm all for introducing people to more transparent gender orientation language, but some people are just immature, ignorant, or won't "get it." At the same time, these kinds of people can still offer good advice and guidance, despite their inability to appreciate how much labels tend to pigeonhole people into a stereotypical "lifestyle" and range of interests and habits.

[Shades]

I'm against censoring words. If there exists a negative connotation to a word, like gay, then it would be better for us to rehabilitate the term than just start crossing words out of the dictionary. Not to mention the obvious dangers censoring language like that, and just generally acting like Thought Police.

While you may feel that there's a fluid continuity between all kinds of sexuality, I think a lot of people would disagree. That doesn't necessarily make them wrong, stupid, or evil, they just don't see that kind of flexibility in themselves. Some people don't play hockey either, I try not to hold it against them.

I think you could say on a scale of 1 to 10, that perhaps if you were very close to one end or the other, you'd identify as straight or gay, and if you were in the middle, you'd be bi.

To close, this is definitely Orwellian. You don't like a concept, so you want to remove the very language to describe it. I also have strong doubts that someday people won't differentiate straight and homosexual sex. There are obvious, real differences, outside of any prejudice.

[shakran]

I think getting rid of the terms would justify those who have made them negative.

i.e. "well if you think gay is a negative word we'll just stop everyone from using it." gives the bigots and assholes far too much power to shape our language. I think some people are running around trying to give negative connotations to words so that they can then use those words to offend/insult people who's only crime is being themselves. I don't think we should give these idiots the dignity of paying any attention to what they say or think by altering our own language to avoid those words. I think that would be playing into their hands, and hasn't our society done that enough?

[analog]

Originally posted by Halx
"I'm straight, but you're a handsome fella." I wanna haul off and smack these people.

There ARE those of us who use this as a term of flattery. I say that every once in a while, something to that effect, but it's not because I want to identify myself as "not gay". It's as a person who is not normally attracted to men offering up a pretty significant compliment. It's like saying, "I don't usually like blondes- but on you, it's hot!"

Originally posted by degrawj
i mean, i've never been in a homosexual relationship, so i can't say from experience how much different (if at all) it is from a straight relationship, but i don't think i could give a gay man any advice with relationship issues because i have no idea what kind of things that relationship entails.

I thought about this for a while... and my conclusion was that, in the end, so much of the success of relationships is communication that really it's not a matter of what is between their legs or what they like their partner to have, but who is communicating and who is not.

That being said, I am a man of words- and any attempt to abridge my vocabulary in the way that I describe things would be totally out of place for me. I don't really see a necessity for dropping the terms from use.

[greyeyes]

This forum (especially the sexuality board) is (or what I think it is) a place where people can go and be who they are without worrying about the acceptance of others. Where if someone is being biased, let them be biased, it's only going to hurt themselves if they choose that path. In my opinion limiting the people's speaking priviliges wont help anything (but of course this is only an opinion).

[Trisk]

I never really thought of "bisexual", "straight" or "gay" as labels....I guess people do and people relate certain things to them but as far as I'm concerned, they're just terms to desribe who someone is attracted to. Saying "I'm bisexual" to me is like saying "I play tennis". That's nice. If I'm not into tennis, I won't play with you. But you can tell me about your games if you want.

Honestly...I don't see the difference. To say "I'm a girl who likes women" just sounds like needless words. It can just be summed up in one word.

As people have said, this is supposed to be a tolerant community. If that is so, nobody should be judging you for saying you're gay, bisexual or straight. And if they are judging you, they'll probably still judge you when you use a different phrase to describe your sexual preference.

I think taking out these words would just be confusing - a lot of people come here for relationship advice. Sometimes words like this can be good when talking about your predicament. For example, here are two paragraphs someone could type:

1. I've been going out with this girl for two years. Our relationship is starting to get rocky and my best friend, who's gay, has been sort of my go-to man for advice. Part of me wants to work through this crap with my girlfriend but my best friend keeps urging me to break up with her. He jokes about how I should just become gay and marry him. The thing is...he has told me he liked me in the past. I'm straight. It makes me very uncomfterble when he jokes about this. I've made it clear to him what my sexual preferences are.

2. I've been going out with this girl for two years. Our relationship is starting to get rocky and my best friend, who likes men, has been my go-to man for advice. Part of me wants to work through this crap with my girlfriend but my best friend keeps uring me to break up with her. He jokes about how I should start liking men and marry him. The thing is...he has told me he liked me in the past. I'm not into men. It makes me very uncomfterble when he jokes about this. I've made it clear to him what my sexual preferences are.

The differences don't seem that great here. If anything, all they do is make the second paragraph a little bit more vague.

[inkriminator]

As many people have pointed out, excising sexual orientation terms from our vocabulary would primarily have the effect of replacing those terms with definitions, ie. My friend who is gay....vs. My friend who likes men.

The reasoning that states that the stereotypical connotations that are associated with the term would not arise when those terms aren't used is faulty logic, because whatever prejudices a person may have, will still arise when the definition is used. By this I mean, if a person thinks gay men are feminine, when you describe a man as liking other men, that person will still think of a feminine man. The key is to remove those mentalities from the individual person.

[macmanmike6100]

I really like the idea, but I don't think that people should be penalized for it. I think encouraging the deconstruction of sexuality labels is a good alternative.

Enforcement would be bad, I think, because it stifles ideas more than is necessary and because there are some cases where not using those labels is counterproductive (gay versus he who likes men, as inkriminator pointed out).

[forkies]

hal, though i am all for your effort to open sexuality and let it just be sexuality, i think this would be a non-productive way to go about eliminating discriminating ideas.

i think these words are just as inaccurate in describing the world as all other words.

i am a minnesotan.
i am bisexual.

some people may use stereotypes to fill in blanks about who i am, but more enlightened people will take what "minnesotan" and "bisexual" mean at face value and not fill in blanks with assumptions.

if anything it would be more appropriate to simply encourage the more general words rather than completely ban them, as such an approach would be awkward for almost all parties, i think.

[MSD]

Banning words just leaves people feeling that they're being talked down to by someone who thinks they're "enlightened" and basically comes across as trying to act superior. Eliminating labels is not going to eleminate that rampant homophobia or sexual taboos that have infected our society. I'll go as far as to say that 99.9% of people in our country, regardless of what they say they think about the issue of homosexuality, gay marriage, whatever, are either openly homophobic or displaying a severe case of psychological reaction-formation and suppressing homophobic tenencies because they're told that simply addressing the issue by using terms like "gay" isn't PC.

Here's the part that is going to piss people off. We do have a lot of good people here, but there's no way that everyone on TFP is from this "enlightened" .1% of society that is free of prejudice and genuinely believes that eceryone is equal. I'm not perfect, but I address issues instead of avoiding them. I grew up in a big racial bubble of a town, and the attitudes of people rubbed off on me. Instead of suppressing what I'd leanred, I actively worked to unlearn the racial, sexual, and cultural biases that I grew up with.

Brushing an issue under the rug lets it grow without being addressed. Words are just a way of verbalizing concepts, markers for ideas inside our heads. Pulling a marker flag off of a buried land mine won't make the mine go away, eliminating words that we attach to concepts against which people have prejudices won't make those concepts or the prejudices go away.

[ShaniFaye]

In my honest opinion its little things like this that made me iffy about jumping and posting, I DO know that my participation was a lot less than ordinarily would have been in the beginning because I was skittish for SO long about saying the wrong thing. I have never ever seen a more accepting board than this one....well if you dont count the politics forum, and I see no need to ban "words".

To me this would kinda be like not being able to state your political preference in the political forum. Censorship in any form has ALWAYS been a bug up my butt....There is a difference in not saying anything if you cant say it nicely, and actually telling me I cant use specific words. I dont think, in all my time here, I have seen anyone be bashed for their sexual preference.

I have never seen those terms as labels, but as adjectives, and we at TFP seem to use them as such. Many discussions in my opinion would be odd sounding if we couldnt use them.

[ManWithAPlan]

I think that we have healthy discussions here as it is, everyone seems polite and accepting. i havn't really noticed anyone labeling themselves or anyone else, but we shouldn't abridge people's right to label because it's part of human nature and it does not seem to be bothering anyone.

sometimes to clarify a situation that you are giving, you have to explain it to a certain point, regardless of what words you say... whether you say "I'm a man and i am having a problem with my male partner" or "I'm homosexual and my boyfriend is unhappy", you're really saying the same thing where it might not suffice just to say "my boyfriend is unhappy" (due to whatever the actual problem is... i'm not feeling creative enough).

[Bill O'Rights]

I think that it's more of a catagorization, more than a "label". Even so, it defines what, and who, a person is. I am a straight male. I am also an atheist. I am a Libertarian. I also prefer my coffee...black. These bits of information catagorize, or define me, as a person. It's when the anti-black coffee drinkers discover my preferences, and use that information as my only defining characteristic, that it becomes a "label".

[hazelman]

Originally posted by Halx
you're not reading between the lines.. that's what this IS

Duh. What do you think I meant by "So, looks like this thread is about turning into that."?

Thought I was being a bit clever but I guess I was too subtle...

haze

[ARTelevision]

Well I do see us missing the point and engaging in polemic rather than personal revelation.

I think I'll just repeat myself because it seems that would be all that's needed to work with the premise of the thread.

I can't think of the last time it was necessary to define my sexuality in terms of straight, bi, or gay. I mean I haven't used those terms in years to describe myself to myself or anyone else. I don't see a need for it - that's for damn sure. It's actually quite a revelation. And I wouldn't have even thought of this if Halx hadn't initiated this thread.

[ManWithAPlan]

but the question is not whether or not YOU USE them, it's whether or not NO ONE should be able to use them here.

[shakran]

Originally posted by ARTelevision
Well I do see us missing the point and engaging in polemic rather than personal revelation.

I think I'll just repeat myself because it seems that would be all that's needed to work with the premise of the thread.

I can't think of the last time it was necessary to define my sexuality in terms of straight, bi, or gay. I mean I haven't used those terms in years to describe myself to myself or anyone else. I don't see a need for it - that's for damn sure. It's actually quite a revelation. And I wouldn't have even thought of this if Halx hadn't initiated this thread.

I can't think of the last time I used the word "ARTelevision" but that doesn't mean that your name should be put on the banned words list.

Let's look at this from another perspective. Gender-based identity words bias the reader toward the person using it. i.e. if someone says "I'm a regular guy" you automatically assign male stereotypes to him. Should we therefore ban all gender identification?

[ARTelevision]

I think - as has been stated several times - no one is suggesting words be actually banned. This is a thought experiment.

[shakran]

Originally posted by Halx
I'd like some input on this idea. What if we completely banned the use of labels "straight, bisexual, bi-curious, and gay" from this board?

whether it's a serious suggestion or just a thought experiment, the assignment is to comment on the idea of banning words. That's what we've been doing.

[Holo]

No banning words. Enough words are disappearing in our language to do being unused as it is...there's no need to remove perfectly good ones. I think distinction need to remain as a gay relationship isn't necessarily going to need the same advice as a straight one due to *cringe* lifestyle and culture differences. Sure you can infer bisexuality by someone talking about a love triangle with a guy and a girl but I don't see a need to remove the usage of perfectly good adjectives to help blur the lines of sexuality. Sexual lines are clearly drawn in the real world and we discuss real world problems and relationships. It may be useful to know I'm talking to a gay man than a girl since I would have different advice for the girl from my point of view as a straight man.


I see no bias or stigma on this board against non-straight ppl and I don't see any being tolerated in the future by the mods or the members. To some being gay or even straight is part of their identity, an identity they might have struggled to accept in their lives, and you shouldn't take that away from those ppl in the interest of ending bias. You have one of the least biased boards in existence that I know of. In my experience the more things you ban the less you have to talk about.

[FallenAvatar]

It sounds like somewhat of an interesting concept in the beginning, but it would kind of make things harder. I don't hate the gay community, nor do I hate the bi-sexual community. I am straight but it really doesn't matter; however, as far as trying to lable some questions here it would be difficult not to use bi-sexual or gay. I am personally not a fan of the, Are you gay? Are you bi? Thoughts about being Bisexual? Threads. I think they're stupid. I believe that if you're gay, you're gay. If you're Straight you're straight, and if you're bi, well you're bi. It doesn't matter, it's your preference and you can identify as it. But from standpoint I am proud of my sexuality as I am sure many here are. I don't think that taking that away is something that should be done. Maybe changing the way these properties are used..


But in the end I think we should let, gay, straight, and bi stay. They are a way of life. However, getting everyone to realize that these are choices and not bad things. Just because you aren't gay, or bi, doesn't mean you need to percecute others because they are.

[ARTelevision]

OK then.

If these words were banned, it wouldn't make any existential difference to me because I have no need for them.
...
In addition, it looks like the whole idea of even discussing the notion of banning things is anathema to people to the extreme degree that it tends to nullify any thoughtful consideration of points more central to a given discussion in which it is raised.

[shakran]

Originally posted by ARTelevision
OK then.

If
In addition, it looks like the whole idea of even discussing the notion of banning things is anathema to people to the extreme degree that it tends to nullify any thoughtful consideration of points more central to a given discussion in which it is raised.

If by that you mean that we are against restricting speech no matter what the goal of restricting it is, then you're right on!