Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) see and you wonder why i accused you of having no idea how people work ok let me see if i can lay this alien species out as robotic as possible so you'll maybe get it: "straight" and "gay" are sexual things "i am 100% straight" means "i would not have sex with a man for societal or personal reasons and i am a man" it does not mean "i find no characteristics of men appealing and i find every possible combination of feminine aspects appealing" i think a textbook here would have an example lettuce take me because i am A) 100% straight and B) highly familiar to myself i like to say things like "leigh halfpenny is fucking gorgeous" because from whatever you want to call it, call it an artistic or an objective standpoint or whatever, the man is fucking gorgeous. i would not have sex with him. this does not make me "less than 100% straight" straight people see people of the same sex in pictures or w/e, find them attractive, and then rule them out on a basis of sexy bits because of an expectation. i see this hot chick, my mind says she's a hot chick, i get firm, she's a confirmed dude with a bigger wang than me, my firmness subsides and i carry on. who gives a fuck that it's "societo-social" or whatever (i've been drinking and can't be assed to scroll up and look at what it was lol) once the expectation is subverted the brain goes "lol", the penis goes weeeoooooop and moves on i get that you like being argumentative because i think it's the only thing that brings you pleasure, but at least don't say dumb shit just to say it lol A celibate priest says, "I will not have sex with anyone," yet they may find individuals attractive. They are not termed asexual because they choose celibacy. Sexual behavior is not equivalent to sexual orientation. In short, one does not choose their orientation. One chooses their identity. Edited December 14, 2013 by Makaze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 A celibate priest says, "I will not have sex with anyone," yet they may find individuals attractive. They are not termed asexual because they choose celibacy. In short, one does not choose their orientation. Sexual behavior is not equivalent to sexual orientation. One chooses their identity. i have literally no idea what point you're trying to make are you trying to talk over our heads to make yourself feel better or was this just a momentary failure to communicate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) It may be that you are drunk. Edited December 14, 2013 by Makaze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 oh. OH. i get it. you're making a fucking pedantic argument like you usually do, aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 It may that you are drunk. eat me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 You don't look delicious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inui Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 this is gay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 You don't look delicious. so are you tacitly admitting you were just being a pedantic shit or should i prepare my 98% straight anus for your coup de grace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rehab Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) That one won't have sex with a man and have never felt sexual attraction to one might be different from being incapable of literally ever being attracted to a man, I think might be part of Makaze's point: there have been cases, for example, where somebody who for decades felt little attraction to "the idea of" [sex/gender] got a legit crush on one [sex/gender] person, and that crush became legit "spend my life (and nights in bed) with this person," and there was never any tell that was really obvious (so far as we know). There are also people whose entire sexual orientations have changed over time (I assume a source of some consternation for, say, some lifelong bisexuals who feel like said people give them a reputation as "fakers") (hi) Though it's indeed largely an academic point, because by those standards, nobody could ever really "know" their sexuality, even if they've never had reason to doubt it (as in an example for them of anything that wasn't in line with their orientation, not "this one time, George Clooney literally turned a guy gay") Sexuality isn't the most exact science yet, basically Edited December 14, 2013 by Rehab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 Though it's indeed largely an academic point, because let's be fair, par for the course for makaze Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 I'm not sure. It's possible you missed why I posted. I know why people say they are 100% straight. Someone stated that no one is 100% straight. I would have left it at that, but someone claimed that the person who said that was delusional (Tangerine). I explained why it was not possible because no one had presented reasoning for their claims. Also what Rehab said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prims Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 who cares, sexuality is just what you make of it and nobody's going to say "hey i think youre cute, only 10% homo" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peener weener Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (as in an example for them of anything that wasn't in line with their orientation, not "this one time, George Clooney literally turned a guy gay") lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 I'm not sure. It's possible you missed why I posted. I know why people say they are 100% straight. Someone stated that no one is 100% straight. I would have left it at that, but someone claimed that the person who said that was delusional (Tangerine). I explained why it was not possible because no one had presented reasoning for their claims. Also what Rehab said. sssssssso instead of something like explaining your stance to me further you just tell me how i don't get why you posted or something? i'm trying to figure out a way to take this in a way that isn't "you just didn't understand my post maaaaan!!!" (by the way i'm back from dinner and it was delicious) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 OH WOW I MISSED THIS I know why people say they are 100% straight. you, mr. roboto, mr. "illogical decisions do not compute because i think people are 100% logical", think you have the authority to judge why all people say a certain thing? this just gets better and better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prims Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) tbf i dont disbelieve that upbringing and environmental factors have something to do with sexuality because i was raised to be a 100% Straight Young Christian American and theres still a stigma that makes doin it with a dude sound less appealing, for the longest time i just identified as het because of this despite basically liking dicks too but like, if somebody identifies as heterosexual but is only "90% straight" then who cares? Edited December 14, 2013 by Professional PantsWrestler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 (edited) because makaze has to attribute everything to something concrete ofc and somebody said something that could be construed as factually incorrect Edited December 14, 2013 by Integrity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Espinosa Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 You can't be 100% straight because one of these days somebody might dress up a dude in a pretty dress, put some make-up on and have you fooled. Something like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 sssssssso instead of something like explaining your stance to me further you just tell me how i don't get why you posted or something? i'm trying to figure out a way to take this in a way that isn't "you just didn't understand my post maaaaan!!!" (by the way i'm back from dinner and it was delicious) Both of your guesses were so obtuse that I figured it would be best to direct you back to the beginning. No reason to reinvent the wheel I just made. OH WOW I MISSED THIS you, mr. roboto, mr. "illogical decisions do not compute because i think people are 100% logical", think you have the authority to judge why all people say a certain thing? this just gets better and better I think I can infer incentives from context. Domo arigatou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerine Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 The entire idea of distinguishing between "straight" and "100% straight" is utterly ridiculous and that was the point Integrity was making. For all intents and purposes if you are straight then you are 100% straight. Suggesting otherwise would be a fucking pedantic argument to quote a reasonable person in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 Both of your guesses were so obtuse that I figured it would be best to direct you back to the beginning. No reason to reinvent the wheel I just made. you mean spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Espinosa Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 I don't see anything pedantic or unreasonable with Makaze's statements. If anything, he's referring to pretty clear notions. Urges should be distinguished from acting upon urges. As for whether somebody can be trusted to have full understanding of every impulse and feature they might possess, I'd say you can never be sure, though there's no benefit in dwelling on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makaze Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 How can they both be spot on when you suggested either one or the other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Integrity Posted December 14, 2013 Share Posted December 14, 2013 you got me :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inui Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 makaze confirmed homo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts