Dudette Posted September 5, 2016 Share Posted September 5, 2016 Why does a person has to define his/her own sexuality by him/herself? Is it better to do democratically? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dudette Posted September 5, 2016 Author Share Posted September 5, 2016 Why does a person has to define his/her own sexuality by him/herself? Is it better to do democratically? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nanogretchen4 Posted September 5, 2016 Share Posted September 5, 2016 Tarfeather started a poll to let people vote on his sexual orientation. You could do the same if you want. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
deltaX Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 In general, I don't think having a democratically elected label is the best way to define yourself. The people here will be able to answer some questions or offer advice, but in the end the decision on how to identify should lie soley with you. None of us know what's going on inside your head, so anything we said about your sexuality would just best guesses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
j a c k Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 No one but you can know how you really feel. At the end of the day you're the only one who can decide your sexual orientation. Asking for others opinions may assist you but no one knows you better than you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
touching-not-so-much Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 I agree with the two posts that were a massive stone facepalm and "WAT" (the second one I would have posted but was beat to the punch). I haven't even an inkling of what sense the original post can begin to make, to where other people can respond to it with anything other than the aforementioned two posts I liked. WTF is "democratically elected sexuality"?! I mean I read what you said and it looks just like what you're saying but that's like saying "Yogurt Lawnmower, which is of course, a lawnmower made entirely of yogurt". It has a very concrete definition, but that doesn't mean it makes ANY damn sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
nanogretchen4 Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 Apparently there's a website where you can invite the general public to vote on whether you are gay. John Scalzi went on that website and tweeted about it. He's not gay, but he was an ally before it was cool. He kept egging on his many internet followers to give him a higher gay score. Every time his score went up he made up increasingly ridiculous stories about his gay adventures. It was funny. I'm pretty sure democratically elected sexuality is for comedy purposes only. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MiniVegan Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 So your friends and family would vote to decide who they think you should be sexually attracted to? How would that change who you are or aren't sexually attracted to? We are the only ones who know what attraction we feel, and sometimes we're not even clear on it. You can certainly talk to others about your experiences, and they can provide feedback. And that might help. But your sexuality is what it is. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
One Winged Angel Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 I'll be honest, I think the idea of 'democratically elected sexuality', which is basically letting the herd decide how you think and feel, is utterly and completely ridiculous. Even if you allowed your outward appearance to be affected by the opinions of others, your feelings inside would not alter. But of course, you should NEVER allow the subjective opinions of another person to 'elect' how you can think and feel. In fact, it is completely impossible to do so - if I stood up and said "I am NOT Asexual", I would be lying to everybody including myself. I personally believe that allowing someone else to define you is dangerous. They can advise you, of course. They can agree or disagree with you. But they cannot define you, and will never be able to. People who allow others to dictate their lives to them are prone to all manner of problems, mentally, physically and psychologically. Allow the finger pointing accusation of "your a freak" by the ignorant to define how you feel ("I AM a freak, I knew it!), and you have allowed yourself to be conditioned and controlled. A free person never regulates their conduct by the dictation or suggestion of others, for the second they do so, they are no longer free. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dudette Posted September 6, 2016 Author Share Posted September 6, 2016 I'll be honest, I think the idea of 'democratically elected sexuality', which is basically letting the herd decide how you think and feel, is utterly and completely ridiculous. Even if you allowed your outward appearance to be affected by the opinions of others, your feelings inside would not alter. But of course, you should NEVER allow the subjective opinions of another person to 'elect' how you can think and feel. In fact, it is completely impossible to do so - if I stood up and said "I am NOT Asexual", I would be lying to everybody including myself. I personally believe that allowing someone else to define you is dangerous. They can advise you, of course. They can agree or disagree with you. But they cannot define you, and will never be able to. People who allow others to dictate their lives to them are prone to all manner of problems, mentally, physically and psychologically. Allow the finger pointing accusation of "your a freak" by the ignorant to define how you feel ("I AM a freak, I knew it!), and you have allowed yourself to be conditioned and controlled. A free person never regulates their conduct by the dictation or suggestion of others, for the second they do so, they are no longer free. But, I have noticed that in a way "the herd decide how you think and feel". Let me explain what I have observed during my "sexual exploration". Let us assume that these statements below are true: (Please correct me if these statements are full of shit) -each sexual orientation has a spectrum (like it can be noticed in asexual orientation, there is gray,demi,just ace) -defining your sexual orientation is NOT black and white. -NOT each person of the same sexual orientation feels 100% the same way (each of us experiences and defines what he/she feels in a different way) Now, I have observed that there is some kind of pressure in our society to fully fit into the basic definition of sexual orientation. Let me give you an example: -It is 100% possible to define yourself as homosexual, but at the same time it is possible for the homosexual person to rarely experience sexual attraction to the opposite sex, but this person will define him/herself as homosexual because the sexual attraction to opposite sex happens to rarely for him/her to act upon it. Now, I have seen this with my own eyes that this person would be pressured by non-homosexual communities to identify him/herself as bisexual or heterosexual in denial, and there is a possibility that this person would choose to start identifying himself as "queer" (I mean queer as sexual orientation, some people choose to identify him/herself as queer [for example one of my friends]) or as bisexual. My point which I am trying to make is whether is it more rational to start identifying yourself as "the herd decide how you think and feel" in order to not listen to sexual discrimination OR not to be forced to question your sexuality all over again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sisky Posted September 13, 2016 Share Posted September 13, 2016 The key word here is "rarely". What's the point of pressuring someone into identifying as bisexual if they're into people of their own sex almost all the time? Do two or three opposite sex people a person may have been attracted to in their entire life have to be given so much importance that they offset the significantly higher number of same sex people? Sounds an wful lot like majority people grasping at straws just so they can say "See, this person is into people of the opposite sex! They're not really gay!" There's absolutely nothing rational about it. Ironically, which one is more rational for the individual person depends entirely on said person and how they feel they can best handle their identity, not any outside context. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
j a c k Posted September 16, 2016 Share Posted September 16, 2016 There's nothing rational about that at all. While it's true that sometimes have opinions on what other's sexual orientation is but it's always up to the person themselves. If they want to/feel comfortable identifying as homosexual then that's that. No one else can say that you're not.The idea of democratically elected sexual orientation is not rational in the slightest. Shouldn't people learn to respect how other's identify rather than tell them that they're not [insert orientation] and instead are [insert orientation]? it's up to the person, no one else. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.