Sexual orientation: An Invalid western concept

[Kitsunay]

Hence we get all of these individuals trying to adjust their behaviours to fit a particular label

Frankly, I can't imagine someone adjusting their behavior to fit a label. Do you mean that if a guy decides he's gay, he'll have sex with men even if he doesn't want to? Or he'll not have sex with a woman, even if he's attracted to her? Or someone who's gotten the idea that she's asexual will ignore the feeling of sexual attraction she has to someone?

I really doubt that. People may be taking society's clues (whatever society they pay attention to) about what they think they are. I had romantic relationships with sexuals and they wanted sex, but if I hadn't been with them, I'd have remained very happily sex-free, no matter what label I put on myself.

People adjust to other people, not to labels.

In my experience, people often justify their behaviour using the labels. If they forget that it's just a label, they begin to stop themselves from doing things because 'I'm asexual'. The interesting thing about this topic, is that it brings about a lot of questions about how people act based on what they believe, that can branch this conversation into any other realm.

I'm sorely tempted to see what would happen if I were to question whether people remain curious when you give them a simplified answer to their questions. :o I said it. Don't reply.... this topic is about sexual orientation, so we can't let it derail.

EDIT: *sigh* while I was bringing up an alternate possibility, I accidently stumbled into an example of sticking to labels >.<

People adjust to other people. Labels are people's expectations/definition/categorization of others When you adopt a label, you are 'expected', or at least expect to be expected, to fit the label.

[Sally]

EDIT: *sigh* while I was bringing up an alternate possibility, I accidently stumbled into an example of sticking to labels >.<

People adjust to other people. Labels are people's expectations/definition/categorization of others When you adopt a label, you are 'expected', or at least expect to be expected, to fit the label.

Only when the label you adopt is public. Self-labeling needn't be public (and didn't used to be, before everyone started announcing their labels). If your label isn't pinned to your chest, no one has any particular expectations of you.

[Vampyremage]

Hence we get all of these individuals trying to adjust their behaviours to fit a particular label

Frankly, I can't imagine someone adjusting their behavior to fit a label. Do you mean that if a guy decides he's gay, he'll have sex with men even if he doesn't want to? Or he'll not have sex with a woman, even if he's attracted to her? Or someone who's gotten the idea that she's asexual will ignore the feeling of sexual attraction she has to someone?

I really doubt that. People may be taking society's clues (whatever society they pay attention to) about what they think they are. I had romantic relationships with sexuals and they wanted sex, but if I hadn't been with them, I'd have remained very happily sex-free, no matter what label I put on myself.

People adjust to other people, not to labels.

I don't think its the opposites that this tends to refer to, but rather the grey areas. For example, a man decides that they seem to be attracted to be attracted to men and thus must be gay. He adopts this label and incorporates it into his sense of personal identity. Then he finds there's a woman and, shockingly, finds himself attracted to that woman. However, because he strongly associates with the identity of gay, he doesn't admit to his feelings and denies that he has those feelings. Similarly, someone who identifies as asexual might deny sexual attractions that they have actually experienced because they so strongly associate with the label of asexual. Thus, it is the grey areas that this phenomenon most impacts, rather than the black and white areas.

With that said, I think labels have their pros and cons. I am personally mostly a fan of them, provided one has the understanding that they provide a general guideline of an aspect of self, rather than the entirety of that aspect. They can be useful in getting across a lot of general information relatively quickly, but far less useful in getting across specific information. Thus, I primarily use labels as a starting point and build from there.

[Sally]

I don't think its the opposites that this tends to refer to, but rather the grey areas. For example, a man decides that they seem to be attracted to be attracted to men and thus must be gay. He adopts this label and incorporates it into his sense of personal identity. Then he finds there's a woman and, shockingly, finds himself attracted to that woman. However, because he strongly associates with the identity of gay, he doesn't admit to his feelings and denies that he has those feelings. Similarly, someone who identifies as asexual might deny sexual attractions that they have actually experienced because they so strongly associate with the label of asexual. Thus, it is the grey areas that this phenomenon most impacts, rather than the black and white areas.

Yes -- I've seen and heard about that with men. Also, I've been told that many gay men feel that guys who say they're bisexual are really gay but just don't want to admit it, so there's a stigma to being bisexual coming from both straight and gay men. It's difficult for men attracted to both men and women. There doesn't seem to be that stigma felt by bisexual women, but maybe I just haven't heard about it.

[Guest]

The opposite stigma applies to women. Bisexual women are considered straight, and for a reason. Personally, every one of the bisexual women I know ended up with a man. Every single one. Some bisexual women do end up with women, of course, but rather than the 50% split you'd think you'd find, I'm wagering a bet it's closer to 15% / 85% in favor of men.

[mindlife]

Quote:

The western concept of sexual orientation is an artificial, unnatural and invalid concept that is developed to perpetuate the mechanisms that oppress straight men.

This thread is to discuss how stupid the modern western idea of 'sexual orientation' is. (Well you are free to reason otherwise!).

end

The "x" concept of "y" is an artificial, unnatural and invalid concept that is developed to perpetuate the mechanisms that oppress "z".

Choose your fillers.

"Islamic", "Muhammad", "pacifists"

"Christian", "God", "gays"

"Buddhist", "desire", "gluttons"

"Republican", "balanced budget", "Medicare recipients"

As a Westerner, I don't give a damn about what this non-Westerner thinks.

His judgments are not scientific.

And all this on what purports to be a "sci forum"?

Okay. Strange days indeed.

[mindlife]

All those threads have the same OP.

There are refutations in the threads.

My impression is that this individual is a closeted homosexual who is very angry.

Most of the posts point to a personal rather than intellectual objective.

[oneofthesun]

So -- what if we finally found AVEN and find that asexuality really suits how we feel, and how we've felt all our life? Since that is me, are you saying that my asexuality -- which completely suits me and I don't have any questions about --is an invalid concept?

Geez.

I'd say asexuality is a description of your feelings about sexual relationships. As opposed to an identity.

[Sally]

So -- what if we finally found AVEN and find that asexuality really suits how we feel, and how we've felt all our life? Since that is me, are you saying that my asexuality -- which completely suits me and I don't have any questions about --is an invalid concept?

Geez.

I'd say asexuality is a description of your feelings about sexual relationships. As opposed to an identity.

But if someone asked me what my orientation was, I'd say asexual. To me, it's an identity in that sense. Of course, if someone doesn't ask me about my orientation, I'm certainly not going to say straight off, "I'm an asexual."

I think we can each decide whether we feel we have an identity.

As far as sexual relationships, I had relationships with sexuals most of my life; That's behavior, not identity

[oneofthesun]

But if someone asked me what my orientation was, I'd say asexual.

Our argument isn't that asexuality is not a valid sexual orientation, it's that sexual orientations don't really exist. They are social constructs.

And notice I said sexuality was a description of your feelings, not your behavior.