BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Hetero 101

 
  

Page: 123(4)

 
 
Lurid Archive
12:11 / 09.05.06
I'm not sure the question "Why are people homosexual?" would be a valid question, tbh. Partly because to me it would sounds like a demand to justify sexuality on a personal level, where finger length and hormone studies would be totally irrelevant.

I guess there is a difference between asking a question asking for self justification and looking at various cultural and biological mechanisms which correlate with sexuality and trying to pick out causal mechanisms (though the last is probably hopeless).

But, on that level, I'm not sure you can really dismiss reproduction. Surely, even the most ardent sceptic of evolutionary psychology will see that there is a species advantage to having some members of the species interested in reproduction in a hard wired way. Now quite why the numbers of heteros are hetero is a different question, and much harder to answer. But I'm not sure you can expect anyone to really have a good answer to that beyond the subjective....which is just another way of saying it just is.

Can you clarify,

I think heterosexual people (even those who are perverts and whose identities are not entirely covered by that name, which is just about everyone, probably) do like talking about heterosexuality, because that is what is assumed to be simply 'how the world is'.

because I can't quite unentangle the idea that one is aware of different sexualities, yet carries on talking about one's own normative sexuality because of an assumption of how the world is. I thought that everyone liked talking about themselves, partly because at least they have something to say.
 
 
sibyline, beating Qalyn to a Q
12:56 / 09.05.06
Mister Disco, I feel like the way you phrased your questions the second time sounded significantly less confrontational than the first.

I personally classify myself as heterosexual because I'm a woman who is primarily attracted to men. I have bisexual tendencies, but so far have neither felt or acted on them strongly enough for me to consider myself bisexual. My sexuality is something that I'm exploring on a continuous basis. As someone who enjoys new experiences, I actually would like to be more attracted to women, but so far I haven't been. I know that the reasons for that are complex and not easily classified along biolgoical v. social lines.

And yes, I am a bit concerned about how the Hetero thread is displacing other topics. For whatever reason, I haven't seen anything on those that I feel like responding to yet, but I am reading them.
 
 
alas
13:14 / 09.05.06
I'd suggest you were rather presumptous about my perceived "sexism" and my need to be lectured.

Look, I empathize with your feelings: I don't like the feeling of being lectured to and nor do I like feeling like I have been perceived as being sexist--or any other "-ist." I have been called on my own writing on this board many times, and had to rethink, and it's not fun. So I understand your reaction.

However, I did not say that you were sexist, and in fact would not say that. I said, very carefully and after great thought, that your question had an edge of sexism to it--which I had decided to assume you did not intend. I meant that sincerely. But I needed to let you know how troubled I was by the potential implication of your question that all members of any sexual subgroup feel "the same" about just about any thing or action. Not knowing anything about you beyond your question, I struggled to write a response that assumed nothing about your sexual experience or reading habits. If you have a sense for how I could have better done that, I'm willing to listen--you can PM me, if you want, so we don't derail discussion.

You're probably aware--although I don't know for sure--that there has been a history of sexism and misogyny on this board, recently discussed at length, and of course that history exists in the broader culture. I did not pull that sensitivity out of the blue--so it strikes me as incorrect and troubling to label it as "presumptuous." I really do not exempt myself from being shaped by sexism and misogyny, nor anyone else who was raised in this culture.

To me, the contrary is more likely to be true: it at least borders on presumptuous if one assumes one's own thought patterns may not have been shaped by racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, etc. etc. These are the way our culture has long made "sense" of the social order--we've all been affected by that. I do not know if you are making that presumption, but I think a reasonable person might infer that from this reaction.

I am, however, truly in this boat with you: I fail to clarify and contextualize. I write more flippantly than I intend to. I don't think things through. And when called on it, I try to swallow hard and accept the punches and sort out what's fair and what's not, but even that's hard to do accurately. I wish you well, bear you no ill will, and actually hope to get to know you better. Your subsequent responses have given a context to your question that has been helpful.
 
 
Hattie's Kitchen
13:34 / 09.05.06
I needed to let you know how troubled I was by the potential implication of your question that all members of any sexual subgroup feel "the same" about just about any thing or action.

I didn't generalise at any point about any sexual subset, and I wouldn't presume to know what any or all straight women do or do not enjoy.

I merely asked a brief question in what I thought was a low-snark thread akin to the other 101 threads, where clueless non-heteros such as myself could ask heteros about their sexuality.

I struggled to write a response that assumed nothing about your sexual experience or reading habits

I disagree. I think you assumed an awful lot, given your response, but I have no issue with that now.

I've clarified my original question and given the context behind it. I look forward to reading more about the mysterious lifestyle of the heterosexual.
 
 
Hydra vs Leviathan
19:00 / 09.05.06
Ok, here's a question, returning somewhat to the straight/het (possible) dichotomy (hope you'll forgive the apparent narcissism, but i'm doing it for rhetorical point/example rather than for "look at me!" reasons):

- i'm physically male, but don't really think of myself as any gender (not so much a deliberate refusal of gender identity, so much as just not really having any gendered component to my own identity, or not thinking of it as relevant)...

- i'm exclusively attracted to women (or people of female external appearance), and while i'd be open to having a sexual relationship with someone who didn't *identify* as female, i don't think i'd be willing to have such a relationship with anyone who didn't have, and feel comfortable with having, female-or-female-looking external genitalia...

- as far as i'm concerned, giving oral is probably the highest epitome of pleasure possible, but my attitude to both penetrative sex and recieving oral is, at best, indifference, and at worst active dislike (in the case of the latter)...

- i have had one heterosexual relationship, but for various (primarily disability related) reasons i don't consider getting into another sexual relationship to be a reasonable prospect for me, at least for the foreseeable future...

- so, in the opinion of those who have opinions on sexuality/gender theory stuff, am i het? am i straight? would i be considered to be both, or one and not the other, or neither?

i bring this up because, as someone who is outwardly male and attracted to people who are outwardly female, by default "straight" or "hetero" is the category i get put in, yet i feel like i'm being not entirely honest if/when i actually use either of those words to describe myself...

i have heard that there are people/communities who use the label "queer hetero", which appeals to me, but i'm uncertain of its exact context or meaning... so, do Barbelithers (het or queer) think that "queer hetero" is a possible or rational identity?

(also, on a much cruder level, there's the question that i would like to ask het women: what is it about male bodies that you find (visually/aesthetically) attractive? cos i have great trouble imagining how anyone could look at a male body and find anything desirable about it... but, since i probably couldn't give a coherent answer to the equivalent question being asked of me about female bodies, i realise it's probably pretty stupid and pointless of me to ask it...)
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:51 / 09.05.06
Way-ull... if you're biologically male and don't feel (for want of a better term) unmale, are attracted to women and don't understand why the male body is or could be attractive... hmmm. I think that would, if we're applying taxonomies, probably make "heterosexual" the easiest _fit_ to your identity. "Straight"'s a bit trickier - you could identify as straight if you wanted to, or not, I guess. We're back to taxonomy, identity, performance, I guess... at the risk of sounding fluffy, I have a feeling that queerness or straightness should probably be something you feel comfortable with, and if you feel comfortable with it it can provide useful bases on which to examine yourself and your feelings, and also to provide a means by which others can help to supplement their own understanding of you in a useful way. "Straight, but not narrow" is another way to express "I am heterosexual, but I am not going to condemn you for not being so" which I've encountered. It's a bit hemp, but then a lot of modern sexuality can be a bit... hempen.
 
 
*
20:05 / 09.05.06
I guess if I wanted to make a suggestions, I'd have to first know what doesn't feel honest about using those labels, Natty.
 
 
Ganesh
20:19 / 09.05.06
... on a much cruder level, there's the question that i would like to ask het women: what is it about male bodies that you find (visually/aesthetically) attractive? cos i have great trouble imagining how anyone could look at a male body and find anything desirable about it...

On one level, this is a very 'het male' question: it's been levelled at me, a gay man, on several occasions, usually with an air of faint incredulity. "But the male body's so ugly... why would you choose it over a beautiful female body?"

For me, it's the flattened angles, the way the musculature fits together and the distribution of hair. I realise you didn't ask, but I thought I'd tell you anyway.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
20:46 / 09.05.06
also, on a much cruder level, there's the question that i would like to ask het women: what is it about male bodies that you find (visually/aesthetically) attractive?

*shrug* Well, what's not to like? I like: Deeper voices, bigger hands, Adam's apples; I like the way that fat goes to different parts of the body; I like the angularity, the big jaw, the square forehead; the flatter chest in relation to the belly. I really like facial hair, the different shapes it can grow in, a nice clean well-shampooed beard; I like body hair, the 'happy trail' up the middle of the belly, the sort of T-shape over the pecs, the thicker fuzz in the hollow of the back, the way the hair on a man's arms sometimes angles up the outside edge of the hands towards the pinky. I like the way the hair on men's heads grows in, falls out, and turns grey slightly differently than most women's; the way the hair grows down the back of some guy's necks in little curls and spreads into a sort of 'shawl' over his sholder-blades.

I like the extra height, the extra speed, the extra muscular strength. I like the way they smell a bit different.

I like the genitalia too, although funnily enough that's actually less important to me than many other hey-look-I'm-a-bloke cues. However, I've never found it unaesthetic, not once I'd got over the initial "Bloody hell, that thing looks angry!" adjustment period. I do know that quite a lot of het women find Mr. Winky gross and/or risible, something I don't quite understand. But then, a lot of the things I like about men are the things they're encouraged to wax, shear, depilate, excercise or diet away.

None of the above is really a deal-breaker. Some of the above is a source of envy as much as it is a turn-on. What and how much varies.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
21:21 / 09.05.06
also, on a much cruder level, there's the question that i would like to ask het women: what is it about male bodies that you find (visually/aesthetically) attractive? cos i have great trouble imagining how anyone could look at a male body and find anything desirable about it...

Well it's not about looks, is it? It's about personality. Sitting here on-line in the twlight home for the utterly demented, Brighton and Hove branch, that my grandson was happy enough to pay for before he went into rehab, I'm looking at all these slabs of male meat that are disporting themselves on the beach with a jaundiced eye. Because who have they killed, really? Probably no one. Back in my day, we all liked a man to have blood on his hands before he had any ideas about getting into our petticoats. Alex's grandfather's attentions in the marital bed were, in all honesty, a bit hard to deal with - I remember the time wen he approached me, seething, dressed like Superman, when he jumped off the wardrobe and hurt his leg, but, all credit to the man, he didn't do anything to me that he wouldn't have done to a German spy.

I admired his conviction, in other words, even if he looked terrible, and there's your answer, young lady.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
21:27 / 09.05.06
I know this is supposed to be low snark but shut up Granny or I'll confiscate your gin.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
22:08 / 09.05.06
Not the gin, surely?

Not the gin.
 
 
Goodness Gracious Meme
22:24 / 09.05.06
Also, I'd wonder, does the point about 'why do you find maleness (in bodies) attractive only seem odd to you when considering het women?

Is it somehow easier to conceptualise the attraction felt by homosexual men, queer men, bi men, queer women, bi women and the whole hosts of other people attracted to men's bodies?

And, as you admit, it might be a slightly pointless question.

I have one for the thread in general which touches on something Deva has raised.

To the het-identified here, is there something uniquely attractive about gender difference that influences who you are attracted to?

As a queer/bi-ish id'd person, I have my own spin on this, but it's one that's sited very much within a context of having a bunch of gender attractions. Gender can be a factor in my attractions, but isn't always, and is very rarely a 'deal-breaker'.

Something I genuinely find hard to understand these days (and I realise this could apply in a different way to the homo thread, where I may well ask it) is this:

why is gender, g. identity, genitalia identifying one as a specific gender, in this case, specifically the difference between the gender etc of oneself and that of one's focus for attraction so fundamental to attraction that without it, attraction is impossible/unlikely to arise?

Is it about eroticising of difference, for example?
 
 
Ganesh
09:53 / 10.05.06
Is it about eroticising of difference, for example?

I'm interested in this too. Being male and attracted to male bodies sometimes draws accusations of 'the ultimate narcissism'. One might level similarly unreasonable accusations of 'the ultimate fetishisation of difference' at those attracted to the opposite sex.

Thoughts?
 
 
Lurid Archive
10:16 / 10.05.06
Is it about eroticising of difference, for example?

I think it must be, to an extent. Though, of course, it isn't subjectively experienced in nearly such a reflective way, at least for myself. I just know that, while I appreciate male beauty and eroticism, there just isn't a certain "ping" that goes off in my head which I associate with sexual attraction. So while I can imagine being in a situation where I would hapily try sex with someone male, I don't think I've ever felt the desire to do so. But exactly the source of that desire when it comes to females remains somewhat obscure to me. Certainly I appreciate the difference, both in a physical sense and more broadly in terms of gender, but I'm not sure I can confidently say that that is where it arises. I assumed everyone based their sexuality on that kind of pre-rational desire - isn't that the case?
 
 
Jackie Susann
02:07 / 19.05.06
Do straight people really turn the lights off when they have sex, like in the movies?
 
 
All Acting Regiment
05:11 / 19.05.06
I think that's probably a) a personal choice that people of all persuasions might prefer and b) something they do in movies so we don't see any nadgy bits.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
07:15 / 19.05.06
You = watching the wrong movies, JS.
 
 
Jackie Susann
06:48 / 20.05.06
That post was inspired by Rosemary's Baby = watching unimpugnably correct movies!

Legba - yeah but you could answer every 101 question with 'that's a matter of personal taste'. It would make for dull threads.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
09:05 / 20.05.06
Yeah, and we keep our socks on.
 
 
Dead Megatron
10:53 / 20.05.06
Do straight people really turn the lights off when they have sex, like in the movies?

What? You, non-hets, don't turn the ligths off when you have sex?

You... perverts!

[warning: this post is a jest. to take it seriously as if it is implying none-heterosexuality = pervertion would be a major waste of time]
 
 
Mistoffelees
11:03 / 20.05.06
Some heteros really do this, I guess.

A colleague once told me what another colleague is gossiping about me. He told her, I never have sex because I donĀ“t have curtains!
 
 
Jackie Susann
00:11 / 21.05.06
Here is another question prompted by my vast exposure to cinematic heterosexuality: What is a pass? Like, when someone says, 'He made a pass at me,' or, 'Did you just... make a pass at me?', what are they talking about? Is it just flirting, or is it, like, drunkenly groping someone, or what? I really want to know, because it sounds like 'making a pass' would be fun, and I would like to know how.
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
15:53 / 21.05.06
Basically, it's any action - verbal, physical, whatever - that might, as a possible outcome, reveal that the passee is interested in the passer. A pass can be any variation on subtle/crude and all points inbetween, although the definition of subtle/crude is elastic depending on context (dancing a little too close to someone in a suggestive manner is usually considered common and reasonably subtle behaviour in a club, especially those culturally designated as 'meat markets', but might be considered unacceptably coarse and weird in, say, an office environment).

Taking as read that there's common agreement here that the above is the case, I'd venture that the experience of 'making a pass' at someone or having someone 'make a pass' at you is not one confined to the heterosexual arena.
 
 
Jack The Bodiless
17:27 / 21.05.06
I identify as a heterosexual man (as differentiated from simply male), but not as straight. The former, purely because I have only ever had or wanted to have sexual experiences with women. The latter, because I've frequently had non-sexual crushes on men - usually celebrities - based on both appearance and presented personality, who I have no problem in referring to as truly smoking hot (and because I also identify as a pervert and straight just doesn't seem to fit as an identifying label). I also, curiously, have occasionally fantasised about fellating myself, as if I was someone else - not fantasised about in a sexual sense, as in to get myself off, but I feel it probably would if I did. The possible irony in my not generally like receiving head, but occasionally liking the idea of giving it to myself, who doesn't generally like receiving head but occasionally likes the idea of giving it to myself, who doesn't... anyway. That's not lost on me.

This is the first time I've ever articulated the above to anyone other than myself. This is largely because, while I'm happy with and am settled into the above identification, a lot of the people I know IRL aren't sufficiently broadminded to accept or understand it, while they'd be perfectly happy to discuss any aspect of my many and varied perversions with no judgement or even a raised eyebrow. I've not discussed it here before because there's never really been an opportunity that I've noticed. From my experience I think it's a valid comment that heterosexuality and 'straightness', especially for men, is an underexamined area. The comments that Disco and Deva have made about the fact that cultural chatter about heterosexuality/straightness is so prevalent that it's like background noise in every situation in our society are perfectly correct. It's everywhere, and I can understand how they may feel unable and unwilling to tune it out as so many seem to. However, I don't think that's the same thing as discourse on the subject. In that way, heterosexuality/straightness feels to me like the elephant in the room. Everyone knows it's there, but no one - especially straights/hets - wants to bring it up and talk about why it's there and what to do about it.

In wider society (the 'real world') I think this is because a lot of people don't want to question certain assumptions about themselves, for fear they be seen as different to what they consider to be the norm (and in a culture that practices and cherishes heteronormativity, that's heterosexuality). There's a safety and security in identifying as heterosexual and as straight. I think it's a false security (because it's based on a dodgy foundation) but there you go...

In more rarified communities like this one, I think the lack of examination tends to be because the province of the heterosexual/straight male is one that comes with a history of privilege that acts as baggage, which refers back to Disco's first post in this thread. There's the feeling that people are fed up of having the heterosexual/straight male shoved down their throat, if you'll forgive the expression, and would prefer to spend their time discussing more culturally marginalised expressions of identity. After all, examination and discussion of self-identification, knowing yourself and allowing others to then share in that knowledge, is partly a process of empowerment, and I think there's a perception that the heterosexual/straight male has had plenty of empowerment this evening, sure as hell isn't getting served any more, and should maybe think about calling it a night and hailing a taxi before he becomes a problem to the doorstaff. I'm not doing a fathers-for-justice and asking everyone to feel sorry for the poor wee privileged straight white guy - it's just that as someone who likes to examine labels and identifications within society, and who identifies as a non-straight heterosexual, I've found this to be perfectly understandable, but frustrating. It's telling that I only feel I can express this on Barbelith on what's been called a low snark thread, and to be honest, I'm typing this without any real conviction that I'll avoid the snark even in a thread like this.

Anyway, thanks for your time.
 
 
Ticker
01:27 / 24.05.06
About them social agendas and propriety in regards to heterosexuality....

Somewhere along the way I absorbed the male gaze into my psyche.
By the male gaze I mean to say the very Western view of women as lesser, weaker, passive, objects, sexually vulnerable, and yet enticing virgin whores. You can experience this POV if you rent main stream het porn catering to the perceived male audience.
Did I mention I'm female and attracted primarily to males?

Maybe it was all the subtle things piling up and tossed around with my family's dynamics. Who knows really but by the time I got to college my sexuality was a minefield, I was a crappy lesbian and a lame straight girl. Luckily four years of art school and a great city to frolic in helped me sort out some of the muck.
I'll never be completely deprogrammed from the power dynamics I stewed in and I'll never be heterosexual no matter the choice of my playmates. I'm not a classic bisexual, I'm a pervert.

I met my spouse online from his writing. He was just a personality floating in a jetsam of brilliant words, not even a real picture, as he had an evil fishhead avatar. We fell madly & stupidly and had a test run meeting to see if our reptile brains liked each other's stink.

I agree with Mordant's reasoning for digging males but besides all the manly man stuff, I also like people who own their skin enough to be whatever their truth is.
 
  

Page: 123(4)

 
  
Add Your Reply