Delta4Embassy
Gold Member
As someone who doesn't believe in the usual sexual orientation terms of gay/lesbian, bi, straight, and thinks instead everyone's simply "sexual," I find the existence of the term "gay-for-pay" as applied to men in the gay porn world proves my assertion.
Many gay porn actors are in fact heterosexual-identifying (how you id them is up to you.) Just as when heterosexuals find themselves in prison or other all-male enviroments (war for example,) they often wind up 'making due' with what's at hand. While once out of the all-monosex enviroments, revert to their prefered mode of sexuality involving opposite-sex relationships and sex.
If straight and gay are just terms used to describe a behaviour (who you have sex with,) but dont' refer to binding realities, is our emphasis on such terms appropriate? If people's sexual behaviours can change to same-sex sex instantly given the right enviroment, conditions, or level of intoxication, then isn't identifying as something to the exclusion or the others wrong?
Is a lesbian-identifying woman who prostitutes herself to men really lesbian? Is a man who identifies as straight really straight if he does gay porn? Is a straight man in prison who has sex with other men straight? What about more tricky examples like a man who has sex with other men, but only in the dominant role? What about the submissive role? Are they both gay if they both nonetheless identify as straight, have wives, and families? The so-called 'downlow' thing in the black community.
Seems the terms of gay/lesbian, bi, and straight aren't so simple afterall. If who we have sex with doesn't define our sexual orientation then isn't sexual orientation itself false?
Many gay porn actors are in fact heterosexual-identifying (how you id them is up to you.) Just as when heterosexuals find themselves in prison or other all-male enviroments (war for example,) they often wind up 'making due' with what's at hand. While once out of the all-monosex enviroments, revert to their prefered mode of sexuality involving opposite-sex relationships and sex.
If straight and gay are just terms used to describe a behaviour (who you have sex with,) but dont' refer to binding realities, is our emphasis on such terms appropriate? If people's sexual behaviours can change to same-sex sex instantly given the right enviroment, conditions, or level of intoxication, then isn't identifying as something to the exclusion or the others wrong?
Is a lesbian-identifying woman who prostitutes herself to men really lesbian? Is a man who identifies as straight really straight if he does gay porn? Is a straight man in prison who has sex with other men straight? What about more tricky examples like a man who has sex with other men, but only in the dominant role? What about the submissive role? Are they both gay if they both nonetheless identify as straight, have wives, and families? The so-called 'downlow' thing in the black community.
Seems the terms of gay/lesbian, bi, and straight aren't so simple afterall. If who we have sex with doesn't define our sexual orientation then isn't sexual orientation itself false?
