Can a guy suck a cock and still be heterosexual?

[blue_eyes56 2010]

This thread reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where Jerry and George are mistaken for a gay couple - they repeatedly deny it but quickly add "not that there's anything wrong with that!". Woman on woman is obviously very hot/cool but men exploring cocks, I think many of us are, like Jerry and George, supportive in theory but still a little uncomfortable by the whole idea.

 

I've had a few tgirl experiences and it's really not a big deal. Fun to try different things - I've also visited a few doms and had a few threesomes (mff!), but mostly stuck to female massage. You learn more about yourself and sexuality in general, but none of it really defines you.

[baileydog 9367]

others have spoken quite articulately on this

 

but, if there is strength in numbers ... then I will just add that I totally agree that how one defines their sexuality is totally separate from participation (or not) in a particular sex act

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

At the end of the day, these are English words that do have a clear definition and every single one of us falls into one category listed above, or the other.The only one not mentioned is NON-sexual... Unless of course you're a shrimp who's A-sexual...

Alexxxis, I think it is fine that you have your own opinion of what a sexual identity or orientation is. That is totally your right to have your opinion. But I dislike that you are telling other people that their identification is wrong, and that you are putting down identities like asexuality. It may not be common, but it is out there.

As for the dictionary definitions... Not that long ago, gay meant something completely different. So did queer. We didn't always have the word transgender. So definitions are constantly changing as our understanding of human sexualities and identities is changing.

[xxxAxxx 21016]

Alexxxis, I think it is fine that you have your own opinion of what a sexual identity or orientation is. That is totally your right to have your opinion. But I dislike that you are telling other people that their identification is wrong, and that you are putting down identities like asexuality. It may not be common, but it is out there.

As for the dictionary definitions... Not that long ago, gay meant something completely different. So did queer. We didn't always have the word transgender. So definitions are constantly changing as our understanding of human sexualities and identities is changing.

 

Those were current definitions.

 

I didn't tell her she was wrong, I said I saw it differently. In fact I asked her to further explain so that I may have some insight as to how others see it.

 

Are you saying that you do not fall into ANY of the above categories? Please explain.

 

And as far as the a-sexual comment goes, I didn't realize any species could impregnate itself other than shrimp. If there are a-sexual people out there, I meant no offense.

[Kathryn Bardot 99339]

Those were current definitions.

 

I didn't tell her she was wrong, I said I saw it differently. In fact I asked her to further explain so that I may have some insight as to how others see it.

 

Are you saying that you do not fall into ANY of the above categories? Please explain.

 

And as far as the a-sexual comment goes, I didn't realize any species could impregnate itself other than shrimp. If there are a-sexual people out there, I meant no offense.

Asexuality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

 

I am not discussing myself in this thread.

Current definitions fail to consider than many people consider sexuality to be on a spectrum (see Kinsey's work) rather than as clearly defined categories, and many other people choose to not define themselves by a label.

[xxxAxxx 21016]

Asexuality: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexuality

 

I am not discussing myself in this thread.

Current definitions fail to consider than many people consider sexuality to be on a spectrum (see Kinsey's work) rather than as clearly defined categories, and many other people choose to not define themselves by a label.

 

This is the a-sexual I spoke of.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asexual_reproduction

 

Basically, you can view it a "sex-less" organism being neither male nor female.

Or perhaps you're a glass is full kind of person who sees that as BOTH male AND female.

I'm sure if you're more interested you can look up many debates on the subject.

Either way, it knocks itself up and has no need for a partner.

Probably where they decided to derive the name from in the type of people in your link.

 

And for the Kinsey scale, what you're basically saying is that my definitions were the most basic and that between every 2 categories like another 3 in augmenting increments to the next? Sounds complicated. :S

I'll stick to my simple view a little longer... But can see how others could/do feel about it.

 

Additional Comments:

I'm a Sexual Being...I'm not afraid to explore my options...Is that easier to understand? If I had to choose I would be with a man thus the heterosexual.

 

Keep in mind that this is coming from my point of view and is only an honest opinion of my observations!

 

While I can respect you're choice to not label, and can totally understand why you would call yourself sexual, with no prefix....Can you understand how calling you heterosexual didn't work for me? I am not "labelling" anyone, or saying either of us is right/wrong. Please be aware I am only looking to understand your point of view. :)

[MightyPen 67414]

If you're upset that someone says you're "gay" because you have participated in sexual activities with someone of the same sex, perhaps you need to look deeper into your own insecurities, because at the end of the day that is exactly what gay is.

Hey there many-xes. :) A few points:

 

(1) Labels. I really do see that you want to apply these labels not to inflict stigma or judgement, but because you simply feel they're accurate. I don't fault your motives, but do be careful; human experience is more complicated than dictionaries allow for. Plus, dictionaries are inherently limited, and the definitions they provide brief and superficial. I promise that if you consult professional sex researchers, they'll provide a much more complicated and nuanced set of definitions than the everyman's dictionary does.

 

(2) Asexuality. Asexuality really is how quite a number of human beings are wired and live their lives. They're not sexually attracted to EITHER gender (but this doesn't preclude their full enjoyment of familiar, non-sexual intimacy). This has left them confused and sometimes ashamed, but more recently there's been some awareness and understanding emerging. Here's just one link on the subject from the excellent column of Andrew Sullivan (whose The Dish is awesome and I read every day): The Dish: Asexuality (one of many)

 

(3) Complicated gender. I don't think you have accounted for the case I presented: a beautiful TG woman who still has male equipment. The genes say "male", so does the equipment. But everything else -- appearance, dress, mannerism, other body parts and proportions -- say female. Which is it? And why did you choose your answer?

 

I'd have no trouble declaring myself gay if I thought that was the case. Whatever my nature is, I'll embrace it, revel in it (responsibly), and be proud. But for me, a cock attached to someone masculine has no sexual appeal at all; in fact, the idea is kind of repellent. (I actually consider that an unfortunate limitation on my part, but it's there and undeniable.) On the other hand, a cock on a pretty TG woman is a lot like a strapon worn by a sexy woman, but far far better because it actually works and the owner can feel what I'm doing to it.

 

So how do we address these cases? Cock-equipped TG? Strapon-wearing woman? Which is male and which is female? And why?

 

Last point: if you prefer to resort to genetics for the answer to those questions, then what if a guy receives awesome oral sex from a beautiful TG woman, and never finds out that she was genetically male? Was it still gay if I didn't know my partner was (in some respects) male? Why, or why not? If only genes and the fact that the partner had a cock made my sex with that partner "gay", then how can my knowledge, or lack of it, change that status?

 

And yet, how can it NOT matter?

 

See, it's what we perceive that defines us and our actions. Not what other people say, or a genetic test, or a dictionary. The disconnect in the latter case isn't on the part of the actors; it's the fault of the dictionary.

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

Life is complicated enough. I am a sexual being; period!

[contraman 5480]

I haven't had a "full" sexual encounter with a guy, beyond a fellow kid trying the "you show me yours if I show you mine" gambit when I was really young. For whatever reason I didn't like the idea and (pardon the pun) blew him off. I also had a gay friend talk me into dropping my pants once. After a touch or two, that was enough for me.

 

I have, thanks to Ms. Nathalie Lefebvre, had an opportunity to explore some play with strap-ons recently, and here's what I've learned from that:

 

-- sexual desire is a lot more complicated than just "I like girls", "I like guys."

-- The first time I put a dildo in my mouth, it was ... weird. I had to ask whether the arousal I felt at doing that meant that I had gay tendencies or not.

-- I feel at this point I am a pretty firmly straight dude with some desire to play with gender roles.

 

Would I suck a dick, attached either to a guy or a t-girl? I'm really not sure at this point. Given the circumstances? Perhaps. But it's not something that I've fantasized about or in search of. Would it make me gay if I did? Nope. Just a guy who likes girls and sucked a dick once. Does it matter? Not a whole lot, IMO.

 

I think splitting hairs over dictionary definitions of straight, gay, bi, asexual, whatever, just distracts from the realities of how sex exhibits itself in people's lives.

[Guest]

As a general principle I do agree that all of the terms (heterosexual, bisexual, gay) are labels and what really matters is what you as an individual enjoy. For those who live by principalities, this one in my view is a good one to stick to. However, the reality is far from the ideal (if this were actually the ideal).

 

We are living in a society which has an impact on the vast majority of us. It is true that the intensity of such an impact is different from one individual to another in a way that the less the impact, the more the individual is liberated and vice verse. Hence, my thread was meant to be framed in that context (i.e. the context of the labels adopted by the society). This was, if you would like to say, the "legal test" for this thread.

 

In a simple form: Can a guy suck a cock (of course for pleasure and not for pay) and still be heterosexual (within the society label meaning)?

 

A a matter of fact, the reason for which I initiated this thread is mainly related to my direct observation from my experience with first timers (clients who have never been with t-girl and who are according to the society definitions heterosexuals) as I have noticed that a major portion of them would really start to question their sexual orientation the moment they start seeing a t-girl or even think about it.

 

The common theme among those whom I have met is that none of them has any sexual desire to men in their natural physical form yet they fantasize about the cock when presented or delivered in an overall feminine package. In other words, they will never suck a guy's cock but they crave and enjoy sucking a t-girl's cock. They have never been or thought about being topped by a guy but they crave and enjoy being topped by a t-girl. While the action is the same in both instances, the actors are different.

 

Another example, albeit different as it involves different actors (females) is pegging. The are many heterosexuals men that crave and enjoy women wearing strapons. It is common that men would start sucking these strapons before they are being anally penetrated. Although, the action is similar (synthetic cock sucking and penetration), the actors are different.

 

Accordingly, I hold the view that when a man is attracted only to the external feminine attributes, he is still heterosexual within the corners of the same society label and when he is attracted only to the external masculine attributes, he is a homosexual within the same society label and when he is attracted to both he is bisexual.

 

This was my view on the subject and I agree that there is no right or wrong answer.

 

I think that:

Someone who partakes in sexual acts with both genders is BISEXUAL.

Someone who partakes in sexual acts with their own gender ONLY is HOMOSEXUAL.

Someone who partakes in sexual acts with the opposite gender ONLY is HETEROSEXUAL.

 

I don't see how this is debatable, to be honest? It seems so black and white to me, no grey areas...

 

I can see how "gay for pay" comes into account and all, but then that becomes an emmy nomiated acting job, not sexual preference.

 

If a person has sex with their own gender, but does not get involved with them in relationships, I still see that as Bi. And those of you who made remarks about it being about the person, not their sexe...That, to me, simply reinforces my statements. You're Bi in my mind, as you like all humans regardless of gender.

 

This is all simply my own humble opinion.

 

 

----On a side note----

I have noticed that most people who share my mind frame are hetero (straight), not all heterosexuals feel the way I do on the matter, just saying I've just noticed that majority of like-minded persons tend to be straight. We are all people and personally, that's kind of a label too...In the sense that it's describing what you are. I don't mean to offend anyone by "labelling", but, to be honest; I believe it is just another label like saying "I have 3 labels: Human, Woman, Hetero". Most of my friends are bisexual, male and female alike. They personally don't feel labeled by the term bi and announce it loudly and proudly. The only thing that matters at the end of the day is that YOU know who YOU are and love it. Cheers!

 

I haven't had a "full" sexual encounter with a guy, beyond a fellow kid trying the "you show me yours if I show you mine" gambit when I was really young. For whatever reason I didn't like the idea and (pardon the pun) blew him off. I also had a gay friend talk me into dropping my pants once. After a touch or two, that was enough for me.

 

I have, thanks to Ms. Nathalie Lefebvre, had an opportunity to explore some play with strap-ons recently, and here's what I've learned from that:

 

-- sexual desire is a lot more complicated than just "I like girls", "I like guys."

-- The first time I put a dildo in my mouth, it was ... weird. I had to ask whether the arousal I felt at doing that meant that I had gay tendencies or not.

-- I feel at this point I am a pretty firmly straight dude with some desire to play with gender roles.

 

Would I suck a dick, attached either to a guy or a t-girl? I'm really not sure at this point. Given the circumstances? Perhaps. But it's not something that I've fantasized about or in search of. Would it make me gay if I did? Nope. Just a guy who likes girls and sucked a dick once. Does it matter? Not a whole lot, IMO.

 

I think splitting hairs over dictionary definitions of straight, gay, bi, asexual, whatever, just distracts from the realities of how sex exhibits itself in people's lives.

 

I think Jane responded wonderfully to this topic. I do believe that the labels in a normal guy on guy setting to be accurate or girl on girl. However, when it comes to transgendered individuals it is a little more complicated than that. If a man is born a man and he really feels like he should have been a woman. In all of his being he knows he is a woman, he acts like a woman, dresses like a woman and knows he is a woman. Than who are we to say that this person is not a woman. I think that a lot of gentlemen who are with t girls really feel like they are with a woman. Just like woman playing with strap ons are no less a woman. I also think that t girls are no less any womanly. There are of course people who do not look at it this way. They just see a penis and that's it, this person must be a man. If that's not the persons thing that's okey, it's just very closed minded to dismiss this person for who they really are a woman. I think this in a sense is very closed minded because it takes us all much more to be just a woman or a man, it's how we feel, how we act and how we are. This body that I wear is just a shell, it's the me inside that makes this shell so beautiful. You can use this example on woman who are born a woman but feel like they are men. These woman may be attracted to woman. This might be looked at as a lesbian relationship or a man and woman relationship, it is just the way the individual is looking at it. There can be many other topics that can be brought up, but I think you guys get the point. Labels are great to describe things but I don't believe that human beings are labels and that's where it get complicated.

 

So I guess you can call a t girl session a woman and a man experience or a man on man experience or a A gendered experience. It's just the way you look at it. It's a little more complicated than just labeling a man gay for being with a t girl. Life is beautiful because there is so many different types of people out there and so many different opinions.

[crankF 12893]

I looked up omnisexual in my dictionary and it wasn't there. Wouldn't that mean persons of all the previously "labeled" groups having sex simultaneously? That would be interesting indeed.

[piano8950 32577]

This thread has grown legs and run so far I can only be reminded of a certain character.

 

 

Mr. Garrison (then Miss Garrison, then Mr. Garrison)

 

The only character I know who went through all possible sexual orientations from both sides. A closeted homosexual male, who finally accepted himself and became openly gay to becoming a woman attracted to men, to becoming a lesbian and then going back to being a man who is very straight and pretty much disgusted with homosexuality.

 

---

 

But on a more serious note, I see transgenders as the sex they feel as, not the one the were born as.

 

But that aside (and basically sexual interaction with a pre-op transgender, or "complete male/female"), I am genuinely puzzled about why some people who've posted here bring up labels when talking about sexual orientation. I don't see a correlation between the two.

 

I'll give you an example. One of my cousins believes in Ganesh and Krishna. He follows the rituals of Hinduism, so I would consider him a Hindu. Just like someone might call me Canadian or brown skinned, I don't think they are labeling me, just stating an obvious fact.

 

So yeah, don't think gay/straight/bi are label words, some here do, not sure why. I guess that's it then.

 

 

 

I seriously need to spend more time studying and less time here

[Guest]

I guess you can technically call a man who sees a t girl and who still likes woman bisexual or bi curious. However, being hyper sensitive to other peoples feelings, I don't know what the right thing to say about men seeing t girls because I look at t girls as being women. So what is the right etiquette in this situation? I think that due to the complexity of the sexual orientation that determining weather a person is gay or not by being with a t girl is hard to do and by not knowing each individual who sees t girls make it even harder. I guess there is no right or wrong to this question as I see that both sides of the argument have sensible points. So what is the right etiquette when it comes to trans genders? Is it as unique as the person themselves. All I know about trans genders is from t.v. and from what I know there can be various relationships. For example trans gender man with woman, trans gender woman with woman, trans gender man with man and trans gender woman with man. How do we label each of these relationships individually when the sexual orientation is so complex it's self. Maybe it's just me but I'm curious about if there is a certain level of ethics or manners when it comes to this. Maybe a unwritten rule. I'm sorry if I have offended anyone, I guess my curiosity has the better of me. It would be interested to read what people think about this question or questions if you will.

[roamingguy 300292]

Life is complicated enough. I am a sexual being; period!

 

Not only is life complicated enough, besides those complications it does have it's share of problems.

Human companionship and sexuality are one of life's escapes and pleasures which brings happiness to people. Who cares about labels. What consenting adults do together and provides them with that happiness is of no one's concern.

RG

[Guest]

Not only is life complicated enough, besides those complications it does have it's share of problems.

Human companionship and sexuality are one of life's escapes and pleasures which brings happiness to people. Who cares about labels. What consenting adults do together and provides them with that happiness is of no one's concern.

RG

 

I agree with everything you said. I'm glad that the question was opened for the cerb community to discuss. I think that discussing certain things help take down silly stereotypes. If it makes someone happy then I see no problem with them doing whatever they choose, unfortunately society does label things whether it be right or wrong. I think that things are not so cut and dry myself but I also see why people would be quick to say that it is gay or bisexual especially if they do not have much experience with that type of situation. However, I do think that sometimes we are to much in our heads and that we stop ourselves from really enjoying things. So if you are curious and you find that this is something you like, hey go for it. Life is too short to be worried about what kind of labels you may be tagged with and who really cares what people think of you anyways if it's getting in the way of your happiness.

[Guest *l**e]

I think maybe people are making this too complex. There is nothing wrong with a label so long as each person chooses their own label. It's not my duty, job or business to label anyone else, just myself if I choose to. In other word, me calling you gay is obnoxious unless you have labelled yourself as gay (or straight or bi or whatever.)

The danger in not using labels is that by vilifying or hiding from labels, we give power to their negative connotations. For instance in the old days calling a guy queer was a terrible insult, now that gays have taken that word as their own, the power has been robbed from that word making in an ineffectual insult to the loser that would use it as such.

 

So, in conclusion, call yourself whatever you'd like to and I will happily employ that term for you if you would like me too. But, I will never try to decide what you are.

Now, I will have a beer. I am beer-sexual tonight. (cause I realllllly loooove it)

[VedaSloan 119179]

Another way of thinking of it is like this:

 

I'm a Canadian citizen. I love love love going to Europe, but that doesn't make me a European citizen. Not the best analogy, but you get the gist.

[Guest B**na***oy]

Some years ago, I experimented sex with T Girls. I won't go into all the details, but I can say that sucking the cock of a T Girl is something I tremendously enjoyed. Sucking the cock of a man is something I have never done and will never do.

 

I never questioned myself if these activities actually changed my sexual orientation or altered my DNA or whatever. All I know is that I enjoyed some of it and disliked other parts.

 

At the end of the day, I'm not just a guy standing on the sideline with an opinion; I played the game and I know were I stand. It's all that matters to me.

 

As it has been said a few times already, whatever happens between consenting adults behind closed doors is there business.

[Loki318 1631]

When I started reading this thread I was Straight hetro

Then I thought I might be Curious

Then maybe I was Bi-

I never got to Gay ....Yet

 

I have now decided I am Sexual "Very Sexual" ;)

 

Like the old Bull that I am, I have jumped he fence a few times and occasionally walked on the Wild Side ....

 

Labels just peel away with time and changes; If we could not change then we would be very boring and life should not be allowed to become boring :)

 

Loki318:

 

The Norse God of Mischief & Mirth and Wine Women and Song ...

[spence_ca 722]

The answer has to be qualified by who is asking and who is answering.

 

Uninformed society would likely call him gay, failing to recognize the myriad of shades of grey between black and white.

 

The more informed might call him bisexual, or pan-sexual (if they stopped to consider who the cock is attached to).

 

The person himself (in this case myself) may dislike the definitions as too simplistic and wrongly focusing on the act, rather than the mental state or physical/mental/spiritual attraction that person has to others.

 

I've sucked a cock because I wanted to try it, and feel personally enriched because of the experience.

 

I continue to be curious about things, and will hopefully continue to broaden my experiences, yet don't feel the need to define them.

 

The only label I'm prepared to happily give myself is "open-minded"

 

Spence

[NotchJohnson 214129]

I have been following this thread since it started and I can confirm that "Yes" a guy can suck a cock and still be very much heterosexual, and I have made the experience last week myself. I have booked a threesome, one with a female and Tgirl and have experimented and had a cock in my mouth and still consider myself very much attracted to the female body and none whatsoever to the male.

Please keep in mind that the Tgirl I was with was very feminine and I enjoyed her company very much. I will never suck on a man's cock, never did and never will.

Call me whatever you wish:sexual I will accept but not gay or homosexual.

[canuckhooker 19203]

Yeah, nothing gay about it, as if it matters. Like the old joke a guy can be getting a BJ from another guy, and it is only gay if he looks down. LOL

[cat 262460]

I've been avoiding this thread as I just can't see the point of labels when it comes to defining people. Sexual labels are unstable at best in the right circumstance and limiting our experiences to conform to a self imposed label is self defeating if it imposes limitations we may want to challenge at some point. If someone is absolutely positive there are activities that they will never engage in and there is a label that they are comfortable giving themselves then they should fill their boots! I leave my sexuality unlabeled, undefined and open to the possibilities that life can bring. In all honesty as I suffer from CRSS, it takes way too much brain power to remember that I don't like something, it's easier to try it again and maybe this time it will be fun... ;)

 

cat

[Meg O'Ryan 266444]

I meant incomparable....damn predictive text

[roamingguy 300292]

Something more of a thought than anything else. The topic at hand is

"Can a guy suck a cock and still be heterosexual"

But I can't see the shoe on the other foot so to speak, that is to say a thread titled "Can a woman perform daty on another woman and still be heterosexual"

In fact there is, in civilian society, much more negativity surrounding men being homosexual or bi-sexual than there is around women being lesbian or bi-sexual

Just thrown out there for discussion, that is all

RG