I really want to understand.

[AmPat]

Hm.

But I act the same way when I date men too...some men are less aggressive and will leave me to my fantasy football, war movies, and gadgets. . .would you call THEM feminine?

~QC

Dunno, do they speak with a lssssppp?:p

[Zafod]

Dunno, do they speak with a lssssppp?:p

lol

[Zafod]

Hm.

I never really play a role when I'm dating a woman. I'm always naturally aggressive and not strictly a dyke ( I DO wear mens shirts and ties sometimes) OR Lipstick (I wear makeup 60% of the time, but it's not essential).

But I act the same way when I date men too...some men are less aggressive and will leave me to my fantasy football, war movies, and gadgets. . .would you call THEM feminine?

~QC

maybe. Do you dominate them?

[CueSi]

I cant because of a number of reasons.

But again why have the relationship that you are going to model after male female roles in the first place?

As much as I hate the term for it's mealy mouthed academic PC reputation. . . you're seeing it from a heteronormative point of view -- that basic male/female dichotomy. This pattern of aggressive/retiring is in ALOT of relationships... I'm sure theres a more dominant person in your circle of friends, a pecking order. This is common in single sex environments as well as co-ed situations.

But once you throw in sex, people go to what they know in viewing what they don't understand.

~QC

[CueSi]

maybe. Do you dominate them?

No.

Dunno, do they speak with a lssssppp?:p

No.

Not all straight guys are alike. Some guys are going to be traditional. Some aren't. I've been all over the map as to the type of partner I turn out to be: I've been the June Cleaver, and I've been the tomboy and everywhere in between. I don't dominate.

~QC

[Zafod]

No.



No.

Not all straight guys are alike. Some guys are going to be traditional. Some aren't. I've been all over the map as to the type of partner I turn out to be: I've been the June Cleaver, and I've been the tomboy and everywhere in between. I don't dominate.

~QC

but they let you take control right. Maybe you dominate and you dont know it?

[Constitutionally Speaking]

Because they can't. Just like you cannot fathom yourself having a relationship with another man.

I think everyone knows I have a gay sister - & that I love both her and her partner dearly. But I still have trouble believing this line of thinking. I am not willing to state definitively either side of this argument, but I struggle believing that it is entirely a nature thing in the nature/nurture argument.

[djones520]

I think everyone knows I have a gay sister - & that I love both her and her partner dearly. But I still have trouble believing this line of thinking. I am not willing to state definitively either side of this argument, but I struggle believing that it is entirely a nature thing in the nature/nurture argument.

Have you ever really discussed it with her? Just curious.

[noonwitch]

I think everyone knows I have a gay sister - & that I love both her and her partner dearly. But I still have trouble believing this line of thinking. I am not willing to state definitively either side of this argument, but I struggle believing that it is entirely a nature thing in the nature/nurture argument.

I think that for some people, it is a totally nature thing to be gay. One of the younger guys who used to work at my office has known he was gay since he was 10 or so. His parents didn't encourage it, he wasn't abused as a kid, and that is just who he is. My BIL's sister has been pretty sure she was gay since she was pretty young.

Where I question the nature aspect is when that person was sexually abused as a child. I'm not saying that sexually abusing children makes them gay as adults, but to deny that it could be a factor in determining a client's sexual orientation is providing them with politically correct counseling that may not meet their overall needs.

[Odysseus]

but they let you take control right. Maybe you dominate and you dont know it?

The riding crop is always a dead giveaway. :D