From: ttk@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (the troglodyte killer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,soc.bi
Subject: Re: Oprah 11/19
Date: 20 Nov 92 07:04:17 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


>I confess that I am
>ignorant when it comes to understanding what makes some people a "four-
>leaf clover, when most are three."  (Oprah's analogy for gay vs. straight
>orientation.)
 
     :-)  It's a better analogy than some I've heard.
 
>Therefore, I would like to ask a couple of probably really
>dumb questions, but please believe me that I am sincere and only ask
>because I do care about other people and have a desire to understand.  So,
>1) I believe that whether a person is gay or straight depends on genetics.
>Therefore, when a person is born, it has already been determined...being
>gay is not "learned behavior that one can change" as the religious fanatics
>would have us believe.  Is this belief correct?  
 
     I strongly believe that this is not so.  My parents are both 
heterosexual-to-the-hilt and homophobic to boot.  I was pretty 
much the same 'till I was 17 or so and started making some 
decisions about my sexuality.  If there's some sort of genetic 
disposition towards queer sexuality, I'd think it would show up 
before then or at least show up in my parents (or their parents).
 
     I'm making some assumptions here, though, and I have no 
references to draw upon but my own experiences, so I may be 
(gasp!) wrong.  
 
>2) During the Oprah episode,
>several "straight" individuals accused a couple of lesbians on the show of
>really wanting to be men since they chose to dress or "act" like most people
>think men should behave.  My question then is:  Like a heterosexual relation-
>ship, do homosexual relationships generally have male and female roles...the
>more dominant individual portraying a male role?
 
     Again, I can only draw upon my own experiences, which have 
been limited to bisexual males and females (ie, I've never had a 
relationship with a homosexual male), so take this with a grain of 
salt..  In any relationship, there will usually be one person who 
is more "toppish" (ie, inclined to sexual behaviour traditionally 
attributed to males), and more comfortable with taking a dominant 
role, but this is relative between different relationships (hmm, 
how best to describe this..?).
     Example is best, I guess..  Since not all parties involved 
are yet "out", I'll change a few names and relate some of my own 
experiences.
     Relationship 1 - myself and "Ted" - I was definately the 
"top" in this relationship.  We were both comfortable that way.
     Relationship 2 - myself and "Gary" - Neither of us were 
toppish, really.  When we were together, we'd just sort of go 
fuzzy and cuddle and enjoy each other's company.  Ran into some 
problems when we decided to go out and eat, though -- "So, where 
do you wanna go?"  "I dunno, where do *you* want to go?"  "Oh, I 
don't know.."  "Well, make up your mind, I'm hungry!"  "Me too..  
So where do you want to go?"  :-)
     Relationship 3 - myself and Anne, my current and LAST 
relationship (we're getting married) - She's the top.  Hands-down, 
no question about it.  She's also the ONLY person I've ever felt 
comfortable with when I wasn't the top.  Even now, when I'm around 
friends, I'm either toppish or neutral..  She's very female in 
many respects, but in our relationship she's donned most of the 
roles normally attributed to the male.
 
     Something I've been thinking alot about these past couple of 
years is that by and large my feelings for other men are more 
intense than my feelings for women (although I find about as many 
individuals of either gender attractive), with the sole exception 
of Anne.  Is she so much of an exception that I'm marrying her, or 
is my motivation for marrying her causal to the exception?  I'm 
still chewing on that one..
     But anyway, I'm rambling ..  back to the topic.
 
>If anyone would like to respond to my questions, I would appreciate it.
>Again, my questions (though probably ignorant) are sincere.  By the way,
>my family and I have lived in Colorado Springs for just a few months.  I
>can't believe how intolerant people are here of others.  We are from the
>East coast where people seem to be more open-minded.  The religious
>influence here (with all the "Christians" groups who seem to be rather
>self-righteous) is a little hard to take.  
 
     Yeah, that and the CO-2 has really turned me off to the 
place..  :-(  A pity, 'cuz me and Anne were thinking of moving 
there.
 
>Since being involved with that
>cult I mentioned above, I still haven't found any group that I wish to be
>part of.  I do believe in God -- a God who loves everyone for the person
>he/she is...what they believe in their hearts and how they treat others.
>If you know of a group who subscribes to this belief, please do let me know.
 
     You might want to check out the Unity Christian Church..  I'm 
pretty much done with christianity in my life (I've picked up on 
hinduism, and it makes better sense to me), but Anne's parents 
seem happy enough with Unity.  Her mother explained her view of 
God to me once, and it sounds pretty much like the God you believe 
in.
 
/---\ /---\ /=   /   ttk@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (the troglodyte killer)
  =     =    = /    "Home is a place that keeps the rain off my computer"
  =     =    = \     B0 f- t+ w- g k s- m+ r- p-(++)     ______
  =     =    =   \                      silence = death   \bi/
                                                           \/
Newsgroups: soc.motss