i am zayne

lover of: music and words,thunderstorms and full moons,mountains and sweet breezes,poetry and prose,nursery rhymes and firelights.

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Question of Sexuality - 2

I had this posted elsewhere but the fuvk was hi-jacked out of it -- so i'm moving the topic here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by now, i assume that most people here have heard the on-going saga regarding ted haggard, former pastor of new life church in colorado.


let's forget, for a moment, that haggard is a pastor and just regard him an everyman -- his story is just used as one of the examples.

IS SEXUALITY UP FOR EACH PERSON TO PERSONALLY DEFINE?
  1. although he has had male-to-male sexual encounters, his alleged partner states it was a three year relationship, haggard defines himself as "totally heterosexual"
  2. there is a large group of men who are known as "DOWN-LOW" who enjoy sex (and seek out sex) with other men on a regular basis, yet consider themselves heterosexual.
  3. one of my female acquaintances in the original conversations has had a number of sexual relationships with women, yet consider herself neither bisexual nor homosexual.
  • are these people in denial?
  • is sexuality up for personal definition even if evidence suggest something other than the person's idea of himself?
  • generally, the men who consider themselves down-low also do not feel that they need to disclose their 'other life' to their heterosexual partners because "they do not want to me labeled or judged as anything other than heterosexual" --[yes, i believe this to be very irresponsible behavior].
please, shed some light.

what the heck is going on?

am i wrong to believe that if a person seeks out same sex relationship that the person is either homosexual or bi-sexual?

when did it get so confusing?

comments???
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Comments:

  • At 12:13 PM, Blogger Joyce said…

    I don't necessarily believe because a person has engaged in a particular behavior at some point in their lives that it defines them. For instance, just because I used to shoot heroin many years ago doesn't make me a heroin addict today. No more so than many other labels I have shed along the years -- "disco queen", "hippie", "whore", "holy roller" -- well, you get the idea.

    To engage in certain behaviors but then shed those means, to me, to shed any labels along with that. Not everyone agrees with that -- Alcoholics Anonymous folks label themselves as alcoholics for decades after they have taken their last drink. I, on the other hand, wouldn't even think of labeling myself as a junkie -- I'm not.

    What we were or what we engaged in doesn't always define what we are now.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home