Can someone "turn" gay?

[Pix]

I kind of feel like straight people are the ones that shouldn't be labeled. Straight is regarded as the norm after all. Labels are only really necessary when you come across something that goes beyond that norm

So right handed people shouldn't be labeled as right handed because they're the norm but left handed people should be labeled as left handed?

That makes no sense to me.

[davearoo]

I disagree with the idea that individual people either are gay or they are not.

Every sexually healthy human being has both innate gay and straight sex drives. Most people learn to forget about or even suppress their gay drives, because that's what modern culture generally expects them to do. (Consider that our closest relatives, the bonobo chimps, will have sex with almost anything that moves.)

So, I believe it's possible for people who self-identify as straight to become gay, if they have a genuine desire to do so, and vice versa. I've seen examples of people who made this kind of change with nothing more than hypnotherapy. But it has to be self-motivated; nobody can change your orientation if you don't want it to.

[TonyAndonuts]

So right handed people shouldn't be labeled as right handed because they're the norm but left handed people should be labeled as left handed?

That makes no sense to me.

I...guess...? But I was only really saying that in response to not believing in "bisexuals" as they're just people who don't let labels hold them back, as if straight and gay/lesbians are only that way because they let that label hold them back rather than being genuinely only attracted to one side.

[princealbertofb]

Tony, Kinsey in his research made a scale back then which put anyone's sexual tendencies on a scale from 1 to 6 (I think) 1 being exclusively heterosexual and 6 exclusively homosexual (or vice versa). It's a sliding scale, which means that people can sometimes think of themselves as a 3 or a 4 and maybe later in life realise that they're a complete 6 (ie no longer attracted to heterosexual encounters at all). The fact that labels exist probably helps us to grasp some of the complex realities of life, but sexuality can definitely evolve.
When I was growing up, I sensed a definite attraction to male bodies and the idea of male on male sex, so I would probably have called myself a 5 or a 6, but having no practical knowledge of sex other than self pleasuring, it would have been difficult to situate where I was. When I finally gained some experience on the gay scale, I would have said I was a 5, maybe a 6. Then I had a long lasting affair with a woman and I could then have placed myself at a 2 on the scale. I no longer sought to have affairs with a man. Only when that affair stopped did I consider that I didn't want to be "untrue" to my real interest and and would not enter another heterosexual affair without having given my gay interest another try... I don't think I am straight, nor do I think I am bi-sexual. I don't have a great interest in pursuing a woman (women, more generally) for a romantic and sexual attachment, despite the fact that it would be more convenient and very much easier to find such an attachment. Now that I am happily settled in my gay life with a gay partner, it all seems so natural, that I'd like to say I'm a 5 again, maybe not a total 6, but pretty far down the scale. Does that help?

[Ekwarph]

Tony, Kinsey in his research made a scale back then which put anyone's sexual tendencies on a scale from 1 to 6 (I think) 1 being exclusively heterosexual and 6 exclusively homosexual (or vice versa). It's a sliding scale, which means that people can sometimes think of themselves as a 3 or a 4 and maybe later in life realise that they're a complete 6 (ie no longer attracted to heterosexual encounters at all). The fact that labels exist probably helps us to grasp some of the complex realities of life, but sexuality can definitely evolve.
When I was growing up, I sensed a definite attraction to male bodies and the idea of male on male sex, so I would probably have called myself a 5 or a 6, but having no practical knowledge of sex other than self pleasuring, it would have been difficult to situate where I was. When I finally gained some experience on the gay scale, I would have said I was a 5, maybe a 6. Then I had a long lasting affair with a woman and I could then have placed myself at a 2 on the scale. I no longer sought to have affairs with a man. Only when that affair stopped did I consider that I didn't want to be "untrue" to my real interest and and would not enter another heterosexual affair without having given my gay interest another try... I don't think I am straight, nor do I think I am bi-sexual. I don't have a great interest in pursuing a woman (women, more generally) for a romantic and sexual attachment, despite the fact that it would be more convenient and very much easier to find such an attachment. Now that I am happily settled in my gay life with a gay partner, it all seems so natural, that I'd like to say I'm a 5 again, maybe not a total 6, but pretty far down the scale. Does that help?

I don't believe at all in this scale.

According to Kinsey, sexuality may evolve with time...personnally, I don't know a single gay person (not bi) saying "hey! I became straight" whereas I often hear "I was straight but now I'm gay".

This scale probably reassured lots of gays of the fifties but that's all, I think.

Let's suppose it is true, being 5, would it concretly change comparing from being 6?
Maybe I understood in a wrong way but this is how I feel it.

[Pix]

I...guess...? But I was only really saying that in response to not believing in "bisexuals" as they're just people who don't let labels hold them back, as if straight and gay/lesbians are only that way because they let that label hold them back rather than being genuinely only attracted to one side.

That makes more sense, like someone ambidextrous not being left or right handed...but in this case "straight" is still a choice or orientation as "gay" is with bisexuality as the default and therefore straights would need to be labeled as well.

Not that I'm fully agreeing mind you, just that this is a concept I get. I don't agree because if it were truly a choice then way too many gay people would jump at the chance to be straight and therefore accepted by family, friends, churches, and not have to worry about being treated like shit.

[TonyAndonuts]

^ I don't think it's a choice either. I don't think any sexual orientation is a choice, not straight or gay or bisexual. If I am bisexual, I didn't choose it. I'd much rather be straight, but I do find guys attractive now and unless I have some kind of moment that changes things (like finally losing my virginity) I'm finding it difficult to not find them attractive anymore.

[davearoo]

Most people have the capacity to be sexually attracted to the opposite gender, to their own, or to both.

That doesn't mean that they don't have a natural preference for one gender or the other. (I never heard of anyone besides an asexual claiming that they have no preference either way.)

[Waylon777]

Well, I think you can make someone confident enough to come out of the closet, but not turn gay. Gays aren't completely magical like that. Although, it would make things a lot easier if we did have such awesome magical ability.