Is sexual orientation a choice?

[waves olive branch] Can I just say that I'm really happy for anyone who is having great sex, of whatever kind. Especially after having children

Yes Devora, I'm taking the second definition. Feminism seem so reliant on fixed definitions to simplify things. Not everyone posting on this board is using the feminist definition, they are most probably using the mainstream definition, in this case the second one. So quick to take offence here without clarifying what people mean. However, asking to expand your opinion is apparently trolling.

Well, this is semantics, isn't it? We're using 'natural' in two different ways. If you take 'natural' to mean inherent, born-that-way, as-god-or-nature intended, essentially 'normal', than many feminists (including me) would argue that no sexuality is 'natural'.

If, however, you use 'natural' to mean the sexual identity that works best for me on many levels, that expresses who I believe myself to be on a very deep level, that comes easily and beautifully and feels in harmony with my inner self, then yes it's fair enough to use the term.

Of course, the relationship between the two meanings is where we should focus attention. Without anyone getting offended.

Just because PIV sex is not what you find natural doesn't mean it's not natural for some people. This board is always about them versus us. As Devora posted earlier, compassion and wisdom are improtant factors.

Is not natural... Typo

No one is saying that sexual relations of same sex is in natural, the point is sex is not just for reproduction in the human species and therefore it can occur naturally between anyone who is consenting.

" Sat 16-Jun-12 09:59:51
i'm dubious about the term 'natural' here - re: calling piv perfectly natural sex. there's really nothing natural about the way we have sex.

sex is for reproduction in our nearest relatives - coital sex was only engaged in when the female was in oestrus.

so whilst it's 'natural' to have piv sex for reproduction it's not really natural to do it for pleasure and all the other uses we make of it.

I despair at comments like this. I really do."

Hmm, I agree with you. It would be very helpful if people said
IMO or I believe and not portray such opinion as fact.

What a shame this thread has turned nasty. It seems there's a backstory here which I don't fully understand - I don't go on feminist threads much because it does seem to deteriorate like this, which is such a shame.

I have to say that it seems like there is a little wilful taking offence going on, apparently because of other threads. But FWIW I don't see what is wrong in challenging the idea of PIV as 'natural'. I don't see any form of sexual expression as 'natural', including my own. What is feminist discussion about, if not questioning everything we have been taught to see as natural?

What I DO find slightly surprising is how thin-skinned some people are at any questioning of their sexual practices. That doesn't mean I think it's ok to be rude to people because of their sexual orientation; it isn't. But, you know, maybe heterosexuals who get outraged and offended on these threads could reflect a little on what it feels like to grow up gay, how constantly and casually everybody insults your sexual orientation. And then think that it's perhaps not surprising that some radical lesbian feminists go a bit OTT once they get started. Cut them some slack! A lot of what Julie Bindel writes is not ok, in my book. But think about where it's coming from, and learn from that. You can afford to, if you've had a lifetime of heterosexual privilege; you really can.

Beachcomber / Saf

Pointing out the difference between a belief and a fact may be something you don't like, but its an very important thing to do. If you present something as a fact it holds more weight and influence over others than if you present it as a belief.

You can say it might be or you think it is influenced by socialisation and thats very valid. But you don't know. Its an area very much contested by an awful lot of people for an awful lot of reasons. Don't get upset when you are challenged over it, as it is a very legitimate thing to do.

I do have issues where things are dressed as fact when they aren't. Why? Because its a method of influencing others and making your opinion look like it has more weight and substance than it actually has.

What about the natural sexual behaviour of bonobos, as close to us as chimpanzees? They use sex for comfort, bonding, apology...

SAf, it is, like, really offensive to hint that human sexuality might be influenced by socialization - especially if a feminist says it.

Sorry, but its important and I think its important to address stuff like this.

There is a massive difference, and I'm sorry that sex for pleasure is disputed as being exclusive to humans as is sex for power and influence in a group.

Therefore it is a belief rather than a fact. There is evidence for both possibilities.

seems you and bindel would have a lot in common re: your manners and consideration of others.

learn not to be so bloody rude hmm! wow you're being so vile!

it's not a belief to say that human sexual behaviour be it lesbian, heterosexual or bloody anything is not 'natural' in the normal meaning of the world because in nature sex is for reproduction. our sex for pleasure - whichever way we do it is something different. therefore NONE OF THE WAYS of doing it are better, more natural, etc etc than any other. it's just social values.

Learn the difference between a belief and a fact.

Its important.

'I think' rather than 'It is'.

is it like you can't make a comment at all now on these boards without someone twisting what you said into the little polemic world of crap that is going on?

it makes discussion pointless and impossible and then the people doing it accuse others of being 'oppressive'?!?

it's ridiculous.

you can't have a discussion because everything you say is twisted into what someone assumes it says or wants it to say so they can continue their fight. so a conversation goes, 'statement x', 'god it's so ridiculous that you say y' 'but i didn't i clearly said x', 'y is so fucking ridiculous'. ???? just ridiculous.

Its not a fact though and you are still presenting it as if it is!

Thats the problem. It isn't a fact. Its a belief.

but i didn't place value on anything ffs - i stated a fact. i didn't say any type of sex was better or worse i just pointed out that there is no 'natural' president for human sexual behaviour outside of reproduction. i have no idea why that induced such rudeness.

I don't think sexual orientation is a choice. What you choose to do with it is.

Discuss things without over generalising.

Discuss things without devaluing the experience of others. The use of language is very important and as a feminist i kind of expect you to know and understand WHY it is important.

This is why I find the fwr section so frustrating. I don't mind my experienced being critiqued as typical or not typical, but to deny my experience as completely invalid or wrong isn't on. We are not all the same, and I find the failure of feminists to observe this so frequency only reinforces problems rather than celebrating and encouraging diversity and freedom. Its why I find it alienating at times. There isn't an embracing of this often enough. Instead lesbians are like this, bisexuals are like this, men are like this etc etc.

Sex and PIV isn't political for some people. Its just what they like and find works for them. I don't think its wrong. For others it is. And again thats fine too. It should be respected rather than saying things like I believed then, and I believe now, that if bisexual women had an ounce of sexual politics, they would stop sleeping with men.

That is placing value and hierarchy which is as controlling as any notion that PIV is better and is a way of controlling women.

There already seems to be a far smaller number of commenters then days past and I'm sure certain attitudes are the reasons why.

Yes, lots of us don't bother much any more because it is very difficult to discuss anything when everything is taken personally.

When, on another thread here, I said that I found PIV enjoyable, I was told that I shouldn't find it enjoyable, because it's no different then being poked in the ear.

No you weren't. I was on that thread. No-one said that to you. A poster wondered out loud in a totally non-personal way why the vaginal orifice should be explored when say, we don't explore our ears.

Nobody told you that you shouldn't enjoy PIV because it is no different to being poked in the ear. The post was addressed to you because it was in response to something you had said - but the poster didn't 'tell' you anything, they gave a general opinion.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/1479204-Radical-feminism-and-PIV

VashtiBunyan Fri 01-Jun-12 13:16:14

GAG, I don't really understand why orifices need to be explored. I don't explore the inside of my ear.

Is the vagina packed with nerve endings? I thought that was just the bit around the vulva, which you can stimulate without penetration anyway. I can't feel a tampon once it is in, so I'm assuming my vagina is not packed with nerve endings.

I am more concerned that a lot of people don't understand that an engorged clitoris is the same size as a penis, where it is located or how to stimulate any part of it other than the tip. The sexual element of the vagina, while having its own unique pleasures, is a secondary concern for most women when it comes to having an orgasm.

I don't think that is grudgingly admitting people enjoy PIV sex - I think it is just putting the level of sexual pleasure in some kind of context.