User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 159

  1. #31
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    So, no, I'm not bisexual. I'm not heterosexual. I'm not homosexual. I'm just loving. And when God wants me to have a sexualoving relationship, he'll give me someone to love that I may be sexual with.
    you're bi.

  2. #32
    Senior Member King sns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    6,748

    Default

    I'm not sure how losing your sexual preference equates to being a medium for God's love. Love your brother's and sisters, love everyone, God loves all his sons and daughters, we presume romantic love and sex is more specified than that. I'm not sure how becoming a bisexual (yes, it is previously defined, you can't un-define it) is going to equate to reaching higher ideals... Loving a greater percentage of the population in a more specified and intimate way= becoming a more loving person in general perhaps?
    06/13 10:51:03 five sounds: you!!!
    06/13 10:51:08 shortnsweet: no you!!
    06/13 10:51:12 shortnsweet: go do your things and my things too!
    06/13 10:51:23 five sounds: oh hell naw
    06/13 10:51:55 shortnsweet: !!!!
    06/13 10:51:57 shortnsweet: (cries)
    06/13 10:52:19 RiftsWRX: You two are like furbies stuck in a shoe box

    My Nohari
    My Johari
    by sns.

  3. #33
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    OMG. Why?

    AGA, your ideas on sexuality tend to be unusual and extreme and you give the impression that everyone who doesn't do or see it your way is doing it/seeing it wrong.

    Most people identify as gay, straight, bi or something. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. I think God makes us with a potential range of sexuality. Environment, experiences, and choice can influence your development within that range. Sometimes someone can fall in love with someone who is not their ordinary preference. You get that sometimes. Just like you sometimes get albinos but most of the time, people don't have pink irises. So as short-hand we generally say people have brown, blue, green, grey, or hazel eyes. It's possible to have other colors. It's possible to get your eye poked out with a stick. But we don't have to include those things in every conversation about eye color, IMO.

    As a general rule, if you have a tendency to be attracted to (or lust after) a particular gender more than the other, you're probably best off with a partner of that gender. Just like if you prefer a particular body type, you probably shouldn't pursue people of the opposite body type. Assuming God gets involved in this kind of thing at this level, he's probably going to send you someone who is your type, since he made you in the first place.

    I'm born again and doctrinally Evangelical, so I understand what you're saying about the lust thing. A lot of people do not share those views. I don't think it's right to hold people that do not share those views to the dictates of those views, personally. It would be like someone giving me a hard time about eating sausage for breakfast because their religion forbids the consumption of pork or meat. Or for not covering my head when I left the house or using electricity in the house. I can eat sausage, go around bare-headed and use electricity in the house with a clear conscience because those things do not violate my beliefs. So it is with those who do not hold to Conservative Christian standards on sex.

    Personally, I've never fought the temptation to lust for a woman. I'm forty-two and I've only ever fought the temptation to lust for men. Generally stocky men with big butts. I consider that enough evidence to call myself straight and probably a chubby chaser. Not saying it could never change, but it's probably fairly unlikely at this point.
    Well, good for you, Cafe. I'm not quite sure what to say to most of your post. I think it speaks for itself.

    But lusting is never 'okay' if you are a Christian, even an evangelical one. And God will definitely send to us who we need, if anyone. And, yes, I 'am assuming he gets involved in this sort of thing'--I'm sure he is involved in everything, everyday whether we are aware of him or not, and most certainly he'd be involved in our love partners? Anyway, I like this segway. The point I am trying to put to the forum in this matter is that the less we proscribe our life and what we think we need, the more we give God the leeway to give us what we need. Good?

    That is all I mean. I suggest having a consciousness about not being so quick to assign ourselves a sexual orientation, a gender orientation, or X-orientation because then we have decided what we think we need. And once we decide what we think we need, we close off opportunities that might be Divine. Sure, we CAN do this, and we do it.

    I just really advocate letting go and letting God. I'm hardcore like that. I would like to see others do the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    I can see what you’re saying, the power of identity (and feeling like certain choices are already made for us because our ego clings to the identity) is strong, but I personally don’t have any identity issues wrapped strongly around ‘hetero’ and it still isn’t a choice for me. Maybe you don’t have a strong predilection for exclusively one direction or the other, so maybe it’s hard for you to imagine what it’s like for one to truly be there in others.

    There’s a certain organic truth under the labels and while using labels is often an attempt to sell a man-made construct about ‘human nature’ as an organic truth (“If we say we are X-sexual, we are trying to control who we love.”), that works in the other direction as well: getting rid of a label doesn’t get rid of whatever underlying organic truth the label was constructed to distinguish. I don’t think we really get to ‘decide’ what that underlying truth is; self actualization is more about uncovering it than deciding what it is.
    We can never really 'uncover' a mate though, like we can uncover our own selves.

    I actually wish what you are saying could be true- I’ve had far closer relationships with females, in the sense that I’ve felt far more understood and related infinitely better to female friends than any guys I’ve been in a relationship with- but the appetite just isn’t there. I’m somewhat unusual in that I don’t feel any lust for someone without a foundation of something like agape forming first (I really need that foundation of respect and awe for humanity to be there)- so I do agree with your premise that love should ‘lead’ (at least, for me)- but I disagree that we can ‘choose’ anything. Regardless of how strong the bond I form, lust really only follows that foundation in relation to males for me. Trying to ‘decide’ where that appetite ‘should’ be would ultimately be forcing the issue as much as letting the established labels make that decision for me.
    I'd be careful about saying you use agape love. I'd be skeptical many could. I used my example with God for that very reason. But anyway, what if you developed romantic love for a woman? Don't you think you'd 'choose' to have sex with her? Perhaps you just haven't lived long enough. Really no one can say who they are capable of being sexual with, when they haven't, and will never, be exposed to everyone in the world. It will always be a possibility. Of course, one can close that door, but that is a choice. A choice to limit your sexualoving potentiality.

    Quote Originally Posted by shortnsweet View Post
    I'm not sure how losing your sexual preference equates to being a medium for God's love. Love your brother's and sisters, love everyone, God loves all his sons and daughters, we presume romantic love and sex is more specified than that. I'm not sure how becoming a bisexual (yes, it is previously defined, you can't un-define it) is going to equate to reaching higher ideals... Loving a greater percentage of the population in a more specified and intimate way= becoming a more loving person in general perhaps?
    Mostly I have said why above here, and in the rest of this thread. I'm talking about broadening and opening and not labeling ourselves so that we are an open pallet for God.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  4. #34
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    I guess I don't really feel the need to say I'm heterosexual but on the other hand I have no desire for sex with women. I don't think you need to me everyone in the works to know that you are attracted to certain things. I've had some very close female friends and some people assume we're lesbians and that would cause me to ponder "Coukd I be with this/another woman romantically". As much as I cared for these women I didn't find the idea is touching or kissing them, even embracing to be arrows in or appealing.

    One thought I had reading your post was why the idea of solmate is tied to romantic/sexual partnership. Perhaps my soulmate is a woman but does that mean our relationship would need to become physically intimate. I don't think an intense emotional bond needs to become anything more than a friend ship. I think it would be fine to recognize that certain manifestations of love are only possible with given people based on our sexual preferences. I might have two very intense relationships but they would offer different things. The relationship with the man having the benefits of mutual sexual fulfillment and allowing for romantic closeness. One with a woman having the emerita of almost sibling like closeness because of the lack of any sexual tension.

    I think you can let go an let god, but in my case I think gas created a heterosexual person. I think I would say more that we should be more open to having intense platonic relationships rather than feeling the obligation to specialize them

  5. #35
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    Well, good for you, Cafe. I'm not quite sure what to say to most of your post. I think it speaks for itself.
    Thank you! Communicating clearly in writing is something I aspire to.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    But lusting is never 'okay' if you are a Christian, even an evangelical one.
    That's why I said I fight it. Temptation isn't a sin. Giving into it is. Objectifying people is wrong in any context.

    I don't think sexual attraction is a sin, though. I think it is a gift from God. It gives us pleasure and it helps perpetuate the species.

    We all have things that appeal to us in any number of areas. I don't think who we're attracted to is all that more spiritually significant than what foods or colors we like, to be honest. It's not what you feel that determines whether or not you are doing the right thing. It's the decisions you make and the actions you take.
    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    And God will definitely send to us who we need, if anyone. And, yes, I 'am assuming he gets involved in this sort of thing'--I'm sure he is involved in everything, everyday whether we are aware of him or not, and most certainly he'd be involved in our love partners? Anyway, I like this segway. The point I am trying to put to the forum in this matter is that the less we proscribe our life and what we think we need, the more we give God the leeway to give us what we need. Good?
    Maybe. I agonized a lot over that kind of thing as a young person. I'm not sure there aren't areas in which he expects us to use our brains in combination with wisdom from his written word. I think he cares about everything, but maybe doesn't direct everything. I'm also not sure it's not possible that each of us have several potential mates and the one we get is the one we find because of the path we take our lives on. Maybe like a choose your own adventure book. There are a lot of ways to look at something like this. I haven't decided on an absolute opinion about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    That is all I mean. I suggest having a consciousness about not being so quick to assign ourselves a sexual orientation, a gender orientation, or X-orientation because then we have decided what we think we need. And once we decide what we think we need, we close off opportunities that might be Divine. Sure, we CAN do this, and we do it.

    I just really advocate letting go and letting God. I'm hardcore like that. I would like to see others do the same.
    I think not being particularly invested in the gender of a potential partner is something you're okay with because you are okay with either gender as a partner. You have historically had relationships with both. A lot of people have a strong gender preference. I don't think it's because they are less hardcore about their faith or less open to the Divine or less anything. I think it's because they aren't bisexual.

    To me, you are making a value judgement about something that is value neutral. Something that none of us can really help very much. It'd be like me giving people a hard time for not liking some of the foods I like, when I, due to genetics that are completely out of my control, am physically unable to taste certain unpleasant flavors. I *know* I can't actually taste certain things so I accept what other people say when they say it tastes bad to them.

    You're bi. That's okay. Good for you. Some of us aren't. Saying we're wrong for that is about the same level of judgmental as saying people are sinners for being gay. It's kind of a sucky thing to do, IMO.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  6. #36
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    I think I might understand the basic point being argued in the OP. It seems to be an attempt to articulate the meaning behind Christ's words of "'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind....Love your neighbor as yourself." So our love for God is to be the foundation for our love for not only ourselves but also our neighbor, which in many ways transcends and probes much deeper than mere sexual attraction. This in particular runs contrary to categories of sexual orientation which are more modern in origins. And so on.

    Is this fairly close?

  7. #37
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    I understand the premise of your thoughts. Good on you. I, unfortunately, will be required to remain sitting in my unenlightened corner of the universe.


    Also, I believe the increasingly popular term 'pansexual' describes your feelings on love.

  8. #38
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jontherobot View Post
    I understand the premise of your thoughts. Good on you. I, unfortunately, will be required to remain sitting in my unenlightened corner of the universe.


    Also, I believe the increasingly popular term 'pansexual' describes your feelings on love.

    Does that mean I could love a pan?

    Srsly, I doubt I fall into any sexual categories.

    I'm sorta like a nun now.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  9. #39
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Sure. It means you are open to the concept of love applied to anything in the universe, from beginning to end and top to bottom.

  10. #40
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Then no.


    And zero points for trying.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


Similar Threads

  1. When there is no personality to type.
    By Tabula in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-04-2010, 10:24 AM
  2. In Charity There is No Excess - Help Type Me!!
    By Applez in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-22-2010, 10:45 PM
  3. There is no such thing as personality.
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-12-2009, 10:13 AM
  4. If IP is EJ then is IP IP or can it be IJ?
    By Xander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 12-02-2008, 09:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO