E
egoldstein
Guest
That’s a really good point and can be extended to things like…two men holding hands walking down the street seems “gay” but what if that’s all they do? Or think about a man that really likes making out with other men but doesn’t want to have sex with them and he loves having sex with women.
It’s hard to put a label on something like that but I feel like starting with the literal definition of the word is a smart way to go about it. Your race example would satisfy the definition of “gay” but interspecies sexual attraction or conduct falls outside of the definition of “gay”.
I’m invested in this discussion because I have zero sexual attraction to men or female canines but, for whatever reason, am wildly attracted to women and male canines. So when the main definition of gay is being sexually attracted to people of the same sex, well that doesn’t fit even a little bit.
I’m kind of generally averse to warping definitions of words to suit ourselves. Maybe we just need more complex orientation terms. Maybe it makes sense for me to say that I’m a straight man that is zoo-gay, or something like that.
Would you accept that you're gay with canines, straight with humans, and I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you're asexual in regard to pangolins?