Photo courtesy of Greg Clements
‘I’m not sure there’s a name for what I am,’ says Dillon, a college hockey player. Welcome to the world of the mostly straights.
Dillon, a college varsity hockey goalie, is an eager volunteer for our interview. In fact, he so loves telling his story that he stays beyond the 90 minutes he believes it will take, and offers to come back for the chance to talk some more. When we reschedule, he’s thrilled, and shakes my hand and thanks me four times in the process of leaving.
Besides being remarkably polite, Dillon is talkative, self-aware, and reflective, with an engaging smile and an at-ease quality. Nothing he says feels rehearsed. It’s as if each topic brings forth another triumph, as if he’s discovering his life as he reflects on the questions.
When eventually asked about his sexuality, Dillon isn’t fazed. Though he wants to “fuck lots of girls” before graduation, he’s not entirely heterosexual. “I’m not sure there’s a name for what I am,” he says. He wants this process, this interview, to help him figure it out.
♦♦♦
By his own admission, Dillon says he resides in the “Sexual Netherlands” (his words), a place that exists between heterosexuality and bisexuality. In previous generations, such individuals might have been described as “straight but not narrow,” “bending a little,” and “heteroflexible.”
Dillon is part of a growing trend of young men who are secure in their heterosexuality and yet remain aware of their potential to experience far more—sexual attractions, sexual interactions, crushes, and, ocassionally romantic relationships with other guys. Dillon lives these contradictions—seemingly hetero guys who now reject that label, sexual description, and identity.
And he is not alone. National surveys in the U.S. and Canada show that 3 to 4 percent of male teenagers, when given the choice to select a term that best describes their sexual feelings, desires, and behaviors, opt not for heterosexual, bisexual, or gay, but for “mostly” or “predominantly” heterosexual.
An even higher percentage of post-high-school young-adult men in the U.S. and in a handful of other countries (including New Zealand and Norway) make the same choice. There are now more young men who feel they are “mostly straight” than who say they are bisexual or gay.
To the uninitiated, “mostly straight” is a paradox. These young men fracture the heterosexual agenda—or do we call it a lifestyle? If a guy is not exclusively into girls, he can’t be totally straight. Aren’t you supposed to pick a side?
If a guy is not straight, not bisexual, and not gay—and yet still falls in love and gets an erection—what the hell is he?
It’s a common misconception that the “mostly straight” phenomenon is nothing more than an adolescent foray into sexual experimentation, possibly due to excessive hormones and sexual confusion.
Sizable numbers of young men maintain their “mostly straight” status—not just as adolescents or college students, but as adults. Of the 160 guys we interviewed for a study in 2008 and 2009, nearly one in eight reported same-sex attractions, fantasies, and crushes. The majority had these feelings since high school; a few others developed them more recently. And in a national sample of young men whose average age was 22, the “mostly straight” proportion increased when they completed the same survey six years later.
These men aren’t bisexuals in disguise. They’re not closeted gay men seeking the privileges afforded to heterosexuals in society. They’re not simply tired of sex with women. With the words “mostly straight,” they’re describing a unique sexual identity, their complete romantic self.
♦♦♦
Among the “mostly straights” we surveyed, a few subtypes stood out.
First is the guy whose progressive political leanings lead him to feel constrained by traditional heterosexuality and masculinity, an outdated and unnecessary burden. “I might have been gay if I’d been raised differently,” one said. “Aren’t we all born bisexual and culture pushes us one way or another?” He challenges homophobic customs and assumptions. One such young man sings in a gay chorus; another marches in pride parades as an ally; a third intends to “come out” as mostly straight in the military to test the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. He wants to know, how gay does one have to be to count?
Second is the guy who finds guys physically attractive. One interviewee pleaded, “I mean, come on, tell me some guys aren’t hot!” If he finds himself staring at men in the gym, on the sports field, around the neighborhood, and in Details, Instinct, and Vman, then how can he say to himself that he is totally straight? He notices guys in the buff and who are buff, visually appealing, and pleasurable to be around. He wonders if he only desires the toned body, stylistic appearance, and athletic facility—and not the sexuality.
A third guy may admit that he’s a little sexually attracted to guys. It may not be his top priority, but he’ll acknowledge that men occasionally pop up in his masturbatory fantasies. He doesn’t expect to have sex with a man, but he isn’t ruling it out; he has a willingness to experiment. He’s into sexual pleasure without strings, without meaning. Anything is possible, given the right circumstances with the right person. (Well, almost anything: most interviewees drew the line at actual male-male intercourse.)
A fourth guy is a guy like Dillon: he grants that he’s not totally straight, and that his feelings for guys are more than just sexual—they’re romantic. He can imagine experiencing emotional, intimate relationships with other young men. It just seems natural. He’s into cuddling without the pressure of sex, and he could spend countless hours with “special buddies.” He’s been infatuated with best friends, teammates, and videogame partners.
All four guys have one thing in common: unlike their totally straight brothers, they’re not averse to sexual or romantic feelings, encounters, or relationships with other males.
♦♦♦
It’s unlikely that mostly straight youth are limited to just four types. As additional young men recognize and reveal their sexual breadth, they assist all of us to understand previously unrecognized sexual and romantic possibilities. How many of us have these feelings and are clamoring to “come out” as mostly straight?
Indeed, throughout his life, Dillon has had boy chums, boy crushes, and boy infatuations with teammates and best friends. He makes lingering, intense, frequent references to his core group of high-school buddies and to the male companionship he habitually seeks. He readily hugs and even cuddles with male friends while watching a movie and eating popcorn, especially if they are “on the same wavelength.”
Dillon could see himself meeting a guy and together developing a “partnership.” They wouldn’t act on it sexually, but they’d be physically affectionate. Dillon imagines that their relationship would be difficult for others to understand. They’d think it was a gay relationship because of the time he and his partner spent together, the secrets they shared, and the knowing glances, nods, and code words they exchanged. This is the “homosexual thing” that most interests him.
Far more than we realize, young males wait to be released from their heterosexual straightjackets.
Dillon might just show us the way.
—By Ritch Savin-Williams and Kenneth Cohen
– photo courtesy Greg Clements
About Ritch C. Savin-Williams and Kenneth M. Cohen
I think all sex feels good, be it with a woman, a man, even an animal, an inanimate object, or as many of us do it, with ourselves. I think I am bi. I can get it up for either gender. For the first 22 years of my life, I always thought of myself as straight and was only into girls. Then at 22, a memory of a same sex experience I had when I was younger came up and really shocked me. I became very uncomfortable around other men, something I have never felt before. When some gay people talk about that there knew they were gay early on, or in puberty, I cannot relate to that. I think that what shocked me about the memory of my homosexual experience was that I enjoyed it. Now I’m realizing that all sex feels good, so I don’t beat myself up over a homosexual desire or fantasy. While I have not had sex with dudes, I am open to this notion. I have not had sex for 10 years. I slept with 8 women from ages 18 to 24. I loved sex with women, but when I started being worried about my sexuality that ended up being not fun. Now that I’m accepting my homosexual feelings, I’m noticing my sexual interest in women has also spiked. What does that make me, who knows. I am still not at ease around men at times, but I’m hopeful once I can understand sex better and nature of sexual attractions something will happen that would put me at ease. Maybe for some people they are 100% straight or 100% gay, but I know that I’m not one of them. I have experienced too many changes to think otherwise. I wish people were more open minded to the notions discussed in this article
I’m confused. Whey don’t they identify as bi, I understand why they don’t consider themselves to be straight or gay but why not bi, it’s never explained? As a bi person I have faced my share of biphobia from both the straight and queer communities, to queer for one, not queer enough for the other. Bisexuality does not mean you have to have both at all times and it doesn’t mean that you are necessarily equally attracted to both men and women, it simply means that you have the capacity to be attracted to both men and women. From what I can tell this is a fairly apt description of these men’s feelings. So I have to wonder, why reject a term that describes you quite well in favour of one that emphasized heterosexuality. It is not for me to tell someone how to identify but I can’t help but wonder, what’s so wrong with being bi?
Kristin,
I think perhaps the major difference between a male who would identify as bi and someone who would claim to be predominantly heterosexual is that “most interviewees drew the line at actual male-male intercourse”. Not sure if this is splitting hairs or not; it certainly seems an important factor at any rate.
I also really enjoyed your point about biphobia – “to queer for one, not queer enough for the other” – I think that sums the situation up perfectly.
The problem with Gerry’s definition is I’ve heard from my gay friends that a substantial number of gay men don’t engage in male-male intercourse either, so we’re back to square one. Moreover, plenty of bi men do engage in male-male intercourse. Dillon seems to be bi – he also seems to want to think he’s special, the pioneer of a new group. Or simply uncomfortable with being identified as bi for some reason. He’s young, he’ll get over it.
I think a lot of people who continue to not say bi is the reason why confusion is the norm. Is it fear based. I think it is… thought I think you can say what you are to the community when it comes to education, bi is the term we need to use for understanding and removal of biphobia. It’s that simple
I agree.
Hi Bi Social Network
There is nothing wrong with being bi or any sexuality. The problem is, that “bi” covers a gargantuan spectrum of sexual/romantic preferences, and a vast amount of differing shades of grey. My shade of grey is far different to someone who is exclusively bi sexual. But the simple fact we are both still grey, you can fit us into the same enormous, colossal box, even though we are worlds apart from each other in reality, yet many exclusive bi-sexuals are trying to do this which is unfair. Just as gays and straights attack the people in-between, many exclusively ‘in-between’ people attack the people who are in-between the ‘in-between’ and ‘straight’, or in-between the ‘in-between’, and ‘gay’. People don’t simply choose not to identify for the sake of splitting hairs. They do so because there are a vast range of hugely significant differences between them and someone who is ‘exclusively’ or ‘predominantly bi-sexual’.
Homophobia, biphobia and transphobia aren’t the only phobias out there. The Kinsey scale says I’m hetro-flexible, and I’m sure there are many people with a phobia against that (even if there’s not a fancy name for it yet). Moreover, hetro-flexibles also experience bi phobia (and homophobia) anyway, because many people automatically assume we are bi/homosexual even if some of us aren’t even attracted to the opposite sex, but just want to experiment with same sex genitalia etc. There’s nothing wrong with being bi-sexual, but I don’t consider myself in the same category as someone who could get romantically, and intimately involved with someone of the same sex. I’m only attracted to the opposite sex, but like to fantasize/experiment with same sex genitalia once in a very blue moon. I’ve had 2 drunken fumbles in my life, and I’m in my late 30s. Nevertheless, many straight people would say I’m bi or gay. Many gay people would say I’m gay and don’t realise it, or bi. And many bi people (and gay people for that matter) seem to want to bring people like me into their battles, to help their cause, and say ‘you’re one of us, whether you like it or not’. I’ll still help you, and help you fight your battles, but not in the way you expect me to. Don’t put me in a category that’s far to vague, where most people assume things about me that aren’t even true (even if there’s nothing wrong with what they assume). There needs to be more education about sexuality, and more people coming forward (anonymously is fine), so there can be more than 3 boxes (the Kinsey scale is the best theory I’ve came across so far). Eventually, once people accept there are more than 3 types of sexuality, people will end up caring much less, and become more accepting of people. Hopefully there will be a time when we won’t need to place as much emphasis on what category someone fits into. The same goes for racism, or any other type of prejudice. Mixed race is the most ridiculous category ever, as we’re all mixed race. I know someone who is caucasian, but when he has a tan he’s darker than an Indian. People are people, and category boxes create problems/conflict. To put someone in a box just because they bare some correlation to the criteria you see relevant is disrespectful. People should be able to identify exactly how they want. Then, people will realise how unique we all really are, and appreciate the similarities/differences we have between each person. NOT each group!
Hi Bi Social Network
There is nothing wrong with being bi or any sexuality. The problem is, that “bi” covers a gargantuan spectrum of sexual/romantic preferences, and a vast amount of differing shades of grey. My shade of grey is far different to someone who is exclusively bi sexual. But the simple fact we are both still grey, you can fit us into the same enormous, colossal box, even though we are worlds apart from each other in reality, yet many exclusive bi-sexuals are trying to do this which is unfair. Just as gays and straights attack the people in-between, many exclusively ‘in-between’ people attack the people who are in-between the ‘in-between’ and ‘straight’, or in-between the ‘in-between’, and ‘gay’. People don’t simply choose not to identify for the sake of splitting hairs. They do so because there are a vast range of hugely significant differences between them and someone who is ‘exclusively’ or ‘predominantly bi-sexual’.
Homophobia, biphobia and transphobia aren’t the only phobias out there. The Kinsey scale says I’m hetro-flexible, and I’m sure there are many people with a phobia against that (even if there’s not a fancy name for it yet). Moreover, hetro-flexibles also experience bi phobia (and homophobia) anyway, because many people automatically assume we are bi/homosexual even if some of us aren’t even attracted to the same sex, but just want to experiment with same sex genitalia etc. There’s nothing wrong with being bi-sexual, but I don’t consider myself in the same category as someone who could get romantically, and intimately involved with someone of the same sex. I’m only attracted to the opposite sex, but like to fantasize/experiment with same sex genitalia once in a very blue moon. I’ve had 2 drunken fumbles in my life, and I’m in my late 30s. Nevertheless, many straight people would say I’m bi or gay. Many gay people would say I’m gay and don’t realise it, or bi. And many bi people (and gay people for that matter) seem to want to bring people like me into their battles, to help their cause, and say ‘you’re one of us, whether you like it or not’. I’ll still help you, and help you fight your battles, but not in the way you expect me to. Don’t put me in a category that’s far to vague, where most people assume things about me that aren’t even true (even if there’s nothing wrong with what they assume). There needs to be more education about sexuality, and more people coming forward (anonymously is fine), so there can be more than 3 boxes (the Kinsey scale is the best theory I’ve came across so far). Eventually, once people accept there are more than 3 types of sexuality, people will end up caring much less, and become more accepting of people. Hopefully there will be a time when we won’t need to place as much emphasis on what category someone fits into. The same goes for racism, or any other type of prejudice. Mixed race is the most ridiculous category ever, as we’re all mixed race. I know someone who is caucasian, but when he has a tan he’s darker than an Indian. People are people, and category boxes create problems/conflict. To put someone in a box just because they bare some correlation to the criteria you see relevant is disrespectful. People should be able to identify exactly how they want. Then, people will realise how unique we all really are, and appreciate the similarities/differences we have between each person. NOT each group!
Bisexual means you have an equal attraction to both men and women. Heteroflexible men are predominantly straight.
kinsey’s heterosexual – homosexual rating scale
http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/resources/ak-hhscale.html
Actually, bisexual just means you are attracted to men and women. It’s not a matter of degrees, and anyone who isn’t a 0 or 6 on the Kinsey Scale (or an X, for asexual) is technically bisexual. Of course, people who lean strongly one way or the other may prefer to identify as straight or gay. But you don’t have to be 50/50 to be bisexual – in fact, most bisexuals are probably not 50/50. And others will fluctuate throughout their lives. I’ve found myself leaning toward men and toward women at different points of my life.
I mean, just think about it. What if you do lean toward either heterosexuality or homosexuality, but not strongly enough that you’re going to rule out dating or having sex with your non-preferred gender? It would be really confusing to use straight or gay. The obvious term that fits is bisexual.
No Rose, the best terms to use would be ‘hetro-flexible’, or ‘homo-flexible’, because they are far more accurate descriptions, and are more respectful to someone’s particular personal orientation. If you like, say that they are in a sub-category of bi-sexuality. But to simply, and lazily, just throw them all into such a gigantic category, and not let them give a more accurate description of their own personal orientations is down-right insensitive and disrespectful. ‘Bisexual’ is far too vague a description, that can lead to many inaccurate assumptions about a person’s orientation, when there are a vast amount of possibilities (within such a huge, unwisely considered/accepted orientation category). Unless the person identifies as ‘exclusively’ or ‘predominantly bi’, they should be referred to as what most accurately describes their orientation, rather than simply ‘bisexual’.
Furthermore, what about people who aren’t even attracted to the same sex, but have a mess around with same-sex genitalia now and then, if their husband/wife asks them to for his/her benefit? What if some people do it for the kink factor? Kink often includes, anything what you would certainly not normally/naturally desire, or think of doing. Things that you’ve opened your mind too, such as pain, the sex you aren’t attracted to (e.g. a homosexual trying straight sex) different age groups, body types you aren’t normally attracted to (fat/skinny fetish fixes), metal, whips, humiliation, piss, shit, whatever. ‘Bisexual’ is far too vague a term to apply to anyone who has had encounters with the same sex, in these kind of circumstances. The term covers far too wide a spectrum of sexual orientation preferences. It’s like saying people from California should only say they’re from the USA when asked where they’re from, regardless of the different cultures, climates, accents, scenery, lifestyles etc that differentiate between them and people from other parts of the USA.
Another thing is, some people think that once you’ve had same-sex encounters, you’re bi, even if you never do again. Some people just experiment, so get over it. Just because a person has had certain experiences, doesn’t necessarily mean that’s ‘what they are’ (whether it was experimental or serious). I’ve played football, and I would maybe play it again sometime, but I’m certainly not a footballer.
Also, I think I’m one of the rare people who believe that a person’s sexuality can change during their life (without them being confused). You said you fluctuated a lot within bi-sexuality, which means someone else can, to a more extreme degree.
Sexuality is very particular and subjective. Many people who are thrown into the ‘bi’ category, are worlds apart from each other. The accepted, out-dated theory of what ‘bi-sexual’ actually means, needs to be revised, and updated. Simply, it should mean you’re sexually attracted to both sexes, in the way that you are definitely NOT predominantly straight or predominantly gay. You should be ‘consistently active’ with, or ‘consistently attracted’ to both sexes, even if you are more active with/attracted to one more than the other. But for someone who has sex, and is attracted to only/mainly one sex nearly all the time, but happens to go to a swingers party one night (or every now and then), and has a dabble with the other sex, they should either be called hetro-flexible, or homo-flexible. Even the term ‘bi -curious’ is too vague. I would have been happy to identify as bi curious, if it meant that you’ve experimented with the same sex, but aren’t sexually attracted to them. But apparently you can also be bi-curious, be sexually attracted to the same sex, and be up for intimacy such as kissing. I’m not that person, therefore I don’t want to be in that category, as it isn’t an accurate enough description of what I am (even though I have no problem with what other people do). Whenever a description is too vague, there comes confusion, off-the-map assumptions, followed by annoyance, then anger when someone accuses someone of denying their sexuality (even though they have the right to anyway, but that’s a separate issue). This is when you know the description isn’t working, because it clearly has flaws. At the moment, ‘bisexuality’ is a category that lumps far too many people together, has many, many shades of grey, and is therefore likely to be an unreliable description of one’s sexual orientation. The main lot of people that are going to feel comfortable being labeled as ‘bi sexual’, are obviously going to be predominantly, and exclusively bi-sexual people. That’s fine for them, good for them. However, what is wrong, is for those same people to then expect other people who don’t feel as comfortable, also to be labelled ‘bi’, who actually happen to either be mostly gay, or mostly straight. Why would someone who is predominantly gay/straight want the same ‘bisexual’ label as someone who is predominantly or exclusively bisexual. Exactly! They’re clearly very different in a much bigger way than they are similar, however the ‘bisexual’ label suggests otherwise, and is therefore very misleading.
Instead of looking at things in a 3 circled venn diagram kind of way (that’s full of blurry crossover points), it is clearer and more effective to lay the facts out in scale form. The Kinsey scale is probably the most effective, accurate and straight forward to date. There is far less chance of confusion, and grey areas. It’s time to ditch the old concept of categorizing a subject so complex into something as restrictive as 3 defined groups (or 4 including A-sexuality). There are many different sexuality types (and many different A-sexuality types for that matter) that aren’t yet being acknowledged or taken seriously, which is wrong. To name a couple; pan-sexuality, and mono-sexuality, Furthermore, don’t even get me started on gender types, tv and ts issues, and the groups that some of them wrongly get thrown into, mixed with the usual issues that I’ve just discussed.
“Bisexual means you have an equal attraction to both men and women.”
This is not in accord with the experience of most self-described bisexuals (including me), and not supported by Kinsey. In fact, he pioneered a better understanding of bisexuality by putting sexual behavior on a continuum. He could have created three points: homosexual, bisexual, heterosexual, but he didn’t.
Fritz Klein did more research into bisexuality and had a much more nuanced set of continua, reflecting the fact that sexual orientation has many components: behavior, fantasy life, social life, etc.
it seems to be a question of nomenclature. “Bisexual” has precedent as our term for the varying degrees of attraction including both genders. It MUST be understood that this means the continuum you so accurately describe. Like Asberger’s (if you will), it is a gray scale of very varied experiences. I do not think we rely on what people call themselves when speaking clinically or politically… however, I welcome that practice for social settings and self identification.
I mean to say “Autism” rather than “Asberger’s”.
I’ve been a drag activist for 16 years and and a gender player / performer of varying modes for about 27. When I put on dresses for the first time, stepping from Angrogenous into femme, I was met with all manner of “Straight” boys popping out of the woodwork, eyes all aglow and laser beamed in my direction. I was surprised by the number, and by the fact that they were often boys with whom I had previously flirted unsuccessfully as an androgen.
Since that time, sailing across oceans of experiences populated by schools of varying sexualities, I observe this: America is biphobic. (speaking generally). It’s nto a hatred, no vilence, no bullying. It is worse, the obliteration with smiling indifference, ignorance. No one talks about bisexuality in the play of what goes on in our society, yet it is right there like the nose on our faces.
Examples:
The Ex-Gay atrocity. Couldn’t those claiming to have successfully converted from totally gay to totally straight actually have been Bi all along? They just turned off one faucet and on the other for themselves… the point is , they HAVE both faucets, on or off. (The rest of that story involves the same repressions found in closets)
Ditto Gay men who marry women, father children and live happily ever after… really! I know 3. they really are happy and living as straight. I think these must be, at least technically, considered part of a newly understood “BI-SPECTRUM” (copywrite, 2011, Bennett Schneider!!!)
And to my Bi-spectrum bothers and sisters I say, “WELCOME!” You are vitally i9mportant, for you teach us to open our minds and hearts and to think without limits and to welcome love in all people.
From somebody who is also “Bi” (Or pansexual, or something else, I really don’t like the strict labels), I will never call myself bisexual. I’m female, and I am attracted both sexually and romantically to both genders, primarilly women. I’ve found over the years that biphobia (great term, by the way) is worse than homophobia in many cases. At one point, I called myself bi, but encountered so much hate from both sides that it had a very strong negative influence on me. So I dropped the label – but that wasn’t the only reason. I also found several times that I would speak to, say, a woman, find out that she was “bi”, and try to pursue her – only for her to inform me that she was actually barsexual, or she just experimented with one friend once in college and took up the label. Or, she had one crush on a woman five years ago so she must tell people she was bisexual instead of straight, because once she labelled herself as straight, she felt she’d never have another chance with a woman.
I personally refer to myself as queer.
If somebody asks me to explain it in detail, I will. But most people who are not homophobic will understand that queer is not “lesbian”, but just queer – a little strange, and not fitting into any category directly.
Interesting Harley. The only problem with the word ‘queer’ is that there are so many inaccurate, derogatory connotations attached to it, and I know that there are many ignorant men out there who still use it to describe a closet bi or gay (who they think of as sneaky), or someone who secretly cheats on their wife with men. Hetroflexible is the closest description I’ve came across for ‘what I am’, or maybe ‘pan sexual’, however I’d rather just think of myself as ‘me’. Someone who is simply ‘sexual’.
As someone who falls in a similar category, I thought the same thing. Why not just be classified as bi? Consider being classified in politics as liberal, moderate, or conservative. While it would not be incorrect to classify people as gay, bi, or straight, this allows for a bit more definition.
There is a spectrum of sexual preference, The more specific, the more terms/classifications we need.
Because “bi” is typically seen as short for “bisexual”. After a fair amount of reflection, I’ve come to the conclusion that while I’m physically attracted to both males and females, it’s only the females I want to have sex with. Hence I enjoy cuddling and dancing with guys, but I’m not romantically or sexually interested in them.
What “bi” does is it makes it sound like your attraction to both sexes is approximately equal, which in my case is so far from the truth that it’s more accurate to call myself straight. And yet… I have desires that aren’t considered appropriate within normative heterosexuality, so I can’t, quite. Hence “mostly-straight”, or sometimes “heterosexual but biphysical” although nobody really understands that.
I think the term bisexual is limiting and as simplistic as heterosexual and homosexual. categories of sexual orientation are fabrications of Modernity. I identify as “mostly gay,” and face superficial responses of bewilderment from people stuck in a simplified sexual orientation paradigm. The recent article in the NYTimes about homophobia resulting from feelings of any amount of same sex attraction repressed by authoritarian parenting relates to this subject. the “mostly straights” have not had the fear of god put into them about their attractions to other men.
I think it is just a cop out. Obviously there are 2 sexes and you are either “straight” meaning prefer male-femaile sex, “bi” enjoying both male & female sex, or “gay” preferrring same sex sex. There is no “mostly straight” That is ridiciulous. The moment you have oral sex, anal sex, a handjob or whatever with the same sex you are either gay or bi. This “mostly straight” crap is just gay and bi phobia thiinly veiled as not wanting to be limited. Yes, there are degrees of straightness, gayness or bi-ness, but that doesnt change what you are. There is NO “Mostly Straight” in my book and anyone who describes themself as such is a hater…ie they hate themselves.
Hi Kristin.
There’s nothing wrong with being bi, and I was ready to (uncomfortably) accept I was bi or bi curious. However, many bi men say that you must be attracted to men to identify as bi. I’m not attracted to men in the slightest, and only a nice looking girl would attract my attention when I’m walking through town, or give me a stiffy from simply seeing her. The thing is, with men……I like cocks. I don’t know why. I just do. I’ve experimented with anal, because I wanted the closest taste possible of what women get to see what it is like. I also wanted to check if the g-spot thing is true (no success yet lol), and it feels like a naughty turn-on because it is something forbidden by the majority of society. This didn’t come natural to me, i gradually became more and more open minded. I started watching porn at an early age, and at first, I used to envy the men for the treatment they were getting from the pretty ladies. However, after years of watching it, I started realizing that the women usually seem to be having a much better time than the men.
If a man has a good body, I’m not attracted to it. Maybe i’ll wish mine was like that, but i don’t desire to do things with his. It’s only the cock and the balls that I’m interested in. To me, it would personally feel uncomfortable and extremely unenjoyable kissing a man (especially with stubble, tash or a beard, yuk), and it would make me gag for sure. Women (in general), have soft tender skin, whereas a man usually has a thick skull, bigger jaw, and not very pretty looking features. Cuddling would feel weird too. For that type of stuff (intimacy) it needs to be a cute soft smooth tender girl with curves. I would only ever get butterfly feelings for a girl, and get excited about dating one. However i sometimes like to fantasize about opposite sex intamacy, and getting caught just for the taboo factor. I’m also into fantasizing about getting caught in situations where i shouldn’t be having sex (whether it involve, a man, woman, or both). I also fantasize about someone nailing my girlfriend in front of me, and doing a better job than me, or me nailing someone’s wife, and doing a better job than them. I’m into anything that is a bit different…… I did the kinsey scale test on ok cupid, and it said I’m hetroflexible. I’m happy with that description. If you think I’m anything different, then please tell me, but I have faith in the Kinsey scale, as I think sexuality is far more complicated than just 3 boxes. There are even still loads of people who think there are only 2 boxes (gay or straight), and that anyone else is confused. i’m not confused, I know exactly what i want (whatever I feel like, haha). My fantasies keep changing though. I recently went through a stage of fantasizing about really older women, and had an encounter with one. I don’t fancy them, but it’s just the conquest factor (even better if they’re an old virgin, or haven’t had sex for years, haha). Maybe you think I’m just a pervert, lol.
NB, I would never do anything that would harm anybody, and I only approve of encounters that involve responsible consenting adults.
Anyway, I’m waffling, but i hope that gives you a better understanding of someone who doesn’t believe they are simply bi (or straight or gay).
Thank you so much for this article. It’s brilliant.
I’ve written a response on my Tumblr: http://outlawroad.tumblr.com/post/7364873667/the-good-men-project-21st-century-masculinity-mostly
Great article! I’m in pretty much the same position as Dillon and it’s nice to know there are others out there. I had been struggling with my sexuality for a long time, until I finally realized that maybe I’m still heterosexual, I just have that romantic attraction to either gender. There are times when I really crave that connection and affection from another man. Maybe one day I’ll have the “partnership” that he mentions.
I see these guys as simply moving beyond today’s disordered sexual politics on an intellectual, emotional and spiritual level. Modern men are commonly expected to be in a continuous state of competition, one-upmanship, a kind of fearful defensiveness around each other. Dillon and others like him are questioning this interpretation of maleness, are saying “No” to what is a distorted equation, and finding ways to form intimate bonds with other men. Historically, it’s called, uh, “Friendship” — something widely understood to be seriously lacking in the lives of adult heterosexual males. Maybe intimate male friendship looks a little different than intimate female friendship. Maybe it’s more sexual and/or romantic for some men than it is for others. So what? It’s all good. And we need it now more than ever.
Great post Jay. I agree.
I think there is another issue we’re uncovering here. That is that ultimately, humans with no physical attraction to each other can still have sex. An emotional attraction can still develop that leads to intimacy. These men in the article are not queer. They are what normal heterosexuals look like when you remove the body issues and the homophobia.
At the end of the day, every straight man sees a man when he looks in the mirror, and it’s not like he’s immediately repulsed. There’s nothing there he should have to be afraid of. Our problem is that as a society, we force people into exclusive labels like ‘gay’ or ‘straight’, when really nobody is exclusive.
Am I saying that everyone is bisexual? Yes, as far as this emotional/intellectual component of sexuality is concerned, pretty much. We could all say we’re bi-leaning straight, bi, and bi-leaning gay but then that would be everybody (excepting asexuals of course) and it would dilute the bisexual label too much. I think we could shift the terms as our culture advances such that ‘bisexual’ is understood to mean “wanting relationships with both sexes throughout one’s life” and that someone who is straight is perfectly free to pursue incidental same-sex relationships, no stigma, no strings attached, for when that emotional attraction develops.
Thanks for responding to my comment, Nick! I’ve always felt that one of the sexual revolution’s biggest mistakes was to convert sexual feeling into the hard and impervious shell of “identity”. I am reminded of Hester Prynne in “The Scarlet Letter.” Is “Adultress” an identity? Turning Prynne’s sexual act into an “identity” was really a form of punishment, a public humiliation, a way of psychologically stripping away privacy, inhibiting intimacy and personal choice, a strategy which can be linked back to the Puritan ethos in which private, intimate behavior was interpreted as a kind of crime.
Just Say No to Sexual Identity!
It seems like the way forward out of the crisis of masculinity is into the territory of flexible sexuality. Since the popularization of ideas about sexual orientation and identity with the writings of Freud, homosocial space has been charged. Where previously, gay desire or gay sex was kept out of sight, allowing men to behave among one another as if desire is not a possibility between them, this pretense at ignorance has been challenged. Before, men felt safe in men-only spaces because of the taboo against homosexual sex. They were free of the social pressures that come with being seen by others with sexual desire. The possibility of non-sexual, homosocial intimacy could only be embraced when it excluded the intimacy of sex. In the military, “Don’t ask, don’t tell” enforces that taboo. We’ve kept the rule for the comfort of the many men who would be unable to form close bonds with other men if they felt that the social covenant against in-group sexuality wasn’t going to be upheld by all the members. Most men don’t live or work in men-only spaces. In fact, many of us have thrown that rule away and found a new comfort level. Straight-identified, or mostly-hetero men no longer necessarily feel that fear. We’re socially adjusted to the same kinds of mixed groups that we went to school with, in which people can form non-sexual, intimate bonds for work, worship, sport, and other team efforts. That both women and men, of all sexual orientations, have been doing this in more arenas, proves to others that it’s possible and desirable to work with people who might desire you, or you them. Being able to get over that fear of sex invading the workplace allows more freedom of participation in previously all-straight-male enclaves to people who aren’t straight-appearing men, as well as to the men who would have passed before, but are more comfortable not having to maintain that image.
Dillon might very well find that the rem that best describes him is g0y. Google it G0ys is spelled with a zero g-zero-y. Also google Kinsey Institute. Most “straight” men who experience same gender attraction will also shy away from the term Bi because of the fear of the gay label and the association with practices and fetishes found in the gay sub-culture.
I just checked out the main g0ys website, and it’s rather offensive imho. They are extremely opposed to anal sex (male-male or male-female) and it altogether feels like a violent movement. I wouldn’t want to identify with that label.
I’m not sure I care for yet another sexual label, especially one that has so many definitions. The meaning of the word is all over the place. I’m 54 year of age and I have had sex with men many times in my life. I am not bisexual; bisexuals can romantically love another man. I can’t. There are many, many men like me, who can have close, sexual friendships with but are not capable of loving and partnering with another man. We are straight. This is really what is meant by “heteroflexible.” We scare the hell out of gays, because we are living proof that no one is “born gay.” We show that human sexuality has great capacity and flexibility and that sexuality can be expressed without the need for a lifestyle or a community.
Actually, sexual orientation and romantic orientation are separate things. So if you are attracted to men and women, you are bisexual – regardless of your romantic feelings. You’re just not biromantic. There are a lot of people who are bisexual but either heteroromantic or homoromantic (or vice versa, for that matter).
This was so beautiful. I absolutely adored reading this. <3 Thank you.
We are what we are so far as sexuality goes. If that’s not good enough for someone else, well, that’s their problem.
Reading this informative and beautifully structured article brought back to mind a memory that dates from college. This kid Ben—son of friends of my folks’—was bright enough to get a scholarship to Stanford, years ago. Unexpectedly, he quit after freshman year, even though his grades were terrific. When we met, at some point during one of our school vacations that year, I thought he didn’t look well. He’d lost weight and seemed almost catatonic. Later, I learned that he ultimately had what—at that time—was called a “nervous breakdown.” He never returned to school—not Stanford or any other college. Years later, over drinks, he casually mentioned that during his first semester of freshman year he’d had a sexual encounter with a man, someone who lived in his dorm. The experience shattered his confidence and, obviously, gave him some reason to experience guilt and a heaping measure of self-loathing. We lost contact, though over the years I’d hear something now and then. I don’t think he ever married or achieved anything that could rebuild self-esteem. The fact that young males feel free to experiment today—if that’s what it is—and explore multiple realms of sexual gratification suggests that sexual orientation is not always finite or easily defined. I remember my dad talking about his boyhood friend and how they’d sleep in the same bed when one visited the other. The friend died young; my dad never quite got over the loss and never wanted to discuss that relationship. Today, I think “coming out” means whatever men want it to mean. It may be confusing—more to some men than to women, perhaps—but it does connote inherent honesty, suggesting that in many corners of our sexual universe it’s not essential or expected to be 100% anything.
I love this post – for many reasons.
It’s interesting to me how much of the comments I read were in regards to labeling our sexuality – or the avoidance of labeling. Personally? I think some people need labels – and some people have very clear sexual boundaries that are easily defined by a label. I think, for those people, we should still allow labels. But, for some of us, we’re open and flexible, and definitions have had significant negative impacts on us, we prefer to avoid them.
In addition, in this day and age when things ARE changing, forcing someone to label themselves may actually constrain them and keep them from exploring. The underlying reasons are because they still want to define someone else as the “other” and not be in that group – e.g. not define at bi because they don’t want people thinking they have sex with men, due to the stigmas around that. While this motivation bums me out, I’m ok with it as a way to move forward. As more people explore and come out to talk about it, the more we break down stigmas. Maybe, once we do that, labels won’t be so negative, but will revert back to what they fundamentally should be: simply a way for us to learn to navigate among our fellow human beings, to understand who they are and what they want from life.
We’re shaking off all those false notions about “what a man is” and just acknowledging that we are sexual. It’s a lot more honest and perhaps freeing than the rigidity of living as a stereotype.
Could you please cite the surveys you were discussing – and, if possible, add hyperlinks so we can review these surveys for ourselves?
thanks!
If the guy is happy and healthy, what does the label matter?
The only people who need to know are certain ones those men interact with and I am sure he can explain it clearer than some classification because it is deeper than that.
And if one looks at history and even other cultures around the world, sexual ranges are quite common and less frowned upon than they are in many places in the U.S.
To plaigarize the hippies, if more people were busy interacting with passion and love towards one another freely, there would be less malevolence going on.
Better these guys be comfortable with self than end up married and having to hide their openness towards being involved with other men.
Everyone talks of the phenomenon of “heteroflexibility” as something brand new and limited to young men and women. Well, it just isn’t so. I’m 55 years old and I have been this way all of my like. I have never sought a romantic relationship with a man, but I have had sex with men on occasion all my life. What men? Others who are just like me; not gay, not bi, but straight without hang-ups. I do not care for gay men and bisexuals seem confused to me. Almost every close make friend I have ever had has stated that he would like to try sex with another man. Some acted on it, while others admitted that they were to scared to do so.
To be honest, I believe that herteroflexible is the base human sexuality. It is homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality that are artifice. They’re just meaningless labels really. I think that both 100% straight and 100% gay people are unbalanced and in denial of their true natures. It gets me in a lot of trouble to say that I know that gay people are not born that way, but suffer from psycho-sexual maladjustment. But I think that 100% straight people, who insist that it is impossible for them to ever enjoy a same-sex encounter are equally maladjusted.
Real your comments seem to be putting down other people. If you identify as a certain label, do not do so by saying others do not exist. The aim here is to let people feel comfortable with who and what they are, not put them down because you do not relate to their situation. Let’s not try to solve aand educate people then you mess it all up.
To Tyler: I agree with you about ‘Real’s remark. People may categorize and understand themselves as they will, but they shouldn’t slam and smack down other groups, who have different experiences, other goals.
Interesting article & posts here. From my perspective I had come to consider myself “bisexual” whatever that in fact might mean. I have had same sex attraction all my life, among my earliest memories of life. I did a decent job of repressing that, no a fantastic job of repressing that until I ended up marrying a woman, living with her for 26 years and fathering five children. My marriage fell apart for a variety of reasons this last year, NOT because I wanted to go out and find a man/get involved with men, but because my wife has never been good with my attraction to men, despite my never ever acting on that & my physical and emotional attraction to her. She seemed to take it personally that this attraction was part of me, something that no one, no matter what could change. I was willing to live with the situation and continue to raise our kids and have a family, my wife was not. I’ve been in counseling for nearly a year & attending a men’s group. She has done nothing except to kick me out of my house, and subsequently have an affair with her first cousin. OK maybe this is TMI…sorry about that. My point though, is that my very busy life in engaging with other men so far during online dating has led me to feel like I am getting to the heart of who I am. I feel much more “manly” than I ever did as “man of my family.” Much has to do with the personality of my wife and our relationship. But I think this article and these comments start an important discussion. Society in some ways offers us this straitjacket of some stereotyped ways of living that perhaps have not been a good fit for many people for a very long time. It is good to keep search for who we are, what we are. I don’t view myself as a gay man as I’m not sure what that even means. My best friend for the past 35 years is gay and he never ever suspected I was gay, if that’s what I even am. I guess I, like us all am mainly a work in progress. If you are married to a woman, let her be a work in progress too. Men see themselves reflected in their wives much more than women do. When me get disapproval, they are easily shattered and misunderstanding results. We all need to turn the mirror on ourselves, see who we truly are and then the joys of loving relationships will be strengthened and stand the test of time. I wish everyone well, much love, success and happiness. We’re all beautiful on the inside and out and just need to find ways to remember that each day of our lives.
I think everyone who has taken to this article telling Dillon what he is should take a step back and realise that it really doesn’t matter what opinions and boxes they have in their own mind. What matters is how Dillon identifies himself. People creating their own definitions of what people are usually judge this from their own personal experience and so have no place to judge what another person feels from their own experiences. Step back and wake up to yourselves
I’m still not convinced. I think this guy wants the freedom to play around with other guys on the side, while still enjoying the many privileges and advantages that come from classifying himself as heterosexual, and from having this classification accepted by others. I met guys like this at university. They were disingenuous hypocrites. I didn’t like or respect them. Most likely the women with whom they were involved were in for a rude awakening at some point!
Human sexuality is a dynamic and complicated thing. We have created what are perhaps artificial boxes with terms like heterosexual and homosexual and then forced people to fit into them. We make allowances for those who exist outside those two poles: bisexual, omnisexual, polysexual. But still, our society requires that people take a label. The problem is those labels don’t always fit everyone. So as these labels become more well defined, more people become aware of the limitations of these labels, and recognize that they can exist outside them.
“Straight but not narrow”: Ritch and Kenneth, I’ve used that to describe myself, meaning “Heterosexual but not narrow-minded” (by the latter meaning “not homophobic”) — not “mostly straight,” not the least bit “bi,” just never felt threatened by others’ sexuality, whatever it was.
Really, the people *I* worry about are those (often -phobics) who would regulate others’ lives to impose their own beliefs. *Them* I find threatening, but I think that’s an objective assessment.
Great article. I used to be Bisexual but wound up being gay as the years progressed. As the years went by my attraction for men grew and prefer to be with a man, be it Heteroflexible, Bisexual or Homosexual.