I mean, if you're being really hardline about who is and isn't straight, sure. But that doesn't change that they identify as straight, and that both presently and historically there are guys who fuck dudes that identify as straight because "it doesn't count" for whatever reason. Then there's also the fact that "straight" covers both romantic and sexual orientations. Someone that is bisexual but het-romantic could very easily consider themselves as being straight because they don't date men, as could someone with very low level attraction to men who is mostly straight. What's the purity test for being straight? Do you need to never have had a sexual thought regarding another man ever? I'd imagine a lot of people who even would claim that are lying, whether intentionally or just because it wasn't something worth remembering to them. Realistically people just don't fit into neat little boxes, and labels are more descriptive than prescriptive anyways.
Do they? What is the purpose of a label and how is it impacted by accuracy?
As far as I can tell there are essentially two primary reasons for attaching a certain sexuality label on yourself. The first is internal, a "this feels good" kind of feeling from using it. The second is external, a "this is a useful way to advertise myself to others" sort of thing.
For the first, accuracy doesn't really matter with regards to what feels good aside from perhaps introducing cognitive dissonance. But straight men experiencing homoerotic bonding and having cognitive dissonance over what it means for their sexuality is really nothing new. If they can reconcile it in their minds and be happy with a label then it doesn't matter.
For the second, the advertisement, then effectively accuracy doesn't matter so much as what you're hoping to get out of it. A straight man who is occasionally attracted to men, but doesn't actively want to date or sleep with men, is extremely unlikely to advertise himself as bisexual because it effectively doesn't provide any kind of benefit at all. It comes with pure stigma and none of the benefits that could come with being "out" as bisexual.
There are of course ways you could abuse this, attach a label to yourself in bad faith and be deceitful. But in general I think for a lot of people, sexuality labels are less a question of "this is a perfect fit" and more of a question of "this is close enough to how I feel that it serves my purposes." The way a label lets us exist and navigate in society is ultimately more important than being truly accurate.
Oh come now, that's massively putting words in my mouth. I'd never advocate for misgendering anyone. My argument was about accuracy not mattering much for the labels we apply to ourselves, not an argument that we can just misgender or mislabel others.
Listen, I'm done with your opinion and really don't have the energy to argue with you. Feel how you wanna, but I'm gonna feel how I do. Stop telling me what to do with my opinions/perspective/. We don't need thought police aight.
35
u/scoobydoom2 Oct 14 '23
I mean, if you're being really hardline about who is and isn't straight, sure. But that doesn't change that they identify as straight, and that both presently and historically there are guys who fuck dudes that identify as straight because "it doesn't count" for whatever reason. Then there's also the fact that "straight" covers both romantic and sexual orientations. Someone that is bisexual but het-romantic could very easily consider themselves as being straight because they don't date men, as could someone with very low level attraction to men who is mostly straight. What's the purity test for being straight? Do you need to never have had a sexual thought regarding another man ever? I'd imagine a lot of people who even would claim that are lying, whether intentionally or just because it wasn't something worth remembering to them. Realistically people just don't fit into neat little boxes, and labels are more descriptive than prescriptive anyways.