Now , I know this is kind of off-subject, but I remembered seeing a case study of that in a journal somewhere. Lemme look for it.
::rustle, rustle:
Ah, here it is!
The article was simply titled, “Lola” and it could be found in medical journal called, “The Kinks” The issue subject was “Lola Versus Powerman & The Moneygoround”
I met her in a club down in old Soho
Where you drink champagne and it tastes just like cherry-cola [LP version: Coca-Cola]
See-oh-el-aye cola
She walked up to me and she asked me to dance
I asked her her name and in a dark brown voice she said Lola
El-oh-el-aye Lola la-la-la-la Lola
In my day, when I was still young (I think it happened a couple years ago), some poster mentionned in a GQ thread not only that he (I believe it was a “he”, I’m not 100% sure, though) was into bestiality, but also stated that one could feel real feelings for the animal one was…errr…in love with (and advocated on this basis that bestiality should be legal).
Though I would suspect that for the majority of people in bestiality, it’s only a sexual thing, if we are to believe this poster, there might be some who “love” their…Significant Animals???..I’m still not really convinced (s/he might have wanted to make a point) but I thought I would mention it.
However, more generally, I think that inded the ability to experience romantic feelings is a significant difference between homosexuality and fetishes. Despite the bestiality example, I’m going to hazard the guess that indeed nobody can fall in love with a foot.
Worse, in a full-blown paraphilia, you’re rendered incapable of gratification without leather boots or whatever, to the point you cannot enjoy intimate relationships. That sounds like something well beyond eclectic tastes to me.
Ahh, so they’ve finally released a new edition of Rick Santorum’s Unabridged English Dictionary. Personally, I’d rather use a definition that actually means something instead of making value judgements.
But for many (maybe most?) people, it doesn’t boil down to “just” minds or “just” bodies, either or. Attraction to another person is the sum total of emotional and physical attraction – and in some cases, cosmic rays, or some other unexplainable force. You can find a person completely attractive emotionally but not be attracted to them physically, and vice versa. And they feed into each other as well; a real emotional connection to a person can make him or her more physically attractive, and by the same token, maybe unfortunately, really hot people can often get away with being unpleasant or devoid of personality.
It’s why the term “sexual orientation” is preferred over “sexual preference;” it’s not a case of just being “politically correct,” but because the former is more accurate. “Preference” implies being able to do it with anything, but given a choice, one would prefer to do it with a man (or a woman). “Orientation” implies that it’s a more fundamental attraction – it’s the personality and the equipment that are necessary to add up to attractiveness.
Or, as others have already pointed out, it’s the difference between love and sex. And confusion between the two is what leads people to place value judgements on it, or to say that being gay is all about sex, etc. I would say that a proclivity towards certain sexual acts is what qualifies as a “fetish,” and it’s just that some fetishes (liking vaginal intercourse) are more common than others (liking to be tied down and spanked by people dressed as muppets).
And yeah, for many people, both aspects are important. If I met someone who was a great person and completely indistinguishable from a man, but found out that he had a vagina, then I’d most likely be turned off.
Because you can function just fine in society without ever letting anyone know about your fetishes. But homosexual organizations aren’t just about telling everybody “We like penises (or vaginas) so support us!” That would be boorish. And anyone who hears “I’m gay” and immediately thinks of sex acts is also being boorish and crude, IMO. These organizations are asserting orientation, the entire thing, not just sexual attraction. Many of the members could very well be into S&M or foot fetishists, but that’s not the focus of what they’re trying to accomplish. They’re saying, “We are attracted to people of the same sex.” Not organs.
One other thing about that: I constantly hear that gay people in particular go on and on about their sex lives to anyone and everyone. And I can see why it would seem that way to some people. But I’d challenge anyone to spend a week paying attention to conversations, listening to just how much people talk about their sexual orientation (not sex acts, but orientation) without realizing it. You might be surprised.
