Is homoflexible a thing?

Sexuality can be very fluid for some people, so it's definitely possible for a 'straight' man to have situational/momentary attractions to some other men, but in reality, that's just being bisexual. People can call it whatever they want - but really, if you have any attraction to a man, you fit into the category of bisexual or gay.

That's my interpretation of it.

 

It's a bisexual that only has romantic and sexual desire feelings for the same sex but only likes the opposite sex in a sexual way . People who don't want to label themselves bi use it because they think their not bi enough or they don't believe they fit the label gay bi or straight .
but a homoflexible person to me is just a homoromantic bisexual . But it's just a way to explain peoples's attractions and what their looking for another word I think fits them is Queer too
To It's just explaining what type of bisexual you are and who you want relationships with and who you just want sex with or hook ups

 

I've met lesbians who will occasionally have sex with men but ultimately only want to date women. Homoflexible would probably describe that situation pretty well. I imagine it's similar with men.

 

I 'm not saying that it's impossible with a lesbian to enjoy sex with a man. But a lesbian who occasionally sleep with men I think are not lesbian they are homoromantic bisexual women which also has a similar meaning to word homoflexible . Because I'm pretty sure these women have some attraction to the men they sleep with and it goes beyond I think he's handsome or looks nice . and if your attracted to men to the point where you can sleep with them and desire to sleep with them your bisexual . calling yourself a lesbian and occasionally sleeping with men is a contradiction to the meaning of the word lesbian and what a lesbian is . I do not believe these women are lesbian for one second . they may call themselves lesbians but they actions say different . And just because some one calls them self a label doesn't always mean they are that label because we've also seen the reverse where people are gay and say their bi to use it as a stepping stone to come out . to me this is being in denial about being bisexual .

 

Agreed. I think you can be gay and have some tiny curiosity, maybe even act on it but sexuality as a whole is about sex, and only about sex. Being a lesbian isn't about who you fall in love with nor who you choose to date. It's about who you desire to have sex with.

For example, an asexual woman who romantically likes women and chooses to only date women is still considered "asexual" and not "lesbian". A straight man who only has one night stands/hook-ups and is incapable of romantic feelings is still called "straight" and not "asexual".

But for some reason the same logic doesn't apply to lesbians :eusa_doh:

Truth be told I think homoflexibility is more of a one time curious thing, if you like it enough to keep seeking it out (regardless if no romantic attraction is there), you're in the bisexual field.

 

I really don't get why people think it doesn't apply to lesbians
I think another thing that might play into this is that people believe that women only feel romantic feelings and can't have sex with out emotions now I hope i'm making sense but I will often hear when it comes to straight relationships guys say girls can't just want sex they will always get emotionally attached to the guy , I'm thinking are some women who say their lesbian but occasionally sleep with men are thinking well I'm not getting emotionally attached and that makes me not bi ? Because anyone of any sex or orientation can hook up and sleep with each other just for pleasure lesbians do it, gay men do it straight men do it straight women do and bisexual people do it . Many people sleep with people their sexually attracted to just for sexual pleasure . and there are some lesbians that don't have relationships with other women at all and just have sex with other women they have no romantic feelings for .

 

In seeing how the word is being applied over time, if someone says they're 'flexible' it seems more appropriate to simply say 'bisexual' or, in addressing how 'flexible' is actually more commonly used, 'predominantly (insert hetero, homo + sexual etc here)'.

Basically, bisexual versus predominantly heterosexual, predominantly homosexual, etc.

The reason I don't like 'flexible' is because flexibility as a word suggests that the person that the label is applied to is literally 'flexible' in their orientation meaning it is mutable and can change and adapt and compromise. If someone loved a person and that person suddenly changed their gender and/or sex on them, the 'flexibility' suggests that the person ought to be okay with this and will be able to be flexible enough to adapt.

But, more often than not, the 'flexibility' isn't being applied in such a situation where, literally, a flexibility in orientation would be necessary to maintain a relationship. And, in the cases where it IS applied, the persons usually end up choosing the bisexual (or pansexual in some cases) label anyways.

What 'flexible' is more commonly used as is in situations like these:

SOMETIMES ON A RARE OCCASION a person finds a member of another sex attractive enough. SOMETIMES ON A RARE OCCASION a person might engage in a relation that they otherwise would not.

That's situational and more of a 'special circumstance' if it is that rare in happening. OR, if it happens often enough, the 'bi' label might as well be used.

But that doesn't necessarily translate into 'flexibility' (which is why I don't really like the term).

On a related note: I find it interesting; the term 'flexible' (along with the other newer non-mainstream terms related to romantic and sexual orientation) tends to be used more often amongst the younger generations - 20s and younger with a few smattering of 30s.
I also find it interesting to note that partnered sexual inexperience and even relationship inexperience on one end of the 'flexibility' or the other is also more prevalent, too.

As such, someone will say they are hetero or homo-flexible... but without ever having the experience of a relationship (much less a sexual relationship).

With the inexperience being in play, the label of 'curious' makes sense; there's no experience to really base anything off of but there is a possible interest.

But without experience and using a word that gives implication that there is, in fact, experience, is the word 'flexibility' actually meaning that the person is willing to TRY a relationship outside of their normal orientation? In which case, is the flexibility therefore more about the 'romantic' orientation instead of 'sexual' orientation (though in some cases, both are one and the same)?

 

When people use the term heteroflexible or homoflexible it's used as someone who is open to sleeping with both sexes , and has done so . Now here is where l don't like when people say it's not bisexuality, curious or bi It's silly saying your just curious about your sexuality or experimenting when let's say your gay slept with enough people of the opposite sex to fill up one page in a phone book, it makes one wonder what is it about the opposite sex that they keep going back ,there is clearly something they like about the opposite sex, people would not continue having sex with a person for no reason at all, there is some attraction there, but people act like life is like a porno and it's opps we bumped into each other and had sex, I'm pretty sure people agree to sleep with each other, there is flirting taking place, and discussion of where the sex takes place. People are not falling in to a bed and just having sex. Another thing l see people often saying every sexuality has different degrees except bisexuality that's ridge 50/50 which is far from the truth, not all bisexuals sleep with both sexes all the time some even sleep with the opposite sex or the same once in a blue moon. Some bisexual people only dated the same or the opposite sex rarely sleep with the other sex because bisexuals can be monogamous to just like any other sexual orientation they don't need both sexes to feel complete , all there
is to bisexuality is they have attraction to both sexes. It's insulting to bisexual people when people say oh I'm not bisexual because I sleep with the opposite sex some times or rarely well so do some bisexual people . When you say things like this you contribute to bisexuality erasure, and it's sad that people think in this day and age in order to be bisexual you have to have regular contact with both sexes which is not true.

 

I haven't seen a technical definition yet, homoflexible would actually mean the person is only attracted to the same sex, but if no same sex person is available for sex they will then sleep with opposite sex people.

 

I can see if it in when times comes for desperate measures but most people use it as just open to sleep with both sexes no matter what the circumstance , the reason they think they are different from bisexual being in the case of homoflexible is because they get no romantic feelings for the opposite sex reverse with homoflexible . But would we then say a lesbian who only sleeps with women and have no romantic feelings is not a lesbian then ? and a straight man who sleeps with only women and has no romantic feelings is not straight .
Although I can see if they had no one of the same sex to sleep with that they take up someone of the opposite sex . But when they are not in that situation and seeking sex with both sexes I think it's bs to call it anything other than bisexuality

 

No, "homoflexible" would be more along the lines of you've found the same-sex attractive your whole life, only ever fantasized about them, only ever had relationships and sex with them - but then, suddenly, you meet an individual of the opposite sex and actually find them attractive to the extent that you find a relationship with them enjoyable and wholly fulfilling.

With varying levels of leeway, anyways. Say for every 100 girls you think are hot, you find one guy hot/are attracted enough to him that a relationship would be entirely fulfilling. That's hetero/homo-flexible (depending on your own gender/sex).



And yes, it is a "thing."

 

Wouldn't that be like a one exception thing ? I still don't see that as homoflexible at least not how people use it now it would make sense if you used it that way if you found one guy in your life attractive out of the billions of women you loved all your life .
If it was just one guy you fell in love with and you only loved women all your life which I think your saying then yeah I would think that person is not bisexual .

 

*Shrugs* You can call it "one exception," or you can call it "homoflexible." Linguistic definitions are generally subjective things.

I think the "I find one guy that can do it for me for every 100 girls that do it for me" thing is apt, personally. I'd label that person hetero/homo-flexible.


And I should say when I'm making that comparison, it really ought to be more along the lines of "attracted to this person such that a relationship with them would work out/be wholly fulfilling." Since you often hear from gay people that they can find the opposite sex attractive, but just have no desire to be in a relationship with them.

In the end, it's a shaky definition, but most of them are.

 

when you say it do you mean like just one guy there whole life and no other guys besides that one guy ?

 

No, not necessarily, just with attractions to individuals of the same sex greatly outnumbering attractions to individuals of the opposite sex.

 

It applies to gay people if for all other purposes they are not into members of the opposite sex but if the opportunity arises to sleep with one then they take it; if they live as gay and are in the gay community and only pursue gay relationships and strongly identify with the label then why can't they fall under the "homoflexible" category and still id as gay?

I'm not saying labels are meaningless, but that they have a little leeway in how they are interpreted. Some people who are strictly homoromantic would say that this alone qualifies them to be gay, regardless of if they do or have slept with members of the opposite gender in the past. Not everyone is a gold star and some people continue to explore this later in life. Although technically this falls under bisexuality. And might be contributing to bi erasure. But thats another issue.

 

then your right it's not a one exception
but to me I see that as bisexuality there are bisexual people like that
terms bisexual women that prefer other women same sex attraction outweigh opposite sex attraction
bisexual women that prefer men opposite sex attraction out weighs same sex attraction
same for bisexual men .
by the way their not to be confused with homromantic bisexual and heteromantic bisexuals .
To me homoflexible is just a fancy way of saying what kind of bisexual you are .
If your gay or lesbian you will not have sexual attraction to the the people of the opposite sex that's what makes people gay or lesbian
what I don't get is why is every other sexual orientation seen as fluid like gay , lesbian , straight but bisexuality is not and gets the black and white or rigid label ? not every bisexual person is 50/50 Like i sated before some prefer one sex over the other . the only difference between homoflexible people and bisexual people is how they label themselves and what they call themselves that's it .

 

I'd say it's a fancy way of saying what type of sexuality you are, more so, but in general I agree.

Frankly, most people that are "homoflexible" probably call themselves gay, because it wouldn't be worth explaining it. The exception to that are the random cases where people who were "generally speaking, gay, but very, very occasionally attracted to the opposite sex," ended up meeting someone of the opposite sex who they liked enough to become life partners with - so they have to justify it by saying, "well, I'm homoflexible, girls are hot, and most guys aren't - but my husband is." (In fact, I know of someone on EC - not a consistent poster anymore - who fell into that category).



If you really think about it, though, let's say you tell everyone you're bisexual because you do find guys attractive, very occasionally. But, in practice, since you find girls attractive way more often, you're rarely dating a guy. So this causes everyone to ask you, "hey, I thought you were bisexual - but you're dating only girls?" So the extent to which you're into guys is small enough such that saying "I'm bisexual" (which elicits thoughts nearer to 50-50) doesn't really make sense.



....I'm very talkative today... :lol:

 

This actually happens to bisexual people quite a lot even the 50/50 one people think Oh your dating a guy now what happens your not bi anymore and that's the problem people thing bisexual means your both at the same time .
Yet a bisexual woman who says she's bisexual and only dates men and just sleeps with women is still seen as bisexual even one who dates one or 2 women is seen as bi .
but when it's the flip side and she is more into women and less into men and dates more women than men she not seen as bisexual despite having attraction to both sexes .
I've even been told by a straight man that a bisexual woman prefer men and will only use me for a good screw and I'm at the bottom of there list .
I think the reason the bisexual woman that likes women more than men will not be seen as bisexual unlike the women who says she's bi and has more attraction to men whose bisexuality will never be questioned . Is because people think women need men and all women must have an attraction to men so of course people are gonna tell that said woman she's not bi also it's an ego thing . We still live in a society that tells us everyday women need men and can't live with out them and a woman is suppose to be with a man , it is taught to us from birth . Also bisexual men are seen as gay because we have a stupid rule that says if a man sleeps with a man once he's gay he doesn't even get the word bi