I am an out gay man. Ask me anything.

[meltzerboy]

Where did you get the fanciful notion that there’s a “conservative” branch of Catholicism, just as there is a Conservative branch of Judaism, and there are conservative branches of political parties? Catholicism is radically different from other religions, in that its core moral teachings (of which heterosexuality and homosexuality are among those) do not change, are constant, and are binding on all Catholics, despite what particular Catholics might want to follow/not follow. Nor is Catholicism like a political party. Valid Catholicism adheres to moral absolutes which come from The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, through Rome’s authority. Universally, for all Catholics, homosexual activity is immoral and gravely disordered. Universally, all authentically practicing Catholics are bound to inform themselves about church teaching, and to follow that teaching, as it affects matters in the public square, such as homosexual “marriage.” When Catholics oppose such teachings, they are not being “liberal,” they are failing to practice their Catholicism. They are being sinful. And when they claim to other Catholics on message boards that it is possible to be a good Catholic and support homosexual “marriage,” they are elevating that sin to another level: to scandal.

What would make you believe that Catholics, whether practicing authentically or not, would have little acquaintance with people who practice homosexuality, or have same-sex attraction? (Or do you believe that the moral teachings of the Roman Catholic Church have something to do with supposedly not knowing homosexuals?)

There has often been a subtext in the public square that “if people just understood homosexuals more, or had friends who were homosexual,” then (1) the public would embrace gay “marriage” wholeheartedly; (2) religions would alter their moral codes; (3) the natural order of the universe, including the complementarity of genders, would deconstruct itself. (All those are wrong, by the way.)

Although I may not agree with your belief about the immorality of homosexual behavior, I agree with your logical argument presented here about Catholic teaching. As you probably know, Elizabeth, Judaism, from the Orthodox perspective, can also not be broken down into branches, some more liberal than others. In fact, some Orthodox Jews think of Conservative and Reform Jews (who call THEMSELVES that) as really “less Orthodox,” while other Orthodox Jews call them “heretics.” (I’m proud to be one of the latter!) Cannot the same distinction be made in Catholicism among Catholics who call THEMSELVES Liberal and those who call themselves Traditional, while thinking of others as less obedient and more sinful, with charity of course.

 

[Young_Thinker]

I could *tolerate *it, sure. I have an iron will, and could absolutely tolerate being married to a woman. I wouldn’t cheat. If for some reason such a thing was required of me, which I can’t imagine a scenario where it would, I could tolerate it.

But I wouldn’t be happy. I’d be short-changing myself and the very limited span of time that I have here on earth as a human being. Plus, I’d be short changing my wife.

Also, I don’t for a second think it’s unfortunate that I’m not attracted to femininity. I’m genuinely happy being a dude who’s attracted to dudes. I don’t *want *to be different. It’d be terrible to have to settle for anything other than who I’m genuinely deeply attracted to.

I understand what you are saying, especially since you no longer adhere to any organized religion and have no particular desire for children.

 

[meltzerboy]

Please do not become so offended. I was saying that provided that he could behave like a “straight” man. You should remember that there have people who have been married and had children yet lacked any erotic drive. How would a homophile with little or no erotic interest in women who is doing the same be that much different? And of course, it would be best for such a man to be honest with a lady about his feelings before marrying her.

Whatever gave you the idea that TheRealJuliane was offended?!

 

[francisca]

shrug I feel pretty sure that the type of attraction I feel towards an attractive dude when I first see him is physical, sexual attraction.

I’m sure of that too. My concern is that “attracted to hundreds and hundreds of guys” shows that such attraction isn’t that “special”, meaning it’s just like normal heterosexual men likes to look at many many women sexually but not really in “attraction” as in its full meaning. Men who go to prostitutes are attracted to many many of those women, but not in a real way, not in the full meaning of it.

On the other side, your attraction towards one or two women which was “not in sexual way” may be the real “special” and “real romance” feeling. Because guys who like women in a serious way, do not necessarily think about sex in their initial stage because of “how special she is”.

They were definitely sexual dreams.

OK.

Interesting. I remember thinking to myself when I first started looking at porn that I was just looking at pictures of other guys to compare myself to. But I’m pretty sure that was just rationalization.

That might not be “just rationalization”. When I was a young girl, I saw a picture of nude woman for the first time. I can still remember the sensual feeling I got for the first time in my life. Now that I am married to a man, I know for sure that I am 100% heterosexual. I was lucky that in my childhood, I was not exposed to words such as “lesbian/ homosexual” so that I did not know at all about those as to question my orientation when I was too young to understand. Later, when I knew about homosexuality, I have experienced boys approached me, and I knew that I wasn’t confused, eventhough naked women pictures did affected me.

Supposedly I knew about “homosexuality” earlier, I would have surely thought that I was “a lesbian”. Things could have been different with me.

Also, I actually wasn’t exposed to the idea of homosexuality very much as a youngster. I remember hearing about the Ellen show controversy, I think, and I was in middle school at the time. And I remember observing that my older cousin was openly gay (he’s 12 or 13 years older than me). Also, I think I remember that another boy in middle school made him being gay a big deal. And I think that’s it.

That amount of exposure was enough for you to question things because children are naturaly curious so were you as a child.

Honestly, my memories are pretty fuzzy from that time of my life. I remember feeling pretty certain that I was physically attracted to other boys. I remember, too, that this wasn’t something I was particularly worried about until I discovered that the Church didn’t approve of such things. Somehow, I got in my head that if I was mostly or only attracted to other guys, that would be okay – and was really surprised when I found out that the Church and my parents weren’t cool with it.

I really think that you got quite exposed, without really knowing what sexuality was about.

I also remember telling my friends that I had crushes on girls, and I remember getting really attached to a girl when she told me she had a crush on me. But I was never physically attracted to her. And looking back, it’s pretty clear to me that I was crushing on other dudes – not girls. I remember being very attracted to this new boy in my class (I went to a small, private catholic middle school, by the way), and doing everything I could to be his friend. It was kind of silly, actually, the lengths I took to get closer to that boy. And I remember dreaming about him all the time, both in my sleeping and waking state.

Now that you are active in gay circle, your memory remember the boy in your dream as important matter, it might not be so in different scenario, because after all have happened in your life, up to today, the fact that you can still remember your feeling toward the girl.

Not being attracted sexually when somebody is young and innocent is a common fenomena. Instead of sexual feeling, the true feeling in young people should be an innocent crush about how special she is (non sexual romance). Sexual feeling develop as the person grows and also as the relationship grows.

I’m definitely actively looking for a deep, romantic connection (in addition to the physical and intellectual connection) and a long-term relationship…

You have yet to find it.

I read in your post 226, you said that you are not the same person moment to moment, and that your “self” being obliterated and you experience death when the obliterated self has no new self for replacement yet…

Life is not part of death as you said because life is everlasting. Death is not as comfortable as warm bed as you said it in the above post. If you believe these, you’ll be switched from self to self because life and death are two different things, just like self indulgent sex different from steady faithful one. I do believe that you actually are longing for the last one. All of us are looking for relationship and never sex indulgent because the last one doesn’t satisfy.

God bless you.

 

[Young_Thinker]

Whatever gave you the idea that TheRealJuliane was offended?!

The emoticons and her apparent tone. Perhaps “offended” was not the right word for me to use. “Angry” would probably be more appropriate.

 

[meltzerboy]

The emoticons and her apparent tone. Perhaps “offended” was not the right word for me to use. “Angry” would probably be more appropriate.

I really should use some emoticons myself. I was only joking, Young Thinker; how could ANYONE miss her reaction!

 

[Young_Thinker]

I really should use some emoticons myself. I was only joking, Young Thinker; how could ANYONE miss her reaction!

Okay!

 

[meltzerboy]

I’m sure of that too. My concern is that “attracted to hundreds and hundreds of guys” shows that such attraction isn’t that “special”, meaning it’s just like normal heterosexual men likes to look at many many women sexually but not really in “attraction” as in its full meaning. Men who go to prostitutes are attracted to many many of those women, but not in a real way, not in the full meaning of it.

On the other side, your attraction towards one or two women which was “not in sexual way” may be the real “special” and “real romance” feeling. Because guys who like women in a serious way, do not necessarily think about sex in their initial stage because of “how special she is”.

OK.

That might not be “just rationalization”. When I was a young girl, I saw a picture of nude woman for the first time. I can still remember the sensual feeling I got for the first time in my life. Now that I am married to a man, I know for sure that I am 100% heterosexual. I was lucky that in my childhood, I was not exposed to words such as “lesbian/ homosexual” so that I did not know at all about those as to question my orientation when I was too young to understand. Later, when I knew about homosexuality, I have experienced boys approached me, and I knew that I wasn’t confused, eventhough naked women pictures did affected me.

Supposedly I knew about “homosexuality” earlier, I would have surely thought that I was “a lesbian”. Things could have been different with me.

That amount of exposure was enough for you to question things because children are naturaly curious so were you as a child.

I really think that you got quite exposed, without really knowing what sexuality was about.

Now that you are active in gay circle, your memory remember the boy in your dream as important matter, it might not be so in different scenario, because after all have happened in your life, up to today, the fact that you can still remember your feeling toward the girl.

Not being attracted sexually when somebody is young and innocent is a common fenomena. Instead of sexual feeling, the true feeling in young people should be an innocent crush about how special she is (non sexual romance). Sexual feeling develop as the person grows and also as the relationship grows.

You have yet to find it.

I read in your post 226, you said that you are not the same person moment to moment, and that your “self” being obliterated and you experience death when the obliterated self has no new self for replacement yet…

Life is not part of death as you said because life is everlasting. Death is not as comfortable as warm bed as you said it in the above post. If you believe these, you’ll be switched from self to self because life and death are two different things, just like self indulgent sex different from steady faithful one. I do believe that you actually are longing for the last one. All of us are looking for relationship and never sex indulgent because the last one doesn’t satisfy.

God bless you.

Some good points here. However, what you say may not be applicable for all gay people. Some know they are gay very early in life. I also doubt that this minimal exposure of Exalt’s made such a difference. But YOUR personal story is interesting. And I agree about the “hundreds and hundreds” of attractions: that must be sheer lust, not really sexual attraction in any romantic way. (Not that I disapprove of lust, either; but in moderation!)

 

[Elizabeth502]

Although I may not agree with your belief about the immorality of homosexual behavior, I agree with your logical argument presented here about Catholic teaching. As you probably know, Elizabeth, Judaism, from the Orthodox perspective, can also not be broken down into branches, some more liberal than others. In fact, some Orthodox Jews think of Conservative and Reform Jews (who call THEMSELVES that) as really “less Orthodox,” while other Orthodox Jews call them “heretics.” (I’m proud to be one of the latter!) Cannot the same distinction be made in Catholicism among Catholics who call THEMSELVES Liberal and those who call themselves Traditional, while thinking of others as less obedient and more sinful, with charity of course.

Are you saying that individual Catholics are just as free to define their religion by their own standards as are Jews? (I’m aware of the Orthodox standard in Judaism; I once went to a Bat Mitzvah where the reception, at a Reform temple, served shrimp at the buffet table, causing great horror to the Conservative guests, who promptly exclaimed about the ‘un-orthodoxy’ of it all, while eating the shrimp despite other choices, LOL.)

I’m aware of the unified body of belief. There is, however, more acknowledgement of autonomy among Jews, particularly with regard to certain beliefs and practices. I think, though, you make a good point: there is an understanding about what is and is not “absolute” or even just “traditional,” so few Jews raised in the religion are not aware of what makes a good Jew and a bad Jew, even when they have drifted away from the practice. They will easily say about themselves or someone else, “He’s a better Jew than I am.” And they mean the whole observance, not just a portion of that. (There is a regularity about observance, morality, ethical practices in business, etc.)

Unfortunately, this is not true in contemporary Catholicism. There is much confusion about what is, is not allowed to be accepted/rejected, the difference between understanding and practice, etc. Jews are way better about the consistent education of believers than the Catholic Church has been in the last few decades especially. Bishops and dioceses have varied in what is taught and what is practiced, leading to much confusion.