Are straight men comfortable with male ROLE PLAY doctor?

However, I would not feel comfortable with them jerking me off.

That is very understandable. For me, till now, only during one person-to-person play exam, I too expressly requested no jerking off or orgasming during or afterward. And my doctor was female, so the question of gender didn't even enter into anything regarding being comfortable or not with a particular gender or not.

What BenDover said. Right on, Ben!

I'd prefer a women to do medical play with but for the people out there ok with it I say go for it

I, too, agree with BenDover. I have never been in a RL play exam, and therefore didn't know the anticipated/expected ending.

That, in my opinion, would definitely cross the line.

I prefer the online role plays I participate in to be clinical by nature, with agreed to boundaries. Some kink, of course, is expected, and appreciated. This, however, wouldn't qualify as either.

Removed

I don't think there is a clear cut-off line. Heteroflexible is still Bisexual, the difference being one of frequency--how much homosexual activity do you have?

My interpretation of heteroflexible was someone who was hetero, but tolerant and understanding of anything else, as well as possibly open to activity involving the same sex, that either hasn't had it yet, or may have had a close encounter, etc.

I think when there is a conversion from straight to bisexual, there is a bi curious intermediate step. A straight person will know when s/he has become bi curious because obvious behaviors will dictate that. But there is a transition period to becoming bisexual, and it's bi curious, for all intents and purposes.

In the bi curious phase, a person who has been straight still doesn't know for sure if s/he likes same sex experiences, and is experimenting. Some may turn back around and decide that same sex encounters are not for them, and they will go back to being straight or remain no more than bi curious for any given period thereafter (I know there are folks on here with strong opinions who will disagree with this, but there it is. )

In my own personal experience, I knew the moment I had made the transition from bi curious to bisexual. It wasn't until after my 1st few encounters, because during those first few encounters, I still wasn't sure if it was a lifestyle for me. There came a magic point where I knew what I wanted and how I wanted to go about it.

When I was straight, I would not have wanted a male play doctor. I saw to it that all of my real doctors and specialists were women, as much as possible.

@JTMac said

My interpretation of heteroflexible was someone who was hetero, but tolerant and understanding of anything else, as well as possibly open to activity involving the same sex, that either hasn't had it yet, or may have had a close encounter, etc.

THAT is the accepted definition of BI-Curious

Med fet is a sexual fetish. If you chose to do it with a same sex partner - that is a homosexual act. You can call it whatever you want. Lots of rationale to avoid saying you have homosexual tendencies. The definitions are quite clear. there are other threads where people have posted about man-sex isn’t homosexual because they aren’t getting it at home. Both arguments are simply denials.

so what if you are, it isn’t a bad thing.

A person is free to define their sexuality as they choose.

A person is free to define their sexuality as they choose.

Of course they can. Doesn’t change what they are based on the defined definitions of Sexual preferences they have. Just rationalizing there proclivity. Bisexual is just a term created to avoid saying you have homosexual desires.

it isn’t a bad thing.

A person is free to define their sexuality as they choose.

A person IS free to describe their sexuality as they choose.

They are NOT free to make up their own definitions of terms.

Published, accepted definitions must always be used.

A person is free to define their sexuality as they choose.

I think that a logically correct statement would be that a person is free to experience their sexuality as they choose. How those sexual experiences are externalized can, however, be relatively objectively observed and thus defined.

Definitions are attempts to impose a universality of understanding so that communicating between individuals doesn't become a confusing mix-up of misunderstandings.

I find it so fascinating that we are so concerned with labels these days - I would much rather have the experience than to define it a priori.

I find it so fascinating that we are so concerned with labels these days - I would much rather have the experience than to define it a priori.

The issue is people hide/avoid labeling themselves as bisexual/homosexual because they have problems dealing with their sexuality. So they make up terms and or other rationale about their sexual habits. They just need to own it! Having the experience is fine - just don't call it something other that it is - which I think is the issue here.

Do all med fet exams end with or have sexual experiences involved? Are not some of them just less appropriate than what one would get from an actual doctor visit?

A person IS free to describe their sexuality as they choose. They are NOT free to make up their own definitions of terms. Published, accepted definitions must always be used.

hey, boomers. A word that encapsulates this debate is FLUID. Another helpful marker is the Q in LGBTQ. It stands for Queer. It stands for Questioning. As such, a person is free to define Queer, and their particular queerness, as they choose, with the understanding that it’s under a big queer umbrella. Or finally, zity users are free to identify their sexuality on their profiles. New members aren’t sorted into groups by consensus. It’s an individual choice.

I spoke up because it feels at odds with the culture and message of zity to so aggressively impose archaic, rigid views on someone else.

You say “Make up their own definitions” as if there’s some universally accepted glossary of sexual terms out there. There isn’t: the terms we use for sexuality depend on context, culture, individual preference, and have changed over time. You people saying that yours is the “right” or “official” or whatever other term you’ve chosen to christen your definition need to get over yourselves. The only people in denial are the ones insisting that their term is the one, sole correct one, not me or others using a term you don’t approve of: I’m not defined by a label, but apparently you insist upon it.

Actually, there are universally accepted terms for sexuality. Google them. Meriam Webster, Wiki, and other sources are all in agreement. You can call yourself what ever you want - but the accepted and well defined definitions are pretty clear. The only ones in denial are the ones who can't accept the definitions and make up their own terms. Nobody is defining you by a label - label yourself whatever. I never offered my definition of sexuality - only what it is defined in juried dictionaries, literature, etc.

@des As in the "Am I Gay" thread - a lot of people hide the fact they are bisexual by making up their own definitions. It's not bad to be bisexual or gay. If the definitions change over time - fine. But there is a baseline of those definitions today. The gist of this thread was that if you have a same sex medfet experience is it a bisexual activity or not. I believe it is, and others want to believe it's not - or they don't want the bisexual label. That really isn't a big deal.

THE SHORT OF IT ALL; I'm an adulterous bisexual woman who seeks out, engages in, homosexual relations with other women but who very much prefers heterosexual relations with men not my husband outside of our marriage.

I engage in and enjoy heterosexual acts with men. Heterosexual just happens to be the 'norm' for the greater population on this planet. I very much prefer sexual intercourse with a man and I seek it out from my husband and those gentlemen I have come to adore but who are outside of my marriage with my husband's knowledge, consent, and blessings.

I engage in and enjoy homosexual acts with other women. I could identify as homosexual. I could be defined as homosexual. I could be labeled as homosexual. Or whatever word you use that means, '... to classify.' I seek out the company of another woman at times outside of my marriage with my husband's knowledge, consent, and blessings.

The frequency of my homosexual acts with another woman do not rise to the level of my being exclusively homosexual and are far below half of all of my sexual encounters, but more than a casual encounter or curiosity and I could be 'classified' as 'bisexual'. To me, bisexual best describes my view of myself but I make no claim that I do indeed engage in, have thoughts of, and find pleasure in homosexual acts with another woman.

And even though I have my husband's knowledge, consent, and blessings.I commit adultery every single time I engage in a homosexual act with another woman or have heterosexual intercourse with a man not my husband. It matters not that my husband knows of, approves of, and accepts that I commit adultery or that he does, too.

noun

voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not his or her spouse.

The complete definition of 'adultery' also has; 'disloyalty', 'unfaithful', 'infidelity'. Those 'labels', adjectives, I would contest in the context of my love and adoration of my husband and our understanding and our unique construct of our union with each other as long as we both shall live. And as comfortable and accepting of what we, my husband and I, have and claim as our marriage, I would be hard pressed to defend my marriage as not being 'open' or that we 'swing' or 'swap' or commit adultery.

I have and am comfortable with my own definition of who I am in my mind, heart, and conduct knowing full well that MY DEFINITIONS of MYSELF are not universally accepted by others.

When I am examined by a real physician or nurse in a clinical setting for legitimate medical reasons or concerns, I do not enjoy it because it is real and in earnest and my health is being questioned and examined. It is real. There is not one thing erotic or sexual about it even if I happen to know the nurse or doctor apart from their practice. They are professional and comport themselves as such.

When I engage in being examined by a non-medical person is a medfet setting it is with the full understanding that at least one of us is 'getting their jollies'. Regardless of whether there is a 'happy ending'. When I am being examined in a medfet setting, my nakedness to another person in a non medical setting, their touching me, viewing my intimate parts, and access to every part of me is anything but professional medical treatment and it does satisfy a prurient note in myself or that person I have spread my legs for to insert their gloved and lubed fingers into my vagina. I make no effort to distinguish the touch or pretend that I have no sexual feeling or stimulation. If I disrobe, prop my feet up and spread my legs for you to 'examine' I am so doing it because it stimulates me sexually.

And if I am examined by another woman under a non medical, non professional setting, apart and away from any legitimate medical facility it is because I know I will be sexually aroused. And I don't have to admit to you that I will be, because anyone who has lived, loved, or lusted, will know that I'm only lying to myself if I say that there was nothing sexual in it for me. EVEN if I were to have no sexual stimulation, I at the very least allowed another woman access to my genitalia and she may have 'those feelings' and if it is sexual to her, then it is a sexual encounter.

And between two consenting adults, to paraphrase @gwhap, 'What is wrong with that?' Even if the woman examining my nude intimate parts tells herself that she isn't at the very least curious, she has engaged in a homosexual act with me, who definitely is and has engaged in homosexual acts. If she does this with me out of curiosity and never does it again, then she was only curious and in my mind and heart, she would not be homosexual. BUT, she took the substantial step of having me disrobe and had contact with me and there was that desire or tendency at that time. Does she admit her true feelings or protest her 'innocence'? No matter. I was there and she looked, touched, and remained to enjoy what we were doing. Stimulate me to the point where I cum?

Admit it or not, own it or not, resist being labeled or defined or classified, that's your business. It is what it is.

I'm an adulterous bisexual woman who seeks out, engages in, homosexual relations with other women but who very much prefers heterosexual relations with men not my husband outside of our marriage.

@gwhap I totally get you. All I’m saying is that there is an inherent fluidity to it all, as indicated by the Q of LGBTQ, that there really are no hard and fast rules, and that certainly language like ‘Published, accepted definitions must always be used’ is militant, overly authoritative, and, frankly, incorrect under the ‘definitions’ of queer (in quotes because it’s an inherently fluid construct).

Language, much to my occasional chagrin, is itself quite malleable. Just look at the singular they/them. The rigidity of some previous comments would certainly prohibit the modern usage now celebrated as word of the year by the OED.

I believe that it is an individual’s right to identify as they choose. Who are we to police or judge anyone’s choices, even if denial is river in Egypt?

They are NOT free to make up their own definitions of terms.

Published, accepted definitions must always be used

As I read it...This comes across as Rigid, Inflexible, Absolute(ly)...almost intolerable> YOUCH, it almost hurts to think it ?!

I am glad my 4 foot colon tube is a bit more flexible...or it would have gone straight up through my nose and out by now, al so painfully.

I observe religious beliefs seem to be so rigid as this, and which of these are the correct ??

HOW, did this question originally intended, get to here ? I love it !

They are NOT free to make up their own definitions of terms.

Published, accepted definitions must always be used

As I read it...This comes across as Rigid, Inflexible, Absolute(ly)...almost intolerable> YOUCH, it almost hurts to think it ?!

But accepted definitions are not flexible in meaning. Meanings must be clear and consistent if there is to be any effective communication. If everyone seeks to blur the meanings of words, communication fails and instead, we can only wonder what the other person actually meant. We aren't sure due to that lack of clarity.

I see no one here being intolerant of the sexuality of others, only the arguments that words can mean anything you like.

@des said

@gwhap I totally get you. All I’m saying is that there is an inherent fluidity to it all, as indicated by the Q of LGBTQ, that there really are no hard and fast rules, and that certainly language like ‘Published, accepted definitions must always be used’ is militant, overly authoritative, and, frankly, incorrect under the ‘definitions’ of queer (in quotes because it’s an inherently fluid construct).

Language, much to my occasional chagrin, is itself quite malleable. Just look at the singular they/them. The rigidity of some previous comments would certainly prohibit the modern usage now celebrated as word of the year by the OED.

I don't think anyone is saying that the 'Q' part of 'LGBTQ' isn't flexible, but it doesn't mean that very clear terms such as 'straight', 'bisexual', 'homosexual' etc should also be vague in meaning. No one is telling anyone else what their sexuality has to be, but it helps if members are reasonably consistent in how they describe themselves. Zity.biz is one place where no one should have to feel they have to blur the meanings of words to cloud the issue of sexuality.

I believe that it is an individual’s right to identify as they choose. Who are we to police or judge anyone’s choices, even if denial is river in Egypt?

Yes, they can be whatever sexuality they like. But think about this - how does misappropriation of a word to describe sexuality help anyone in identifying potential playmates/partners? Isn't that an impediment which could lead to awkward situations due to misunderstandings? Using words correctly has little to do with being authoritarian, but it has everything to do with mutual understanding.

Response well accepted...I felt no intolerance of sexuality and stated no such, just find that the discussions can sure seem to get off the original track at times, and there is no end to the conversation of the new subject not related to the original matter.

Simply an observation, not a criticism here.

I do love the conversations here and quite often, find a new and different way of thinking for my self. All good it is.

Response well accepted...I felt no intolerance of sexuality and stated no such, just find that the discussions can sure seem to get off the original track at times, and there is no end to the conversation of the new subject not related to the original matter.

Simply an observation, not a criticism here.

I do love the conversations here and quite often, find a new and different way of thinking for my self. All good it is.

No problem at all. These tangential discussions often occur when we focus on one particular point before the discussion returns to the original subject.

A flip side to this question is a gay man receiving an exam from a straight.

i'm gay and get routinely tested for STD's. my doctor is straight and also someone i happen to know and work with (i'm a critical care nurse at a hospital and have a working relationship with him). He's completely professional, but the exam involves oral and anal swabs as well as checking my genitalia and it aways feels awkward for me (and not in a fun or sexual way).

Hi @DrZ

No one is telling anyone else what their sexuality has to be,

Unfortunately, that's exactly what Post 36 says, and what sparked my initial response that people are free to define their sexuality as they choose. I think we can all agree that the language used here not only proves my point, but is also needlessly aggressive:

despite the lies you keep telling yourself, you are bisexual.

Yes, we sure veered off topic @Orifice_Attractions. It can happen, to occasionally serendipitous effect. I asked a question about dead threads last week and before I knew it we were in bondage class.

Hi @DrZ

No one is telling anyone else what their sexuality has to be,

Unfortunately, that's exactly what Post 36 says, and what sparked my initial response that people are free to define their sexuality as they choose. I think we can all agree that the language used here not only proves my point, but is also needlessly aggressive:

Well... no. @SwitchableSusie was more blunt than she needed to be about it, but her point was actually that the member was inaccurately describing himself as straight. That is different to telling him that he was wrong to have some bisexual tendencies, which she didn't do. So even in that example, no one is telling anyone what their sexuality has to be. The only thing being asked of anyone is that they describe their sexuality honestly and accurately.

This is 2020. The waters for defining sexuality are now muddy. To insist that defining someone's sexuality is plain black and white anymore is an obsolete way of approaching the subject. Much of society has still not comprehended this yet, and many of them won't comprehend it any time soon.

This is 2020. The waters for defining sexuality are now muddy. To insist that defining someone's sexuality is plain black and white anymore is an obsolete way of approaching the subject. Much of society has still not comprehended this yet, and many of them won't comprehend it any time soon.

It doesn't make any difference what year it is. A heterosexual / straight person is still interested in the opposite sex only, while there are some with varying degrees of bisexuality, and others who are sexually attracted to the same sex only. There are some who are attracted to basically anything homo sapiens, and a few who seem to change their minds about the type they are most attracted to. I don't understand that at all, but if that is how they are, no problem. It isn't really ever so muddled. The thing to remember is not to project your own sexuality, whatever it might be, onto others.

All we are saying is that there is nuance here, and that it is absolutely no one's business to call someone a liar and label them as you think they should be labeled. It's bullying and cruel. Don't enable the bully by excusing their behavior. It's really very simple.