A nice thought, isn’t it? Should we be more about hearts – being into the person – than we should be about parts – dicks/pussies? Some thoughts about bisexuality says that we should be more about hearts than parts… and I say, “Are you kidding me?” To me, this seems to be a form of denial, a way of saying, for example, I should have no interest in sucking some guy’s dick just because he has a dick, that my interests should be more about him as a person.
Really? Does anyone not know how this works? All you have to do to see the fallacy in this is think about how we go about deciding who we want to have sex with. Can you have sex with someone you’re not into? Sure you can – we’re just told that it’s “better” if we are, that being into them removes the shame of wanting to have sex with someone just because we can. I’ve learned that I don’t have to be into a guy to suck his dick; I don’t have to “like him like that” – I just need to like him enough to want to have sex with him and that means that I see something in him – and other than the fact that he has a dick I want to suck – that will set the green light so this can be done.
I don’t have to “care” about the guy although I can find him interesting as a person. Now, we can become “fuck buddies” if that can be arranged and managed… but that doesn’t mean that we’re having a romantic relationship because, uh, it’s not a requirement if we want to spend time sucking each other off. Yeah, I get that ideally, when you have sex with someone, there should be some emotional investment on everyone’s part, that the only good sex is relationship sex… but real life is quite different. Maybe I don’t want to be in a relationship with “Jerry” but, yeah, we find each other interesting enough that we’d want to have sex at least once; maybe “Jerry” isn’t in a position to have a relationship because he’s already in one… but he wants to add some cock to his sexual diet. Does he have to be into me? Fuck no! At the very least, all he has to do is respect me as a person; if he likes me, okay, that’s fine but, really, all he has to do is like me enough to want to have sex with me and, yes, his sole “like” could simply be the fact that I have cock. Hell, his only “like” could simply be because I’m Black and, for him, that’s a good enough reason, right?
We see this as being a bad thing; men and women are constantly shamed because they like having sex and just because they can. If “Sally” went to the club and for the purpose of having a one-night stand, she’d be seen as a slut or a whore because she wants to get laid – and without anything romantic jumping off; if “Mike” is on the prowl for some pussy, ditto; he’s a dog because he doesn’t want to be bothered with romance – he just wants some pussy and then go on about his business afterward. This “hearts, not parts” thing, to me, is an attempt to romanticize bisexuality because if sex is paired with romance, then it’s all good… but sex for the sake of sex, ooh, that’s a fucked up thing to do.
Bisexuality, sorry to say, ain’t always about romance. I’d never say that romance can’t play into it – that would be a lie – but is it a requirement in order to get your rocks off? Nope, sure ain’t – romance or being into the other person just sugar-coats things so that we don’t feel bad when “Jane” sleeps with “Brenda” and simply because “Brenda” has nice tits or an onion booty or otherwise seen as being hot and desirable. It wants to deflect the fact that “Ron” wants to have sex with “Dave” and just because “Dave” has a big dick or he’s cut/uncut, or a nice chest or a nice ass because, um, being sexually turned on by parts is somehow seen as being the wrong reason to get turned on. Really? Seriously?
I see bisexuals saying “hearts, not parts” and while I understand what they’re saying, yeah, it makes me roll my eyes a lot. Is it nice if you can be all into the hearts thing? Yeah… if that’s what works for you and, again, there’s nothing wrong with that but to deny that the parts aren’t important, well, that doesn’t make sense to me. I see a lot of bisexual women uttering this and it’s my opinion that thinking like this is just another thing women do so they won’t be seen as a slut or something like that – no offense, ladies. I know that women are just funny like that; they’re not likely to give up the booty to anyone who’s not into them or they’re not into and, of course, any woman who does give up the booty without that “being into thing” in their mind gets unbelievably shamed for being loose, easy, sluttish, whorish, etc., like she’s not supposed to ever have sex just because she wants to or, bisexually, she can’t have sex with another woman simply because it’s another woman – parts, not so much hearts.
Is it wrong to put parts before hearts when it suits your purposes? No – why would it be? If you weren’t interested in someone romantically – but you wanted to have sex with them – well, how can that be a bad thing? I’m gonna pick on Rougedmount for a moment (sorry, Rouged) but is it wrong for her to want to have sex with a guy with a huge dick and, further, if she didn’t want to be romantically entangled with Mr. Big Dick, is that also a bad thing? What if being regarded as “a piece of ass” is what will float your boat and that’s because it’s different from romantic/relationship sex?
Is it really so fucked up that the only thing you require for the other person is to say yes to the sex? It seems there are a lot of bisexuals who think so and I guess one has to do whatever their sensibilities require them to do – I just think that hearts aren’t always more important than parts but is good “justification” to keep one from having all the sex they could have because having sex with someone you’re not into (or who isn’t into you) is purported to be just plain wrong. Look at it like this, if you can: If having “not into” sex makes you feel used and all that, if you’re having “into” sex, ah, aren’t you still being used for sexual pleasure? Is there really a difference? It’s said there is a difference… but used for sex is still used for sex… ain’t it? Perhaps “being into” just serves to legitimize and justify having sex? I don’t know this for a fact… but I do question it.
And I think bisexuals should question it – is that trip really necessary to meet your sexual requirements? Ideology says it is; real life say, nah, not really… you just have to find them okay enough to do it with them and even if they do, in fact, have the parts that revs the shit out of your engine…
Just my sixty-two cents…