That's just another way to "loosen the tention". Sexual Activity with another person (and other thing) is a further step as it is about interaction. If you have that available, many/most people chose to do that. And as has been stated, prison rape is far from being a homosexual act, as it's much more about dominance. As for example is the raping of women after having conquered a town. I could look up an article about rapings of men in the Congo in these years as the ultimate form of humiliation of the conquered populations, often driving these men away into far away lands as refugees. It's NOT homosexual.
And this has existed for all time. The non-modern standard example would be the sheperd alone with his herd on a lonely alp using one of his sheep for pleasure. Doesn't make them animal(istic?). Or if you want to go further back, read up on the Greek/Ovidian Myth of Pygmalion which is basically the tale of a women hater who built himself a statue as an alternative.
Or to turn it around, I have had sex with women (I'm male), but as I did not really enjoy it, I don't consider myself heterosexual? Do you agree?
So I went back and looked at the posts that spawned this. First I gotta say, I only now read your first post in this thread and I do agree with pretty much everything you wrote. But I wasn't involved at all in the "set-up" you see. The other posts are a back-and-forth on defining homosexuality and the nature argument. I'm not really sure if there can be a trap here since I do not see how one can "win" or "lose" in this argument. I do think it's an open-ended (and personally I do think this line of argument is completely irrelevant to the question of which place we give "homosexuality" in our society).
