Finding Your Sexuality Poll

[3113]

just for the record, one's 'sexuality' is not exhaustively, or even mainly, defined by the gender(s) you like to fuck with.

Well, that's what the "other" is for

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Tends to be more: sex, sex, sex...
You know what women are like. They like to talk about it, but-

You've been hanging around the wrong women.

 

[zeb1094]

Tends to be more: sex, sex, sex...
You know what women are like. They like to talk about it, but-

Isn't that oral sex? When you talk about it?

 

[3113]

I do so like the male bonding that's going on here. I keep envisioning CD, lil Elvis, and rgraham at a bar, drinking beer...and talking about how much happier they'd all be if they were talking to women....

 

[lucky-E-leven]

Isn't that oral sex? When you talk about it?

Hee! Hee!

 

[rgraham666]

I do so like the male bonding that's going on here. I keep envisioning CD, lil Elvis, and rgraham at a bar, drinking beer...and talking about how much happier they'd all be if they were talking to women....

As a matter of fact, yes I would.

 

[MasterPhoenix]

The current trend toward bisexuality, sexual experimentation and personal lifestyle choices is very much an expression of the development of consumerist capitalism and it's demands for well-adapted infantile narcissistic individuals. The narcissistic obsession with self and pleasure creates constant needs and desires; while the infantile element ensures that the need to satiate those needs and desires takes pride of place in the individual's personal agenda. And thus you have people who are just and only what they buy.

There - that should be utterly clear as mud.

Holy crap! Did you have your dictionary next to your desk as you wrote that? ROFL

Actually, it made a lot of sense to me.

 

[togitc]

Hetero, but I have felt attracted to certain individuals of my own gender and have experimented/want to experiment.

Experimented and prefer women.

 

[Lucifer_Carroll]

I've been thinking a lot about bisexuality recently, and I'm increasingly of the opinion it's a lot less common than believed. Most 'bis' are gay, but the social pressure to be 'straight' is enormous. So many fudge their sexuality.

Dating a bisexual, I believe this is likely true and that there might be some tiny truth to the whole Kinsey spectrum of sexuality (that there can be 90% straight, 10% gay people and whatnot).

And many are right to point out that one's sexuality only refers to one's lust and that love and the heart, she makes her own rules.

And speaking personally, knowing one's own sexuality and being honest to it is a big deal that everyone should strive to find as early as they possibly can even though it could mean some very complicated discussions with friends and family in the future.

My own sexuality? Very complicated to explain, relatively long in knowledge, relatively recent in full self acceptance. Yes...I'm commiesexual. I'm only sexually attracted to communists.

 

[3113]

I've been thinking a lot about bisexuality recently, and I'm increasingly of the opinion it's a lot less common than believed. Most 'bis' are gay, but the social pressure to be 'straight' is enormous. So many fudge their sexuality.

Just read an article in the newspaper where it mentioned some tests some university or other did on a study group (always suspect, especially when they don't say much about number of subjects, age range, cultural range, ect.--but there you go), of men claiming to be bi-sexual. They showed them porn films (Gay and Straight) and measured their responses (I assume this mean heartbeat, erections, etc.). They all responded to one type of porn or the other, not both--3/4th responding to the gay porno, suggesting that a lot of gay men claim to be bi because they're in denial or giving into social pressure, rather than really being bi.

The article added that 40% of men claiming to be "bi" are usually gay (which I guess makes the other 60% are straight and/or really Bi?).

I don't think individual sexuality is ever that simple...but assuming that the general population is on a bell curve (as it is with most things), then I suppose this stuff might have some validity.

I'm just wondering if they did the same test with women and if they got different or similar results.....

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

just for the record, one's 'sexuality' is not exhaustively, or even mainly, defined by the gender(s) you like to fuck with.



PS. I think perhaps CharleyH has made the same point above, in her inimitable way.

That's how I define it. I am curious as to how you would define sexual preference.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Dating a bisexual, I believe this is likely true and that there might be some tiny truth to the whole Kinsey spectrum of sexuality (that there can be 90% straight, 10% gay people and whatnot).

And many are right to point out that one's sexuality only refers to one's lust and that love and the heart, she makes her own rules.

And speaking personally, knowing one's own sexuality and being honest to it is a big deal that everyone should strive to find as early as they possibly can even though it could mean some very complicated discussions with friends and family in the future.

My own sexuality? Very complicated to explain, relatively long in knowledge, relatively recent in full self acceptance. Yes...I'm commiesexual. I'm only sexually attracted to communists.

I agree with the first part. However, I am the opposite. Something about somebody wanting to put me in a gulag is a turn-off.

 

[MissBri]

 

[Pure]

Sev,

the question didn't say, 'what sex/gender do you prefer to fuck with', it asked about 'Finding your sexuality.'

starting about 150 years ago, the 'homosexual' thing got medicalized and psychiatrized and made into the main dimension of sexuality. for Socrates and his buddy boys, the question did not arise: In OUR terms, he was sorta straight, but fucked boys, though maybe not up the ass.

why not look at other issues such as 1) is the sex you like a bit dirty?
2)Do you like it a bit degrading? 3) Do you like it rough? 4) Do you like it lovey-dovey-equal, Romeo and Juliet style. 5) Do you like it with any live body with the right appurtenances, or with an OAO? 6) Do you relate your 'drive' to your creativity (as in the case of Picasso)?


Originally Posted by Pure
//just for the record, one's 'sexuality' is not exhaustively, or even mainly, defined by the gender(s) you like to fuck with.



PS. I think perhaps CharleyH has made the same point above, in her inimitable way. //



Sev replied That's how I define it. I am curious as to how you would define sexual preference.

 

[SummerMorning]

There we have to disagree. I find it masochistic to delay gratification, but that's just me. To me, abstinence is a form of masochism sublimated into a "virtue". Then again, I may have simply read too much of the Satanic Bible. What LaVey says there makes sense to me, although I reject Satanism because it is still too dualistic for my taste.

LaVey's Satanic Bible? Wasn't too impressed ... I think it's not masochistic to delay gratification. It's a question of priorities - do you want something *then* or something *now*? If a person's infantile, they're unable to sacrifice the *now* for the *then*.

But then, that's just me and Lacan and Freud.

 

[SummerMorning]

Holy crap! Did you have your dictionary next to your desk as you wrote that? ROFL

Actually, it made a lot of sense to me.

Dictionary? Hell, no! Just one dick, no dictionary.

 

[SummerMorning]

the question didn't say, 'what sex/gender do you prefer to fuck with', it asked about 'Finding your sexuality.'

starting about 150 years ago, the 'homosexual' thing got medicalized and psychiatrized and made into the main dimension of sexuality. for Socrates and his buddy boys, the question did not arise: In OUR terms, he was sorta straight, but fucked boys, though maybe not up the ass.

why not look at other issues such as 1) is the sex you like a bit dirty?
2)Do you like it a bit degrading? 3) Do you like it rough? 4) Do you like it lovey-dovey-equal, Romeo and Juliet style. 5) Do you like it with any live body with the right appurtenances, or with an OAO? 6) Do you relate your 'drive' to your creativity (as in the case of Picasso)?
[/i]

Oh, that.

I'm polymorphously perverse.

And I like furries, too.

But that's all just post festum rationalisation of things that simply always "made sense" to me. For me, two of the biggest defining features of my sexuality were probably connected with two interesting events that ocurred when I was going through adolescence: culture shock and sexual frustration. This may have led me to have a very "perverse" and alternate lookout on the whole matter.

 

[Liar]

And many are right to point out that one's sexuality only refers to one's lust and that love and the heart, she makes her own rules.

So, in all fairness, we have sexuality, and amorousity, that are different beasts. But are they connected, or do they merely correlate because society thinks of them as one and the same?

 

[impressive]

So, in all fairness, we have sexuality, and amorousity, that are different beasts. But are they connected, or do they merely correlate because society thinks of them as one and the same?

I believe they are connected -- at least in one direction (love -> desire). However, I also believe that "society" has placed WAY too much emphasis on the exclusivity of that connection.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

the question didn't say, 'what sex/gender do you prefer to fuck with', it asked about 'Finding your sexuality.'

starting about 150 years ago, the 'homosexual' thing got medicalized and psychiatrized and made into the main dimension of sexuality. for Socrates and his buddy boys, the question did not arise: In OUR terms, he was sorta straight, but fucked boys, though maybe not up the ass.

why not look at other issues such as 1) is the sex you like a bit dirty?
2)Do you like it a bit degrading? 3) Do you like it rough? 4) Do you like it lovey-dovey-equal, Romeo and Juliet style. 5) Do you like it with any live body with the right appurtenances, or with an OAO? 6) Do you relate your 'drive' to your creativity (as in the case of Picasso)?


Originally Posted by Pure
//just for the record, one's 'sexuality' is not exhaustively, or even mainly, defined by the gender(s) you like to fuck with.



PS. I think perhaps CharleyH has made the same point above, in her inimitable way. //



Sev replied That's how I define it. I am curious as to how you would define sexual preference.

I got that impression because of the poll. Maybe it's just me.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

LaVey's Satanic Bible? Wasn't too impressed ... I think it's not masochistic to delay gratification. It's a question of priorities - do you want something *then* or something *now*? If a person's infantile, they're unable to sacrifice the *now* for the *then*.

But then, that's just me and Lacan and Freud.

Depends on WHY you are delaying it, IMO. Delaying for practical reasons of necessity, or for no reason at all? In the latter case, it sounds masochistic. I don't see it as infantile to refuse to delay when the delay is needless. It might be infantile, quite possibly, if the delay is obviously necessary (for instance, if you are on a ship, you are straight, and the brass have strict rules about fraternization with your comrades).

 

[SummerMorning]

Depends on WHY you are delaying it, IMO. Delaying for practical reasons of necessity, or for no reason at all? In the latter case, it sounds masochistic. I don't see it as infantile to refuse to delay when the delay is needless. It might be infantile, quite possibly, if the delay is obviously necessary (for instance, if you are on a ship, you are straight, and the brass have strict rules about fraternization with your comrades).

Well, if there is no reason to delay - obviously it could be masochistic to delay (it might also just be very anal). What I'm saying is that an infantile person is not able to choose between some pleasure now and greater pleasure later. Furthermore, an infantile person who can not get all his or her pleasure immediately suffers emotional distress, while a mature person can handle not getting the cake right away.

This of course has little to do with this thread, but still.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Well, if there is no reason to delay - obviously it could be masochistic to delay (it might also just be very anal). What I'm saying is that an infantile person is not able to choose between some pleasure now and greater pleasure later. Furthermore, an infantile person who can not get all his or her pleasure immediately suffers emotional distress, while a mature person can handle not getting the cake right away.

This of course has little to do with this thread, but still.

What's not clear to me is how this might be tied to bisexuality. I can see your earlier post (about immediate gratification) as applying to promiscuity and/or to casual or immediate sexual gratification, but that doesn't seem to me to be innately tied to the ability to feel desire for either gender. Surely there are heterosexual individuals who engage in infantile/narcissistic sex and there are bisexuals who don't. I like your point, really, on the infantile/narcissistic bent of the culture, but I can't see that it ties up all that neatly with sexual orientation.

Shanglan

 

[BlackShanglan]

Just read an article in the newspaper where it mentioned some tests some university or other did on a study group (always suspect, especially when they don't say much about number of subjects, age range, cultural range, ect.--but there you go), of men claiming to be bi-sexual. They showed them porn films (Gay and Straight) and measured their responses (I assume this mean heartbeat, erections, etc.). They all responded to one type of porn or the other, not both--3/4th responding to the gay porno, suggesting that a lot of gay men claim to be bi because they're in denial or giving into social pressure, rather than really being bi.

The article added that 40% of men claiming to be "bi" are usually gay (which I guess makes the other 60% are straight and/or really Bi?).

I don't think individual sexuality is ever that simple...but assuming that the general population is on a bell curve (as it is with most things), then I suppose this stuff might have some validity.

I'm just wondering if they did the same test with women and if they got different or similar results.....

I found that study very interesting as well. It's certainly food for thought. What makes it especially interesting to me is that I've seen previous studies indicating that men experience higher levels of excitement when exposed to visual pornography than women do. I seem to remember that this was being measured by pupil dilation. It leads (I think) to an interesting question: Was the gay/bi/straight study actually measuring sexual orientation, or was it possibly only measuring one kind of sexual interest (visual) in isolation? Is it possible that part of being bisexual might be experiencing a mixture of sexual stimuli or triggers? Might excitement in response to visual stimulus alone not give us the full picture?

Shanglan

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Again, I wouldn't presume that casual sex is infantile, either. Depends on the person. If you are in a presumably exclusive marriage, and you sleep with a crack whore because your wife is healing from childbirth, well, THAT would be a prime example of infantilism. A bunch of swingers just having fun on their spare time would not. There is a difference.