What is your definition of "bisexual"?

[Safe_Bet]

Back on subject...


I found this to be very informative:

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/bisexual.pdf


What I found of particular interest was the line, "Bisexual people have the capacity to love either gender". (if you changed "either gender" to "all genders" I believe this would encompass pansexuals as well).

I found that sentence interesting because of the purposeful use of the word "capacity". my personal read on the meaning of this usage is that the author means to imply that a Bi person (or Pan with the expanded def) is anyone CAPABLE of loving a person of either/all genders, regardless of how strongly or whether they currently do or not.

I know I am not capable nor do I have the capacity to love a male. I think that "incapability" is what makes me a lesbian and what makes me perceive a woman who periodically will want a dick not to be one.

I hope that makes my PERSONAL OPINION a little bit clearer to some people (Stella )

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Back on subject...


I found this to be very informative:

http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/storage/advfy/documents/bisexual.pdf


What I found of particular interest was the line, "Bisexual people have the capacity to love either gender". (if you changed "either gender" to "all genders" I believe this would encompass pansexuals as well).

I found that sentence interesting because of the purposeful use of the word "capacity". my personal read on the meaning of this usage is that the author means to imply that a Bi person (or Pan with the expanded def) is anyone CAPABLE of loving a person of either/all genders, regardless of how strongly or whether they currently do or not.

I know I am not capable nor do I have the capacity to love a male. I think that "incapability" is what makes me a lesbian and what makes me perceive a woman who periodically will want a dick not to be one.

I hope that makes my PERSONAL OPINION a little bit clearer to some people (Stella )

*stands up, whistles, claps, gropes Safety girl*

VERY good. (And interesting read).

 

[Stella_Omega]

I like that word "capacity." Good link!

 

[PricelessT]

And many lesbian-identified women who occasionally have sex with men or feel a tiny romantic/sexual attraction to men have stated that they do not have the capacity to love a man romantically or to be sexually happy with a man. Again, if these women want to call themselves lesbian because there is close to zero chance that a man will end up between their legs, etc., then I can understand why they identify as lesbian and why "lesbian" fits them a hell of a lot better than "bisexual." And I respect that.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And many lesbian-identified women who occasionally have sex with men or feel a tiny romantic/sexual attraction to men have stated that they do not have the capacity to love a man romantically or to be sexually happy with a man. Again, if these women want to call themselves lesbian because there is close to zero chance that a man will end up between their legs, etc., then I can understand why they identify as lesbian and why "lesbian" fits them a hell of a lot better than "bisexual." And I respect that.

It works for me, it works for you. it doesn't work for Amy. Amy can communicate that it doesn't work for her, when she's confronted by a woman like this. You don't have to worry about it -- I have the responsibility of letting that woman know where I stand on the spectrum, and letting her decide if I'm worth it or if my sexual stance squicks her.

 

[PricelessT]

Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is... Well, I've already gone over my disagreement with the way she posts.

Anyway, for the lesbians who have admitted to feeling a tiny romantic/sexual attraction to men but have never had sex with men and don't intend do, I don't see at all why these women should be treated as though they are bisexual. It doesn't scream "bisexual" to me at all. A woman calls some men cute or stunningly beautiful, like Rosie O'Donnell has done even post her Tom Cruise-crush and since coming out as lesbian (because even gay women are not blind to male attractiveness), but is not interested in having sex with men...and yet we should still call such a woman bisexual? I disagree. Rosie O'Donnell has admitted to finding men attractive on more than one occasion, and no one ever says she's not a lesbian.

 

[Safe_Bet]

It works for me, it works for you. it doesn't work for Amy. Amy can communicate that it doesn't work for her, when she's confronted by a woman like this. You don't have to worry about it -- I have the responsibility of letting that woman know where I stand on the spectrum, and letting her decide if I'm worth it or if my sexual stance squicks her.

EXACTLY.

I don't care if the chick calls herself a bisexual, a pansexual, a lesbian who occasionally fucks men or a bleeding paper cut. That's up to her. If she says she a lesbian however, knowing full well how I feel (and any prospective sexual partner would know WELL in advance) and she doesn't disclose the fact then that IS the definition of nonconsensual sex because I was KNOWINGLY denied informed consent. And what's another name for nonconsensual sex? Date rape.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Okay folks, we all know better than to lie to Amy for sex, right?

now me-- you can do a little bit of lying to. A teensy bit. I'll bite.

I'm just saying.

Rosie O'Donnell has admitted to finding men attractive on more than one occasion, and no one ever says she's not a lesbian.

Well, she just looks so butch. And the men don't want her. So that's why.

 

[PricelessT]

...that IS the definition of nonconsensual sex because I was KNOWINGLY denied informed consent. And what's another name for nonconsensual sex? Date rape.

Good luck with that in court.

Well, she just looks so butch. And the men don't want her. So that's why.

LOL!!!!

 

[CandiCame]

Yes, I understand that. What I don't understand is... Well, I've already gone over my disagreement with the way she posts.

Anyway, for the lesbians who have admitted to feeling a tiny romantic/sexual attraction to men but have never had sex with men and don't intend do, I don't see at all why these women should be treated as though they are bisexual. It doesn't scream "bisexual" to me at all. A woman calls some men cute or stunningly beautiful, like Rosie O'Donnell has done even post her Tom Cruise-crush and since coming out as lesbian (because even gay women are not blind to male attractiveness), but is not interested in having sex with men...and yet we should still call such a woman bisexual? I disagree. Rosie O'Donnell has admitted to finding men attractive on more than one occasion, and no one ever says she's not a lesbian.

Yeah- I think it's totally possible to aesthetically appreciate someone without wanting to bone them- as an artist, I don't leave every live drawing class with a hard-on.

 

[PricelessT]

LOL. Yeah, I get that. That is totally possible. And, in fact, happens all the time, such as with gay men (like fashion designers or just "regular folk") commenting on what a beauty some women are (whether models or just "regular folk").

But for a few of the men O'Donnell has called attractive, she actually stated that she would bone them if she were straight. I hear such statements often from gay people, and similar statements from straight women who say that they would "go gay" for Angelina Jolie (although sex experts say women have a greater capacity for bisexuality than men anyway). All of this is about some level of sexual attraction to me, and it goes back to saying that "no one is 100% heterosexual or homosexual." I think most people do base their straightness or gayness on their sexual preference (if they strongly prefer one sex over the other), then they are most likely going to identify by the label that describes their preference for that sex -- aka straight or gay. Research shows that most people who identify as bisexual have a sexual preference for one sex over the other, and that equal attraction (50/50) is pretty rare. This is why some researchers argue over what they call "true bisexuality" and whether it exists, because they feel that it is impossible for anyone to be 100% straight or gay and that bisexuality should be defined by equal attraction or close to equal attraction. Indeed, if you look at the Kinsey scale (which we were talking about on the previous page), it does seem as though Kinsey believed this too. Going by his scale, most people fall in the middle, and only the very center of the scale -- the equal attraction -- is defined as bisexual.

 

[ViviDreamer]

Forgive me if this is ground that's already been covered, but why can't we all enjoy sexuality for its fluidity? For me it seems contextual. Like a pendulum swinging it always passes through that center point, and sometimes even comes to rest precisely there, or at either end of the arc. But those times are less interesting

I guess I resist being labeled, or don't see the point to it.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

All of this is about some level of sexual attraction to me, and it goes back to saying that "no one is 100% heterosexual or homosexual." I think most people do base their straightness or gayness on their sexual preference (if they strongly prefer one sex over the other), then they are most likely going to identify by the label that describes their preference for that sex -- aka straight or gay. .

I have been reading along. I don't bother to post here very often because it seems that my words get lost among all the other vitriolic, hate filled, asinine posts. But by the above statement? I must be hanging around the wrong crowd and have been for most of my queer life.

Almost every single one of my friends who self identify as gay or lesbian harbor NO sexual attraction for the opposite sex. They can appreciate a member of the opposite sex for their looks alone...and do. BUT harboring a sexual attraction? Not even close.

What that tells me is either a~they are all lying to me (and trust me...I have known the majority of my GLBT community in the tri-state area for damned near 25 years...) or b~research is only as effective as the people who go in for that sort of thing.

Quite frankly, the only labels that really matter are the one's we choose to employ to describe ourselves. No amount of research will ever prove to me that no purely gay/purely straight people exist. I know far too many of them (both types) to believe any sort of research concerning it. AND I would much prefer to live my life according to what I know to be true.

IE~none of the lesbians I know would EVER willingly get with me if I decided to go back to being with a male. Some of them would debate being with me if I ever decided to be with a transwoman (and the second is far more likely~ for me~ than the first.) That is their right. It is my right to be with whomever floats my boat...and their right to say..."You are cool, awesome, fucking spectacular...but I don't want a penis by proxy...so let's go get drinks and check out chicks together."

Anyway, you have brought some valuable insight to the thread...and I do appreciate the sense of what you are saying...but the above statement just...I don't know. It bugged me...because it doesn't match what I know to be true concerning my friends and myself.

 

[CandiCame]

I have been reading along. I don't bother to post here very often because it seems that my words get lost among all the other vitriolic, hate filled, asinine posts. But by the above statement? I must be hanging around the wrong crowd and have been for most of my queer life.

Almost every single one of my friends who self identify as gay or lesbian harbor NO sexual attraction for the opposite sex. They can appreciate a member of the opposite sex for their looks alone...and do. BUT harboring a sexual attraction? Not even close.

What that tells me is either a~they are all lying to me (and trust me...I have known the majority of my GLBT community in the tri-state area for damned near 25 years...) or b~research is only as effective as the people who go in for that sort of thing.

Quite frankly, the only labels that really matter are the one's we choose to employ to describe ourselves. No amount of research will ever prove to me that no purely gay/purely straight people exist. I know far too many of them (both types) to believe any sort of research concerning it. AND I would much prefer to live my life according to what I know to be true.

IE~none of the lesbians I know would EVER willingly get with me if I decided to go back to being with a male. Some of them would debate being with me if I ever decided to be with a transwoman (and the second is far more likely~ for me~ than the first.) That is their right. It is my right to be with whomever floats my boat...and their right to say..."You are cool, awesome, fucking spectacular...but I don't want a penis by proxy...so let's go get drinks and check out chicks together."

Anyway, you have brought some valuable insight to the thread...and I do appreciate the sense of what you are saying...but the above statement just...I don't know. It bugged me...because it doesn't match what I know to be true concerning my friends and myself.

Most research has found that about 10% of the population identifies as purely strait or purely gay; 10% each way, and the other 80% are bi or pan, so if you're in the US, which houses over a billion people, it's pretty likely that you can run into some "strait" or "gay" folk. They're rare, but they're out there. I've not read anything to suggest that there are no strait or gay folk out there either- and you caught me in a coming out phase, so I've done a shit-load of recent research...

I was wondering what the poster was basing this on as well, but I didn't really want to say anything, but since you brought it up, I would kinda like to read it, because I've never heard it either. It's a spectrum deal, isn't it? I mean, there's got to be at least a .05%, just by statistical chance, like any other fetish.

 

[PricelessT]

I have been reading along. I don't bother to post here very often because it seems that my words get lost among all the other vitriolic, hate filled, asinine posts.

I understand, Luna Wolf, seeing how some posters treat others at this site.

But by the above statement? I must be hanging around the wrong crowd and have been for most of my queer life.

Almost every single one of my friends who self identify as gay or lesbian harbor NO sexual attraction for the opposite sex. They can appreciate a member of the opposite sex for their looks alone...and do. BUT harboring a sexual attraction? Not even close.

What that tells me is either a~they are all lying to me (and trust me...I have known the majority of my GLBT community in the tri-state area for damned near 25 years...) or b~research is only as effective as the people who go in for that sort of thing.

No, you're not hanging around the wrong crowd. Of course not. Almost every single one of my friends who identifies as gay or lesbian harbors no sexual attraction to the opposite sex either. But we both stated "almost." And I can't help but think that most people do identify by their sexual preference. For example, I have known plenty of people (and most of these people are not my friends of course; just acquaintances or individuals I have met over the years) who either used bisexuality as a stepping stone to a gay or lesbian identity...or initially identified as bisexual but later as gay or lesbian.

Take the study by Rosario, Schrimshaw, Hunter, Braun (2006): In that study about sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) youths, its authors "found evidence of both considerable consistency and change in LGB sexual identity over time." Youths who had identified as both gay/lesbian and bisexual prior to baseline were approximately three times more likely to identify as gay/lesbian than as bisexual at subsequent assessments. Of youths who had identified only as bisexual at earlier assessments, 60–70% continued to thus identify, while approximately 30–40% assumed a gay/lesbian identity over time. Authors suggested that "although there were youths who consistently self-identified as bisexual throughout the study, for other youths, a bisexual identity served as a transitional identity to a subsequent gay/lesbian identity."

That's what I mean about the saying that "no one is 100% heterosexual or homosexual." I'm not saying I believe that. Because, really, I harbor no sexual leanings for men either. But I am open to looking at all research and studies, and have seen the inconsistencies in sexuality myself. I mean, most of my lesbian friends are not "gold star lesbians," while I am. In fact, it is reported that most gay and lesbian individuals have sexually interacted with the opposite sex before coming out as gay/lesbian. I wonder did all of these people never achieve sexual pleasure from the opposite sex? Were they disgusted the whole time, every time, and are they that good of actors? I have asked more than one gay man how they did it -- faked it -- and almost all of them have said that while having sex with a woman, they were able to go "some place in their head" or to "just focus on the pleasure of the act." A few told me something to the effect of, "You can get sexual pleasure from a woman without being sexually attracted to women." These were all butch or seemingly butch gay men, though. I doubt that if they were really effeminate, they could have pulled this off. By that, I mean most really effeminate gay men I know are extremely repulsed by the idea of having sex with a vagina; some by the vagina itself.

I also think of people who go half of their lives enjoying having sex with the opposite sex, but identify as gay or lesbian at the midpoint...saying they had no idea they were gay or lesbian before then. I can never understand how someone realizes that late in life that they are gay or lesbian. I've known since age 5 that I was/am a lesbian (though I didn't know the name of it until maybe a couple years after that).

Quite frankly, the only labels that really matter are the one's we choose to employ to describe ourselves.

Thank you. I've been saying that, too.

No amount of research will ever prove to me that no purely gay/purely straight people exist. I know far too many of them (both types) to believe any sort of research concerning it. AND I would much prefer to live my life according to what I know to be true.

I never said that research shows that there are no purely gay/purely straight people; only that some researchers believe this due to the research they have done over the years.

Anyway, you have brought some valuable insight to the thread...and I do appreciate the sense of what you are saying...but the above statement just...I don't know. It bugged me...because it doesn't match what I know to be true concerning my friends and myself.

Thank you. I appreciate that, and what you have stated as well. I definitely understand. As I stated, men don't do it for me AT ALL. But I just usually don't get offended by what researchers say, and I often try to look into it and think of it from their points of view.

 

[PricelessT]

Most research has found that about 10% of the population identifies as purely strait or purely gay; 10% each way, and the other 80% are bi or pan, so if you're in the US, which houses over a billion people, it's pretty likely that you can run into some "strait" or "gay" folk.

Bi or pan? Most people identify as heterosexual, as far as I've researched.

As for this...

I was wondering what the poster was basing this on as well, but I didn't really want to say anything, but since you brought it up, I would kinda like to read it, because I've never heard it either. It's a spectrum deal, isn't it? I mean, there's got to be at least a .05%, just by statistical chance, like any other fetish.

...I just explained above. But you can obviously see that, LOL.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Oh, ok. I get it. Thank you. I was reading our discourse to my girl...she was nodding and saying..."uh-huh, uh- huh"...*grins*. (Since I judge lesbian reactions by the woman I am with, her agreement to certain statements on both sides, argues the validity of both our beliefs...as it should.)

I did know about the study concerning queer youth who end up self identifying as gay/lesbian after many years of bisexuality. I myself probably followed the very same template. (Seeing as I am a Daddi in the RW with three children made the old fashioned way.) I self identify as pansexual or just plain queer with a strong preference for women...and I haven't touched a man in YEARS. Even so, I can't judge the way a gold start lesbian thinks...so I ask. She's my gold star.

Anyway, thanks for the conversation and for expanding your explanation about that particular statement. I appreciate it.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Most research has found that about 10% of the population identifies as purely strait or purely gay; 10% each way, and the other 80% are bi or pan, so if you're in the US, which houses over a billion people, it's pretty likely that you can run into some "strait" or "gay" folk. They're rare, but they're out there. I've not read anything to suggest that there are no strait or gay folk out there either- and you caught me in a coming out phase, so I've done a shit-load of recent research...

I was wondering what the poster was basing this on as well, but I didn't really want to say anything, but since you brought it up, I would kinda like to read it, because I've never heard it either. It's a spectrum deal, isn't it? I mean, there's got to be at least a .05%, just by statistical chance, like any other fetish.

Couple of thing, dude:

80% of the population does NOT identify as bi or pan. According to an anonymous 2008 survey of Briton by the Observer Newspaper the number of people who active self identify as bi is 2%. (which I personally think is low, but not by 78 freakin percent).

Homosexuality is NOT a fetish "like any other". In all that research you're doing I'd strongly suggest that you learn the difference between a fetish and an orientation. To say that the orientation that someone had no or little choice over is a fetish like toe sucking or wearing diapers is pretty insulting.

 

[PricelessT]

Oh, ok. I get it. Thank you. I was reading our discourse to my girl...she was nodding and saying..."uh-huh, uh- huh"...*grins*. (Since I judge lesbian reactions by the woman I am with, her agreement to certain statements on both sides, argues the validity of both our beliefs...as it should.)

I did know about the study concerning queer youth who end up self identifying as gay/lesbian after many years of bisexuality. I myself probably followed the very same template. (Seeing as I am a Daddi in the RW with three children made the old fashioned way.) I self identify as pansexual or just plain queer with a strong preference for women...and I haven't touched a man in YEARS. Even so, I can't judge the way a gold start lesbian thinks...so I ask. She's my gold star.

Anyway, thanks for the conversation and for expanding your explanation about that particular statement. I appreciate it.

Thank you, Luna Wolf. You are a pleasure to debate with. I'm glad you understand about the "initially identifying as bisexual" or "initially identifying as gay or lesbian." I'm not sure what made you change to a lesbian identity -- or if it's simply because you have a sexual preference for women -- but I certainly believe you when you say you're lesbian. Like I stated before, if a woman calls herself a lesbian because she has very little sexual attraction to men and there is close to zero chance that a man will end up between her legs, etc., then I can understand why she identifies as "lesbian" and why "lesbian" fits her a hell of a lot better than "bisexual."

EDITED TO ADD: I did notice that you I self-identify as "pansexual or just plain queer with a strong preference for women," and that you may not even identify as lesbian. Just wanted to point out that I saw that, even though it seemed to register to me late.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

Thank you, Luna Wolf. You are a pleasure to debate with. I'm glad you understand about the "initially identifying as bisexual" or "initially identifying as gay or lesbian." I'm not sure what made you change to a lesbian identity -- or if it's simply because you have a sexual preference for women -- but I certainly believe you when you say you're lesbian. Like I stated before, if a woman calls herself a lesbian because she has very little sexual attraction to men and there is close to zero chance that a man will end up between her legs, etc., then I can understand why she identifies as "lesbian" and why "lesbian" fits her a hell of a lot better than "bisexual."

EDITED TO ADD: I did notice that you I self-identify as "pansexual or just plain queer with a strong preference for women," and that you may not even identify as lesbian. Just wanted to point out that I saw that, even though it seemed to register to me late.

*grins* I was just getting ready to high light that. In my case the Pansexual tag is better since I have dated transwomen without the bottom surgery (as a Top). The extra bit doesn't change them. In my sight, they are still women. And the preference is still *Woman Only*...I just don't think that a woman going through transition is anything less than a woman.

 

[PricelessT]

...I just don't negate the idea of a woman going through transition as being less than a woman.

You mean "not going through it"? Either way, I get that too. Some transgender people don't have reassignment surgery and don't feel that they need to in order to identify as the gender they see themselves as. And that's fine. It's not always about looking completely like the gender you identify as. It's more about people acknowledging you as that gender and respecting your gender-identity.

EDITED TO ADD: I see you corrected that line I just quoted, LOL.

 

[Luna_Wolf72]

You mean "not going through it"? Either way, I get that too. Some transgender people don't have reassignment surgery and don't feel that they need to in order to identify as the gender they see themselves as. And that's fine. It's not always about looking completely like the gender you identify as. It's more about people acknowledging you as that gender and respecting your gender-identity.

EDITED TO ADD: I see you corrected that line I just quoted, LOL.

*glares* YOU stop that!!!!

*grins*

Thanks. You get it. Most don't or claim they don't or even DON'T want to admit that they do.

How friggin odd.

 

[PricelessT]

*glares* YOU stop that!!!!

*grins*

LOL!!!! I'll try.

Thanks. You get it. Most don't or claim they don't or even DON'T want to admit that they do.

How friggin odd.

Well, transgender is a topic a lot of people don't understand (including LGB people, as you know), and I'm not saying I understand everything about it, but I grasp some aspects about it and try to grasp the others.