why "poly women" are bisexual ???

[TiMCbyats]

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

Secondly, I blame the Bible. The small beleaguered tribe of Israelites needed to breed, and breed fast and large. Squished between the enormous powerful empires of Egypt and Babylon and Persia, all recommendations were to get the sperm into the multiple wives and make warriors quick quick quick! Men couldnt do this if they were busy with each other. Now, in Sparta, it was a different story, hehe.

I blame people, not religion, gurus, politicians, etc. I can see two possibilities:
1. They have herd instinct and believe in hierarchy.
2. They are just 'evil'.

Originally Posted by Tonberry

Well, since it came up in the conversation... not sure how it's relevant, but I find B2B a turn-on, and G2G a turn off.... as well as G2B, for the most part. I usually don't enjoy any porn that features females, which I always thought made sense since I'm not interested in females... but I seem to be the minority here.

It's less of an issue in written porn, though, as long as it doesn't spend time describing the female (I skip these parts anyways).

I usually prefer B alone, though. B2B a close second.

I personally don't see why it would be wrong that people be accepting of other people's tastes. I certainly wouldn't stop two women from having sex or a relationship, and the fact that I wouldn't enjoy watching it just means that I don't watch it. As far as I know, most of them wouldn't want me watching them either anyways.

In your post you're focused mostly on the physicality. I wanna focus on another topic. Ok, in Canada there is possibilty to legalize homosexual relationship, but monogamous. There is no country in the Western world which allows polygamous marriages, in most countries even monogamous homosexual mariagges aren't allowed and who is responsible for this?


SchrodingersCat, in my opinion you're simply wrong.

Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat

"This conversation is over" is a judgement (that they're not worth consideration).

No, that's my freedom, their freedom also.

Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat

"Those people are disgusting" is so obviously a judgement that I shouldn't even have to explain it.

Yes, that's a judgement, but "For me, people that belong to the 'norm' are just disgusting." isn't. I have the right to be somewhat misanthropic and openly declare, that I' m disgusted by more then 95% of people.


Actally, people like me are judged, because democratic society choose for them and trying to limit possibilities on not only one field.
If x say that hates and doesn't want to talk with people that like pop music it's not judgemental, it's just right to choose, but when majority tell x that he/ she can only listen to pop music, and when he/ she wants to listen another genres of music, have to do it on another rights and preferably should hide it, that's just wrong.
I think, that you're the man, who never says "It's red, it's green and it's blue.", for you everything is somewhere between, preferably near the center.

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

Your reaction saddens me. If someone who´s male and straight [straight in its usual connotation - in discussions like this one - of heterosexual] "admits" to being male and straight, WHY should that disgust you?

You have changed meaning of my opinion.

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

I´ve looked at your profile. According to that, you´re male. No more information, so I don´t know whether you´re

a) straight, but refuse to define yourself as "male, straight" because it´s the ACT of labelling oneself that disgusts you;

b) gay and are disgusted by straights;

c) bi and are disgusted by people who limit their sexuality to one sex;

d) either gay or bi and what disgusts you is that straight males are (generally) the people who call the shots in this society. (Though that is a VERY different thing from the "norm".)

"Norm": what is normal (average or the majority, depending on one´s definition). Since there are more female [humans] on this planet than male ones, surely "female" is more the norm than "male"?

e) pansexual and what disgusts me are for example ordinariness, and that it's just lies in many cases- Almost everybody knows: http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resea...ml#bisexuality , but where are nonmonosexuals, where are men who tell that they wanna try something else? I clearly wrote "something like "male, straight"", there is long list of unpopolar indicator topics like this, but most people manifest that they're fit in, and part of that society with such pride, that usually there is no need to ask any question. This is good point to mention rules known as law. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that not only me but most of users are discriminated and who make a law in democratic countries? In my opinion not politicians, not some evil "anty" groups, but majority. They aren't somewhere, aren't strangers, they're "normal" people. They show hatred to people like me, want to limit me. I just don't wanna talk to them, feel disgust. I don't wanna affect their lifes, but they want affect mine. Who is the rude one, me or the majority? Did you see a movie 'Easy rider'?

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

Since I have no more information about you, let me make contradictory "suppositions" and see where each one leads us:

1) You´re human, male and a U.S. citizen. This puts you in THE most powerful, oppressive, destructive group of living beings on this planet. You make me puke. I refuse to continue conversing with you.

2) You´re human, male and - although not a U.S. citizen - you´re white. This puts you in a wider, less concentrated version of THE most powerful, oppressive, destructive group of living beings on this planet. You make me puke. I refuse to continue conversing with you.

3) You´re human, male and non-white. This puts you in THE most popülous group of human beings on this planet... bar the female non-whites. And males are generally more oppressive to females than vice versa. So YOU´RE the oppressive norm!!! You make me puke. I refuse to continue conversing with you.

4) You´re an incredibly intelligent non-human male animal, who´s mastered how to handle a computer AND express yourself [relatively] coherently. You non-human animals outnumber us humans by a factor of many millions. You´re the norm! You make me puke. I refuse to continue conversing with you.

5) You´re actually female and lied on your profile. You´re a LIAR!!! You make me puke. I refuse to continue conversing with you.

Human, male, white, was born and live in Europe. Say what you want, I don't care.

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

This forum, this web-site is about supporting other people who´ve made an often uncomfortable, difficult choice: to live a poly life; to include and cherish monos who are in love with polys; to offer information to "outsiders" who are curious... or nervous of "getting wet" in the poly pool. It distresses me to see blanket rejections of ANYONE because of their sex, their sexual orientation, or their sexual 3-D relationship-configurations.

This is YOUR choice and your ways of life, I made many choices like this and don't want a medal. By the way- monos are "norm". LOL Your problem is that you are focusing on one thing, when there are lots of important factors. I have "friend for life" (Something else than temporary relatioships known from "norm".) who, when we first met, has different views on at least two important for me topics, but just saw that don't belong to 'norm', so yes this is simple, bay not as simple as you think.

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight

I have a confession to make, but I first want to make clear that this confession is NOT why I replied as I have. It was NOT about defending people like myself. Exactly the opposite: it was about NOT attacking those who are different from ourselves. Having said that, here comes the confession:

I´m male [not by choice], I´m straight [not by choice], I´m white [not by choice]. OK, OK, I make you puke. I´ll just have to live with that. But I´ll tell you something, Mate: I´m one of the LEAST normal people that I know. Teenagers laugh at me on the streets, toddlers stare / gaze at me, 4-to-8-year-olds are sometimes wary to begin with then climb all over me, my friends rib me [affectionately, I HOPE!!!] Adult strangers who have never picked up a hitch-hiker in their lives tell me: "You´ve got an honest face, hop in!" and take me 100s of km on our common way... then THANK me for the experience of sharing each other´s company.

I might make some people just puke, that's the end of conversation, even if it has never started. I may be disgusting... but I am NOT "norm"!!!

You really think that I'm the attacking one, not people who wanna restrict your rights, this is so "normal".
Aren't you American?
Maybe you are unique on many fields, but the fields you named are irrelevant to me.

Originally Posted by Marcus

If not being "in to" watching a certain type of sexual interaction is wrong... sorry, that'd just a dumb thing to say. I don't interpret these posts as making that point. It's the strong visceral anti-expression wording that has rightfully caused some concern.

Probably everything is explained above.

[Natja]

Originally Posted by SchrodingersCat

What if your partner is gender fluid, so that at times you have a girlfriend, and at other times that same person is your boyfriend. Then you could say, in general, that you have a bisexual relationship with that person...

Sorry, just being an ass. Fluidity of gender and sexual orientation came up in another thread and now it's stuck in my head.

The myriad complexities which comes up in a scenario like that is too much for my brain at the moment.
I would say that most people looking for a "bisexual relationship" are not especially looking for a gender fluid individual anyway.

[BreatheDeeply]

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

In my opinion that's probably because all their lifes are conformistic. From my experience, there are some unpopular topics which I use as indicators of someone's way of thinking.

Well, most people are conformist in most ways. And everyone is a conformist at least in some ways.

Societal pressure is an incredibly powerful force. It's probably the reason why we've been so successful as species. So it's not all negative.

[BreatheDeeply]

Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe

From your post, you seem to be saying that because I have personal turn-ons/turn-offs that I am personally "not allowing" men to be bisexual? Everyone has their own turn-offs/turn-ons.

No, not saying that exactly. That would imply I'm targeting you, and that's not the case.

It's more about the summation of statements voicing distaste for homosexual sex. If you're an impressionable young person, forming their first opinions on sex, and all you see around you are negative statements about B2B sex, then it's not too hard to see that this could color your newly-forming beliefs.

And then say you come to this forum, where people are incredibly accepting of a wide range of persuasions, and everyone seems so accepting of everyone else's opinions. It's just great. But then you see people who openly voice their distaste for gay sex. One has to wonder why.

You could add that these people shouldn't be influenced by your statements, and I agree, they shouldn't. But we all know that if most people are surrounded by a certain belief, in volume, they will conform to that belief. At least for some portion of their lives.

Originally Posted by JaneQSmythe

I don't see why my personal preferences - in terms of porn or sexual activities that I am willing to participate in/witness/think or fantasize about - matters to anyone but me and the people that I am involved with (who happen to be straight guys and bi-women).

Simply put, your personal preferences don't matter to others. Until you voice them to others. Then they matter.

In no way shape or form am I saying for anyone to withhold their opinions about any subject. If I appear to be voicing an opinion that could be viewed as trying to suppress yours, that is not my intent. But, I also know you're not the masses, you know this is just my opinion.

And I'm bringing this up for the sake of awareness. And I'm doing it in this forum, where I know people will get what I'm saying.

.

[Natja]

I kind of get what Jane is saying though, personal preferences in what turns you on do not equal non acceptance. I accept that in the case of male homosexuality though, there is a wealth of what seems to be negative 'personal preference' due to wider homophobic society. Using words like 'distasteful' is needlessly negative, it is good enough to say, it does not turn you on.

Porn is, for the most part geared towards men and mostly hetero men at that, hetero men appear to prefer porn that features women, so it makes sense that gay porn would not be of interest to them. I hear some lesbians love male gay porn, it has never done anything for me.

Gay lovemaking in the context of any story can be beautiful, does it turn me on? No (but then, porn with men in it at all is a bit of a turn off for me and in that, I mean, it does not sexually stimulate me, but then neither does women using toys, spitting or men coming over women's faces, it grosses me out, but I accept other people must like it or there would not be a market for it) I don't like hetero porn either but again, straight lovemaking in the context of a story can be beautiful also.

I think it unwise to give the impression that people cannot voice that fact because they may hurt someone's feelings. Everything must be taken in its correct context.

[SchrodingersCat]

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

SchrodingersCat, in my opinion you're simply wrong.

To be pedantic, whether I'm right or simply wrong about the definition of "judgment" and whether a statement qualifies would be a matter of "fact," not "opinion." Now it's possible that in fact I'm wrong, and it's possible that in fact you're wrong. But whether I'm right or wrong is not up to your opinion.

But it does belie your thinking pattern. You seem to believe that just by preceding a statement with "In my opinion" or "for me" that you're absolving yourself of the consequences of that statement. That is not the case. It's just like when someone says "No offence, but..." and then says something offensive.

No, that's my freedom, their freedom also.

Are you saying that "having freedom" and "being judgmental" are mutually exclusive? I would argue that it is your freedom to be judgmental. And that's a freedom I'm not eager to take from you nor give up for myself, even though it results in others' ability to judge me. However, the alternative is that we be handed our judgments by some self-proclaimed authority, and I vote "no" to that.

Yes, that's a judgement, but "For me, people that belong to the 'norm' are just disgusting." isn't. I have the right to be somewhat misanthropic and openly declare, that I' m disgusted by more then 95% of people.

"people that belong to the 'norm' are just disgusting" and "I' m disgusted by more then 95% of people" are fundamentally different statements.

One is an generalized statement about those people: THEY ARE disgusting. Qualifying it with "For me" doesn't make it less of a judgment, it just specifies that the judgment belongs to you and is not the shared judgment of your social group.

The other is a personal statement of your feelings towards certain people: I FEEL disgusted.

Why are you so afraid of being judgmental? Why does it feel okay to you to exercise your right to be "somewhat misanthropic" but not your right to be judgmental? Do you believe that labelling it as non-judgmental will somehow lessen the hurt it will cause to people you accuse of being disgusting? It won't. Do you believe that we'll think less of you for being judgmental? Well, some will, but that's just because they don't realize that in so doing, they are being just as judgmental as you are. So what's the big deal?

Actally, people like me are judged, because democratic society choose for them and trying to limit possibilities on not only one field.

All people are judged. Welcome to humanity. You show me someone who has never been judged, and I'll show you someone who was raised by monkeys and whose existence is unknown to any humans. To be in human society is to judge and be judged.

What makes you so special that the judgments against you are inherently worse than those you make against others?

Democracy has nothing to do with it. You would be judged just as much under a dictatorship, a monarchy, an anarchy, or a prehistoric tribe. Democracy probably provides you the least judgmental society of all.

I think, that you're the man, who never says "It's red, it's green and it's blue.", for you everything is somewhere between, preferably near the center.

I am not a man. I don't even know what you mean by the rest of that. As a physicist, specifically in optics, all I can think of is: Red + Green + Blue = White.

[MrFarFromRight]

Nice reply, SchrodingersCat!

[MrFarFromRight]

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

You have changed meaning of my opinion.

No, I really don´t think so. I think that you just like trying to wriggle out of the consequences of what you´ve written once other people pick you up on your bigoted comments. [See latest comment by SchrodingersCat]

Let´s go back to your original comment:

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

[...] Personally, when I read something like "male, straight", I just puke, for me that's the end of conversation, even if it has never started. For me, people that belong to the 'norm' are just disgusting. [...]

"Male, straight" makes you puke. "For me, people that belong to the 'norm' are just disgusting." Those are YOUR words. I just abbreviated it to "somebody admitting to being male and straight disgusts you." The meaning is EXACTLY the same! Or isn´t puking a means of expressing disgust for you???

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

Personally, when I read something like "male, straight", I just puke, for me that's the end of conversation, even if it has never started.

(my boldfacing of your words)
So, you refuse to even converse with somebody who defines themselves as "male, straight"... and you DARE to state that you´re not judgemental. You insult people on this thread for "not understanding" you or "chang[ing] meaning of [your] opinion", when it´s my opinion that we´ve understood you very well. (Actually, I´ll amend that opinion: Since it´s obvious that English isn´t your first language, maybe you think that you´re expressing yourself clearly, but are really writing things that don´t say exactly what you mean? In this case, I encourage you to continue conversing with the rest of us, but to be less hasty in criticising us for misunderstanding opinions of yours that you´ve expressed poorly.)

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

Aren't you American?

There you go, jumping to conclusions again. If you´d bothered to click on SchrodingersCat´s name and visited her profile, you might not have written "I think, that you're the man [...]". If you´d bothered to look at the top right-hand corner of my comments, you´d have read "Location: Smack in the middle of The Spanish Revolution!" But since you don´t seem to be willing to take any interest at all in anybody who isn´t in your 5% ghetto of INTERESTING oppressed people (male and pansexual), any of the 90+% of people oppressed for different reasons just aren´t worth listening to, are we?

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

Maybe you are unique on many fields, but the fields you named are irrelevant to me.

I repeat: you´re only interested in people who are unique in exactly the same way as you are. THAT´s pathetic!!!

[nycindie]

Originally Posted by TiMCbyats

Almost everybody knows: http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resea...ml#bisexuality

I did not visit the link but I can see that it goes to the Kinsey Institute. I wonder why you assume that "almost everybody knows" Kinsey's research. Of course, I knew of him and knew he did research in sex, having occasionally come across a magazine article that referenced his work, and I loved the film with Liam Neeson, but have never been familiar with any of Kinsey's findings, and never heard of the Kinsey scale until I started visiting this forum two years ago, at age 50.

So, I pretty much went my whole life without really knowing anything about Kinsey's work. Surely, I am not alone in this regard. I'm curious - what makes you think "almost everyone knows" it?

- - - -

Originally Posted by BreatheDeeply

And I'm bringing this up for the sake of awareness. And I'm doing it in this forum, where I know people will get what I'm saying.

Sorry, but I've read and re-read your posts in this thread several times and still have no idea what it is you're saying. What, exactly, is the point you're trying to make?

[BreatheDeeply]

Originally Posted by nycindie

Sorry, but I've read and re-read your posts in this thread several times and still have no idea what it is you're saying. What, exactly, is the point you're trying to make?

My post is about how humans form judgements, and specifically how individuals inherit judgements from groups. If an idea is repeated over and over again then most people will adopt that idea even in the absence of any proof.

Examples:
Blacks should sit at the back of the bus
Women belong in the home
Men aren't very manly if they have sex with other men (this is an opinion I have seen here in this forum)

All of the above are demeaning statements to the target audience, but rarely are the people who make these statements aware of it. They have adopted a belief and can't easily change that belief even when confronted with clear evidence.

It takes time and awareness on the part of people to understand that although you may have a very firm opinion about a subject, you should also be aware that you don't live in a vacuum. Speak your mind of course, but there's no need to be descriptive and demeaning about why you don't like a particular group.

In this forum, people are fairly cognisant of not insulting others because of their beliefs or persuasion or choices. That's why I made the statement that you quoted in your post. But even more then that, I think we (in this forum) should be exceptionally good at not insulting others. Why? Because we ourselves (polyamorists) are on the butt end of bad public opinion, so we should be the last people to make any kind of negative remarks about any
group of people.

.