Polyamory.com Forum  

Go Back   Polyamory.com Forum > Polyamory > General Poly Discussions

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 12-10-2009, 09:02 PM
AutumnalTone AutumnalTone is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kansas City Metro
Posts: 2,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vampiresscammy View Post
I'll second Rarechild here and put in my two cents, that its been my experience and overall thoughts that we are all actually bisexual...
That, however, denies the experiences of those women who have never been sexually attracted to other women and men who have never been sexually attracted to other men. Most people may, indeed, be described as somewhere along the spectrum of hetero to homo. There are still people at each end of the spectrum and to describe them as belonging somewhere in the middle pretty much eliminates any notion of normal human variation and runs roughshod over their experiences.
__________________
When speaking of various forms of non-monogamy...it ain't poly if you're just fucking around.

While polyamory, open relationships, and swinging are all distinctly different approaches to non-monogamy, they are not mutually exlusive. Folks can, and some do, engage in more than one of them at a time--and it's all good.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 12-10-2009, 09:16 PM
River's Avatar
River River is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: NM, USA
Posts: 1,894
Default

Yes, and what we need is to respect and honor differences. And it's rather obvious that if there is indeed a spectrum there must be people occupying the far ends of it.
__________________
bi, partnered, available

River's Blog
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 12-10-2009, 09:45 PM
LovingRadiance's Avatar
LovingRadiance LovingRadiance is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 5,451
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhCrow View Post
That, however, denies the experiences of those women who have never been sexually attracted to other women and men who have never been sexually attracted to other men. Most people may, indeed, be described as somewhere along the spectrum of hetero to homo. There are still people at each end of the spectrum and to describe them as belonging somewhere in the middle pretty much eliminates any notion of normal human variation and runs roughshod over their experiences.
See I really believe in the spectrum, but in order for there to BE a spectrum, there must also be SOMEONE on either end.. I think.... if there wasn't-there wouldn't be an "either end".... (scratching head and wondering where II is with his logic).
__________________
"Love As Thou Wilt"
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 12-13-2009, 07:56 AM
Sweetheart's Avatar
Sweetheart Sweetheart is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in my mind
Posts: 125
Default

I am familiar with some of the studies mentioned here which indicate that most men with the strongest homophobic reactions are actually homosexual. It seems to be a defensive reaction. In fact, the researchers believed that gay men being married to straight women was a more common phenomenon than lesbians being married to straight men. The men do it to be socially acceptable, or because they just haven't realized it themselves. If you get on dating websites such as Adult Friend Finder, every couple seems to be comprised of a straight man and a bi woman. It's the same among swingers. Where are all these bi or gay men? Apparently they are married to straight women, and are keeping a low profile!

P.S.
I identify as straight, but I am not homophobic. I have been sexual with men, but only while women were also present. The women were turned on, and that got me turned on. Men by themselves just don't seem to get me going, for whatever reason. Not for lack of trying!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-13-2009, 06:07 PM
ImaginaryIllusion's Avatar
ImaginaryIllusion ImaginaryIllusion is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,943
Default

Oh, LR, Why'd you have to drag me into this??? I was having fun just watching the bi-girls go at it!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImaginaryIllusion View Post
Almost all females were physically turned on by any of the acts...regardless of their own orientation, and regardless of the subjects in the pictures. It didn't matter if the pic was MM, MF, FF, MFM...etc...didn't matter that the viewer was Hetero, Homo, Bi...they responded to them all.

The greater majority of males...were physically responsive only when at least one subject in the pic matched with their orientation. Hetero did not respond to MM, Homo did not respond to FF.
So far...the various reactions in this thread, seem to be consistent with the findings.

One of the big bones of contention with the sexuality debate seems to revolve around nature vs. nurture. Elements of personality or identity which are pre-programmed without the conscious choice of the individual, and those which are a product of conditioning from the environment around us...societal norms, family, religious dogma, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MonoVCPHG View Post
...and of course social conditioning. There were 1300 kids in my high school and only two that identified as gay males the entire time. I had very little exposure during some very influential times of my life.
I grew up in similar circumstances. My high school numbered 2600, in a conservative city of a conservative province. I don't recall ever hearing about a single publically self-identified homosexual in the school. The only time it came up was watching Degrassi. This was also before the Canadian charter added sexual orientation to the list of things that the government wasn't allowed to discriminate against.

Quote:
Originally Posted by crisare View Post
If one can be "wired" mono, I suspect one can be "wired" hetero. Of course I guess that's another discussion. And all of that is completely separate from finding bi- "disgusting" - which I don't.
It may be a different discussion, but this is one of the linchpins that the GLBT lobby used for years to gain their piece of equality. The argument that being Gay, was not a choice. It was no different than being born male, female, black or white. Thus if discrimination was not permitted based on things which the individual had no control over, such as their physical gender, or ethnicity, then there should likewise be no discrimination based on orientation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quath View Post
From studies, I lean more to the idea that men and women fall somewhere on the bisexual scale. I think a big difference is that society is more encouraging of women being with women than with men being with men. So they don't feel as much pressure to act more heterosexual than men do. Plus it seems to be a fad for two women to make out to turn guys on. (While I would like to believe they want each other, I think many cases are just to tease guys.)

Maybe when society becomes less male homophobic, we will see more bisexual men pubically. I have a gut feeling that basic bisexuality is probably equal in both genders.
The societal norms...vary from country to country...but certainly while men might greet each other with kisses on the cheek in some countries, this sort of PDA would be far less acceptable in most areas of the US, Canada,...and I would expect the UK. It would be far more acceptable for women to do so. Similarly, women could go to a club and dance with a guy, group, or with each other. Guys generally danced with a woman or mixed group, maybe on their own...or more likely not at all.
The relaxation of these norms I think has manifested in the newish so called 'fad' of girls kissing each other at the bars to tease the guys. (This was not something I remember seeing when I first started going to bars) It makes sense...since the straight guys will still react to watching two girls kiss, and they don't have to give anything away by kissing a guy they may not know, or cause a jealousy reaction in a guy they might know. And they also may get something out of it if they're turned on by the act regardless of their own orientation.

Thus, FF PDA's had a head start anyways...and are inclined to favourable albeit subconscious reaction by both sexes in the majority of cases...with the possible exception of gay males. MM interactions however...are having a harder time...the interaction would not garner a favourable reaction in the majority of straight males...and there is still a broad power base governing what defines the mores and norms of society which is heavily influenced by a bunch of old straight guys...such is the way of patriarchy.

I'd agree with Quath that as the fears around Homosexuality subside, the public self-identification of Bi-males will increase. Although I personally doubt it will approach the same levels of female bi-sexuality. Given the apparently biological pre-disposition of females to be turned on by any sexual combination regardless of their own preference, I'd suspect there'd be a greater flexibility in their ability to move away from the extremes of the spectrum. (This is just my current suspicion...only time will tell)


Quote:
Originally Posted by SeventhCrow View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by vampiresscammy View Post
I'll second Rarechild here and put in my two cents, that its been my experience and overall thoughts that we are all actually bisexual...
That, however, denies the experiences of those women who have never been sexually attracted to other women and men who have never been sexually attracted to other men. Most people may, indeed, be described as somewhere along the spectrum of hetero to homo. There are still people at each end of the spectrum and to describe them as belonging somewhere in the middle pretty much eliminates any notion of normal human variation and runs roughshod over their experiences.
I have to agree with SC about some of this. The idea that everyone is Bi, to the exclusion of Hetero, or Homo comes close to invalidating the argument that sexuality is a factor of nature. If everyone was Bi, and could be sexually attracted to, or get involved with either sex, then the decision of which sex to be involved with becomes just another personal choice. It would simply be a matter of conditioning, and/or normalization to make sure that they chose the way society wanted to dictate. Homosexuality would become a 'fixable' problem. And the GLBT movement would be out 30 years of blood, sweat and tears for nothing.

I would not at all be surprised if this was part of the reason that bi's seem to get a lot of pushback from the G&L community...seemingly even more-so than the straight side.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LovingRadiance View Post
See I really believe in the spectrum, but in order for there to BE a spectrum, there must also be SOMEONE on either end.. I think.... if there wasn't-there wouldn't be an "either end".... (scratching head and wondering where II is with his logic).
As for the question of the spectrum...between Kinsey and anecdotes, and knowing a few myself...I'd agree there is a spectrum, a continuum between purely straight, and purely gay, and a fair amount of middle in-between.

The thing about the spectrum is that there can be end-points on the extremes. And a middle...and not all patterns of human behaviour follow a bell curve that concentrates everything in the middle.

The other thing about continuums is that while they may be analog, there is so little difference between data points that lie beside each other as to be insignificant. Thus any such curve needs usually needs to be broken down (such as Kinsey did) into discrete elements to simplify presentation and discussion of the data. So regardless of if it's a spectrum, it can be reasonably viewed that the majority of people who lie near those extremes could be discussed as 100% straight or gay....regardless if the (hypothetically empirical)number is 100%, or 99.99998273% or 98.223459%.

In this case there's probably some very heavy weighting on the end points...especially on the straight end. I'd expect it to look something akin to a half-bell curve centred on the Hetero-extreme, and sloping down to the Homo-extreme. Or maybe a learning curve. I wouldn't be surprised if the Homo-extreme ended up making it look a bit like a ski-jump ramp. I also wouldn't be surprised if there was a slightly shallower curve amongst females in comparison to the male curve, where there would be more. There's probably also different curves based on public, private, and true. I`d need to see more data.

Ok LR....now that you dragged me into this...you can let me know if any of this helped.


That's it for me today I think...some more material to chew on...and probably enough discussion stubs for new threads to keep things going a while. This topic is nothing if not complex.

Cheers.
__________________
“People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.” - Chinese Proverb

-Imaginary Illusion

How did I get here & Where am I going?
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-13-2009, 07:57 PM
Derbylicious's Avatar
Derbylicious Derbylicious is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Victoria BC
Posts: 1,603
Default

To look at the bell curve theory posted by II above, I'm wondering if there's a way to do a poll here asking where people fall on the Kinsey scale. Purely out of curiosity.

Personally I've found where I am on the scale shifts according to what I need in my life at any particular time. It's always somewhere in the middle but I don't think that I'm ever equally attracted to both genders.

-Derby
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 12-14-2009, 10:45 AM
Sweetheart's Avatar
Sweetheart Sweetheart is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: in my mind
Posts: 125
Default

Thanks, Imaginary. That was well stated.

Sure Derby, it would be interesting to see where everyone falls on the Kinsey scale.

I 'd say I'm a 0, although I could be a 1 when I get a little crazy.
My wife R considers herself a 5.
I think she's a 10!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Kinsey_Scale.jpg (12.8 KB, 6 views)

Last edited by Sweetheart; 12-15-2009 at 10:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 12-14-2009, 01:21 PM
Ceoli Ceoli is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 900
Default

The Kinsey Scale actually goes from 0 to 6. (Not sure why he chose that spectrum of numbers)

The beauty of that scale is that it's entirely self evaluative. There's no test you take to find out your score. You pick the number that feels right. I'm with Derbylicious on this one. I've found that my number can shift, though it usually isn't about what's happening in my life. I just sometimes find myself generally attracted more to one gender than the other. Other times I feel the attraction equally.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 12-14-2009, 03:05 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231
Default Clarity

Yes - I was going to mention the classic bell curve likelihood also as it's what I would expect.
But one important distinction I think that needs to be drawn here for clarity would be around a pseudo definition of bisexuality for the purposes of discussion and here's why.
I think you will find that there's a much broader swing in people if you framed the question of "attraction" vs ummmmm, "acceptability". In other words, if you were asking how many people felt an "attraction" to the same sex - let's say at a random meeting etc you would get one group. In other words - have you seen or met people of the same sex that stirred sexual desire in you to a point you would welcome a sexual exchange with them - maybe even initiate it.
I think this group would stand aside from another group that would, in a certain situation, be willing to participate sexually with a same sex partner without reservation. But they would not likely classify this as any true "attraction" - just a willingness and open mindedness that such activity could be exciting and there would be no real hesitation on their part.
That was why I tried to frame the question & definition that way originally because I feel these two spectrums exist and that the associated numbers could vary widely. You would still have the two extremes but I suspect the curve for the latter group would be much wider.

GS
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 12-14-2009, 03:15 PM
Rarechild's Avatar
Rarechild Rarechild is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: SW Michigan
Posts: 600
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImaginaryIllusion View Post
The societal norms...vary from country to country...but certainly while men might greet each other with kisses on the cheek in some countries, this sort of PDA would be far less acceptable in most areas of the US, Canada,...and I would expect the UK. It would be far more acceptable for women to do so.
To add some of the other side of the picture, in some countries that are still very patriarchal, like Iraq, the men commonly do more than greet with kisses. It is acceptable to regard sex with women as procreation, and sex with men as a good time. ( Got this from my brother-in-law who spent years there.)There's too much involved in that situation as opposed to countries with more equal rights for women to get into right now, but I think it's fascinating how the status of gender roles plays into a culture's sexual practices.

Homophobia was not a common norm until the Victorian Era. See, there's too much- I have to write papers and take the dog to the vet! But one more...

Quote:
If everyone was Bi, and could be sexually attracted to, or get involved with either sex, then the decision of which sex to be involved with becomes just another personal choice. It would simply be a matter of conditioning, and/or normalization to make sure that they chose the way society wanted to dictate. Homosexuality would become a 'fixable' problem. And the GLBT movement would be out 30 years of blood, sweat and tears for nothing.
Oh, my. I was certainly not trying to invalidate the GLBT movement entirely!

I was not saying that awareness of sexuality is not inborn or god-forbid that it's "fixable"!!! Or a problem.

Again, this is my opinion, but I think those who identify right off are ahead of the game, are sensitive to themselves, are brave and will go through hell to be themselves. Some will never present any homosexual feelings, I agree.

As we often discuss on here, love is not sex, and intimacy is not an orgasm. My thought process is that everyone has it in them to see a person outside of their gender, and outside of the circumstances they've been taught to be comfortable with. To deny the possibility that any person could not develop an intimate love relationship with someone of the same sex that could lead to the sack just seems very limiting to me.

The nature/nurture debate is resolved. It's both. It's circumstances and beliefs.

Sorry I can't write more- I have to go write more.
-R
__________________
"Rocks will open and make a way for the lover."
~Hazrat Inayat Khan


I love Catfish and Charlie.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
attractions, bi-women, biamorous, biamory, bisexual, bisexuality, heterosexuality, love, meditation, pansexual, poly vs. open, polyamorous, polyamory, polysexual, steriotypes

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:22 PM.