12 Sexual Types

[clicker]

WHAT

I'm sorry. I can't take this anymore. We've passed the point of any of this making any sense.

Look, I'm very very open to whatever people want to call themselves. But if some guy, with a dick and balls, who was born with a dick and balls, is very masculine looking, dresses in "men's" clothes, and has a wife- and I call him a straight guy and he goes "HEY HEY HEY- I'M A LESBIAN"...seriously.

I think all of this shit proves that labels are fucking stupid. They're a shortcut. A stepping stone at best.

If I say I'm mostly straight, it doesn't mean I'm not bisexual. It just means I'm letting you know that most of the time I'm attracted to women and sometimes I like men too. A shortcut. And I think some people define their entire lives by shortcuts. Which is sad.

you said it eaxctly,Wel478.Tthis is pc out talk of control! I appreciate attempts attempts at refining our understanding of human sexuality, but more often than not I find that labels become quite useful and we come 180 degrees back to the beginning. I find most of it semantics, tomato or tomatoe.

 

[cornholio]

[..] labels are fucking stupid. They're a shortcut. A stepping stone at best.

I agree

But if some guy, with a dick and balls, who was born with a dick and balls, is very masculine looking, dresses in "men's" clothes, and has a wife- and I call him a straight guy and he goes "HEY HEY HEY- I'M A LESBIAN"...seriously.

Of course we can'T really imagine such a situation, but there might be peolpe out there who feel that way. Maybe they stopped telling others however they perceive their own gender and sexuality, because everyone kept shaking their heads. so I doubt someone in that situation would say "hey hey hey i'm a lesbian". But who are we to know, that it isn't possible that one person feels that way?

I'd like to quote a friend, who's straight but had homosexual experiences, but who didn't believe that could happen up until to the day it did actually happen. "you don't understand it if you've never felt it."

Maybe it becomes more imaginable if you change the clothing, what about someone with male body parts who dresses as a woman? The person could be totally content about the dick between his legs and could also be rather masculine. No hip shaking, into sports, farts everywhere, can't multitask (add whatever you think is masculine). But still, it could be that he sees himself, or rather she sees herself as a woman. in a man's body. drinking lots of beer. In a dress. Because it's just the damn way she sees herself

I'm not saying it's common, but why is it so hard to imagine?

But I repeat myself, I agree with you on the labels. It would be nice if we didn't need to put everything in boxes. But then again, we couldn't even talk with each other if we didn't label everything with words. We would need a world where people didn't really see gender. Or where there's no need to talk about sexuality. I'm not sure either, whether that would be a nice world to live in.

 

[Flexuality]

I thought it might be helpful to post this chart from my blog. It illustrates what I believe to be the distribution of sexual attraction within a population. If our culture were neutral in regards to sexual orientation, people's attractions would fall along a bell curve. But stigma towards bisexuality and homosexuality and encouragment of heterosexuality and marriage push the curve far toward the straight end of the spectrum. But that still leave many people in the middle (the heteroflexible, bi-curious, supersexual, ambisexual, etc), who may think of themselves as straight but have feelings for both genders.

Does that make sense? I haven't seen anyone speak about sexuality in quite this way, but I think it is a correct model. See my blog post on flexuality.info for further discussion.

 

[EJMichaels]

...Does that make sense? I haven't seen anyone speak about sexuality in quite this way, but I think it is a correct model. See my blog post on flexuality.info for further discussion.

Of course it's more complicated than that, but it makes sense to me. Do you mean actual social pairings, or just sexual behavior? Monogamy may be the other major "problem" factor. I mean, if we had more open relationships in which some sex outside marriage (or whatever) was acceptable, then we'd still have plenty of babies being made to continue society, but with fewer hangups about sexuality. I'm in a very committed relationship in which we aren't threatened by one partner being sexual with someone else - of either sex - occasionally.

"74 - Queer"

 

[qget12]

I tried to express my views regarding something similar to this in my own thread but nobody seemed to really understand what I was truly trying to say.

Your bell curve is, what I feel is, a default position that would come about if society never placed, or never does place, a bias towards one sex, or a situation linked with one sex, like marriage. But because of the negative connotations surrounding having a same sex attraction the other curve is what occurs in reality. I tried to explain this further with regard to the LBGT community, and how it doesn't allow for all the different idiosyncrasies of sexual attraction to be expressed. You either fit one of the letters, L, G, B, or T or you're "straight". As well as this, there are all the cultural connotations and stereotypes regarding being a "member" of the LGBT community that, for the sheer amount of people the connotations and stereotypes are meant to represent, do a very poor job of doing so.

 

[innocentbychoice]

Alright. So you'Re saying the criterion for labels like homosexuality exclusively is the gender identity, not your body parts.

No. I said that transsexuality and transgenderism got nothing to do with sexual orientation, being a transgendered person means that you think and feel like the opposite sex. You feel like a woman even though you were born a man or viceversa.

You can feel as a heterosexual woman, or a homosexual woman (which means you would change your body to look like a woman but you would keep dating women).

A person in a male body who is attracted to men is not homosexual if she identifies as a woman. I can agree, although the use of "sexual" in terms like "homosexual" appears misleading then, because in the end it's not the sex but the gender that counts, following your interpretation.

What I mean is...Gender identification and sexual orientation are 2 different and separate things. So, with both of them, you can have the next combinations:

A) A biological man, who identifies as a man (gender identification) and likes women (sexual orientation) = A heterosexual man.

b) A biological man, who identifies as a man (gender identification) and likes men (sexual orientation) = A gay man.

c) A biological man, who identifies as a woman (gender identification) and likes men (sexual orientation)= A transgendered straight woman.

d) A biological man, who identifies as a woman (gender identification) and likes women (sexual orientation)= A transgendered lesbian.

e) A biological woman, who identifies as a woman (gender identification) and likes men (sexual orientation) = A straight woman.

f) A biological woman, who identifies as a woman (gender identification) and likes women (sexual orientation) = A homosexual woman.

g) A biological woman, who identifies as a man (gender identification) and likes women (sexual orientation) = A transgendered straight man.

h) A biological woman, who identifies as a man (gender identification) and likes men (sexual orientation) = A transgendered gay man.

Hope that wasn't too confused.

 

[Flexuality]

EJM: the graph lumps together sexual desire, behavior, and affection; you could call it sexual tastes, I guess. What I see in the answers to my Flexuality Test is that sexual desire and romantic attraction are not necessarily in sync. Many want to have sex with both but fall in love with only one or the other. A few fall in love with both but have a sexual preference for one gender or the other.

qget: I read your thread and understand what you're saying. But my own impression is that the LGBT should in no way be blamed, and I think they will continue to be at the forefront of overturning myths and stereotypes. Where I agree with you is that bisexuality, broadly defined, is not a minority phenomenon. It applies to a majority of people, most of whom would never identify as LGBT. I created my blog and Flex Test to call attention to that fact and make people aware of their sexual flexibility, which our culture suppresses.

 

[exterm]

In general, I support a movement away from dualistic understandings of sexuality, but I’m not sure that I can support your particular project because, though you’re positing sexuality as a continuum, you’re nonetheless separating that continuum into discrete categories. It comes down to basic sexuality studies; Foucault points out quite well that the same cultures that marginalize homosexuality, in effect, created the homosexual, even observing that prior to an 1869 (that’s contentious) article the word “homosexual” didn’t exist. The moment a culture “names” a group of individuals, then, it can begin to oppress, repress, and suppress those individuals; the act of naming becomes a sort of containment. I would note that where the category “sodomite” named individuals (straight or gay) who performed certain nonnormative acts (not just what we understand as “sodomy”) the category “homosexual” named individuals who had certain sexual object choices. Yet, I digress. I don’t mean, here, to give a lecture on queer theory, which I’m sure I misunderstand, but it seems dangerous, following Foucault and others, to even attempt to categorize individuals based on their sexual desires and practices. That said, I still appreciate the project and what it’s trying to do.

 

[jmadaf]

I am married, fuck my wife, and suck cock whenever I get the opportunity. Living straight, but secretly gay.

 

[Flexuality]

exterm, I completely agree with you.

Think of my 12 types as a detergent: they break the existing categories down into smaller groups that eventually will be dissolved altogether. In the meantime, they create a little more room for self-understanding and freedom.

 

[Flexuality]

Here's another graph from my blog that might be useful when thinking about the range of sexualities. The original blog post has further discussion.

 

[clicker]

I remember I took this a while back on your site, mostly for the fun of it. I got heteroflexible or "mostly straight" and I suppose that aptly describes me at the moment.

Then why does your avatar orientation say GAY?!

 

[Flexuality]

I posted another batch of profiles last night. Sorry for the wait; I lost internet for a few days. Right now I'm analyzing the results of the first 400 who've taken the test and will post some of the overall findings soon.

 

[Flexuality]

Thanks to all of you who took the Flexuality Test. I've modified the scoring protocol, based on the results I got for the first 500. I've reposted all of the scores, if you want to re-check. I also posted a graph of flexuality scores, so you can see how you compare (the average is around 50).

You may also be interested in my main blogs: Flexuality and Flexuality X.

 

[EJMichaels]

What about those who asked for emailed results?

 

[Flexuality]

Yes, I'll send out the revised scores by e-mail as well, but it may take a few days because there were a few hundred who sent me their e-mail addresses.

 

[Willie Boy]

1. Heteroflexible: You are open to fooling around with someone of the same sex, even though you generally consider yourself straight. Also known as bi-curious, questioning, experimenting, or mostly straight.

This is not really a type of sexuality, but a phase everyone goes through. We question what society tells us we should be, we question what friends tell us we are/should be, we even question what we think we feel. In questioning we find out who we are. For some of us this is a quick occurrence, for others it can take years. And there are many who revisit this phase as they travel through life.

2. Supersexual: You have a strong drive and are interested in finding new ways to express yourself sexually. You probably prefer the opposite sex, but gender is less important than opportunity.

3. Ambisexual: You are attracted to men and women in more or less the same way and to the same degree. Also known as classic bisexual, AC-DC, 50-50, or a Kinsey 3.

4. Polyamorous: You have the capacity to have romantic relationships with both men and women. Your tastes and experience may be fluid and not determined by the gender of your partner.

5. Gay or Lesbian: You have a strong preference for members of the same sex. You have probably had experiences with the opposite sex as well, but your same-sex desires are strong enough that you would not want to live as straight. Also known as homosexual.

6. Queer: You are frustrated with the divide between gay and straight, and suspicious of divisions between male and female. You may consider yourself post-gay and beyond labels. You may also call yourself homoflexible, to reflect your gay preferences and openness to other relationships.

7. Metamorphic: You feel different from the gender of your birth, either in your life as a whole or only in the realm of sex. There are several different metamorphic types; also known as androgynous, cross-dresser, transgendered, transvestite, transvestic fetish, or transsexual.

8. Transitioning: Your sense of sexual orientation is changing or evolving. Commonly known as coming out of the closet, in the case of same-sex interests; you may transition in other directions.

9. Restrained: Your desires are at odds with your view of yourself and your relationship to your family and society. Also known as closet case or on the down-low.

10. Versatile: You are willing and able to have sex with others for whom you do not feel much desire or love, usually because you derive some other benefit from the relationship. Also known as gay-for-pay or sugarbaby.

11. Macho: Only applies to men. You are willing to have sex with other men, so long as you are the active or insertive partner. Your partner may be gay, but you consider yourself straight or a "top."

This is more of a sub-type than an actual type. You can be a macho gay, a macho bi, or even a macho straight.

12. Straight: You lack sexual and romantic feelings for members of the same sex, and any same-sex experiences have confirmed your lack of interest. Also known as heterosexual

This was a nice attempt, but you fall into the same trap as all other attempts to define individual sexuality. Your definitions and spread are two dimensional, you have a flat playing field.

Sexuality is really as individual as the individual concerned. It is three dimensional. It is not set in stone, as we grow and experience new things we change. This tends to affect our sexuality, not always in visible ways.

 

[Flexuality]

Willie Boy, I agree with many of your points, and I elaborate on them on my blog, and we've also had some discussion of them above in this thread.

I agree that macho, versatile, restrained, transitioning, and metamorphic are features that can define several other orientations. This is reflected in the results that come out of the flexuality test.

Even the core types overlap with each other, and one can move from one to the other over time. I do not believe (and more importantly, the research does not support) the idea that we are all trapped in a binary world in which one is born gay or straight and ones feelings never change.

Generally I'm opposed to labeling, but a more accurate and diverse set of labels can be useful to those who are trying to figure out what is going on, because we grow up being told something different.

 

[slnattak]

This is good.

personally, I'm 'osexual' with the person i'm attracted to in the moment. so i can be jessicaosexual or johnosexual or justionosexual (whats with me and people with names who begin with J?)

 

[Flexuality]

I've posted more complete descriptions of almost all of the dozen sexual types on my blog. Each one has its own post: just scroll down to the one you are interested in.

I also just posted the results of two new national studies about the incidence of bisexual orientation and behavior in the general public, as well the recent UK study.