On Topic Discussion What do you think about bisexuals?

[Kulindahr]

What I think Roly believes (and I can sign on as well) is that 100.0% homosexuality probably neither required nor even the majority of the people who identify as gay. The large number of gay men who have had heterosexual relationships (regardless of the circumstances) is proof against the idea that every gay man on earth has zero capacity to function in one or to form a bond with a woman. And while we could easily say some of these were purely forced/fake, not all of them were. I've seen many gay men refer to good sex with a wife or girlfriend, or continuing to care very deeply about a girlfriend or wife they had earlier in life.

So a guy can still be into chicks but be gay, while if he's into dudes at all, he's not straight -- that's what Rolyo said.

That's why I don't understand why someone 90/10 or 95/5 or 85/15 would identify as bi at all. I could understand it better with people closer to the 50/50 mark. It's hard for me to comprehend the motives behind the former other than "I really have baggage about the gay label" or "I really am not comfortable sending a signal to friends and family that no, I'm really not going to end up with a woman even if you hope for it." Because I can't see someone that heavily skewed for same gender as pursuing women or randomly falling in love with them, and with the effectively homosexual bisexual people I know, they make really no effort to ever do so. It's a lot easier to find straight women than gay men, and it's a lot easier to find straight men than lesbians, so when a bisexual person leads a whole adult lifetime only becoming involved with same gender, it implies a very strongly dominant preference.

You never know who you're going to fall in love with, so denying the 30% or even 5% of yourself is a lie. If someone decides to go exclusively for guy despite that attraction to women and thus the possibility of falling in love, then he has chosen to be exclusively gay, denying part of himself. So honesty is a good motive.

 

[Rolyo85]

Then these aren't your words? Right there, you give the double standard: any desire at all to do it with a dude, and the guy isn't straight, but if he mostly wants to do it with dudes, then he's gay.

Yes, and then three times in a row I pointed out that you wouldn't have the desire if you're 1%, or 10% or whatever small portion interested. Three times. In simple English.

 

[xbuzzerx]

If someone decides to go exclusively for guy despite that attraction to women and thus the possibility of falling in love, then he has chosen to be exclusively gay, denying part of himself. So honesty is a good motive.

Or maybe that guy is just going with his strong natural leanings, like 99% of the planet does? You make it sound like any guy labelling as bi and pursuing only men is somehow artificially picking more men over women. I don't have any reason to believe they're doing anything other than what their natural leanings incline them to do.

 

[Sausy]

Why the hell are gay people even trying to define what they think bisexuals are? I wouldn't appreciate being defined by the straight community. It's complex and you guys putting your own perspectives trying to explain them are as ludicrous as a straight guy telling us all he thinks he knows about gays. No sense of the nuance or complexity. Phonies with your claims of being so enlightened and progressive. Still bigoted, no matter how you dismiss it away.

 

[xbuzzerx]

Why the hell are gay people even trying to define what they think bisexuals are? I wouldn't appreciate being defined by the straight community.

Gay people all the time define straight as "not the people on Craigs List all the time looking for sex with guys."

And they're right, even if they themselves are not straight.

 

[LuckysRevenge]

Undoubtedly -- just as the Christians who make the news with their loud mouths aren't representative of Christians, and the few right wingers we have here aren't representative of all Republicans.



Some are going to be afraid to have the discussion because they're afraid to really examine themselves. There are a lot of reasons for that, some good and some silly, but it's there.

And when gay guys run around basically calling all bi guys liars, it definitely doesn't help them be willing to discuss it.

And who are these "gay guys"
I think that's a small vocal minority

Fighting generalization with more generalization is why this is an argument. But it's being argued by people who themselves aren't doing the generalizing which is weird

 

[Kahaih]

Why the hell are gay people even trying to define what they think bisexuals are? I wouldn't appreciate being defined by the straight community. It's complex and you guys putting your own perspectives trying to explain them are as ludicrous as a straight guy telling us all he thinks he knows about gays. No sense of the nuance or complexity. Phonies with your claims of being so enlightened and progressive. Still bigoted, no matter how you dismiss it away.

Because bisexuals want gay men to hop in the sack with them and/or date them, and gay men need to know what 'the hell' they are getting into before they decide if it's worth the gamble.

Thanks for stopping by. You are excused.

 

[johaninsc]

Ooooh - lock up your wives and husbands people
Glad this place never changes

welcome back Kab

you were missed

 

[mikemizanin729]

Because bisexuals want gay men to hop in the sack with them and/or date them, and gay men need to know what 'the hell' they are getting into before they decide if it's worth the gamble.

Thanks for stopping by. You are excused.

Your one arrogant poster. I hope a straight man dicepts YOU so, then you know how it feels.Perhaps Bisexual men need to know what they're getting themselves into before they get into a bed with the likes of YOU.

Is this your revenge? Were you treated differently for being gay so you have to treat Bisexuals like shit?


I shall excuse you and wipe you from the bottom of my shoes I thought I smelled something in this thread.

 

[Sausy]

Because bisexuals want gay men to hop in the sack with them and/or date them, and gay men need to know what 'the hell' they are getting into before they decide if it's worth the gamble.

Thanks for stopping by. You are excused.

Don't fucking patronize me like that. You and those other gays who think like you expecting bisexuals to just straighten out or come join our team? Are there bisexual cads? Yes, there are as exists straight AND gay ones. We have enough shit thrown our way in terms of expectations and stereotypes, but it's fine for us to hold bisexuals to the same shit albeit on a grander scale that straights throw on us? I'm really disappointed in the OP even wading in these waters again when this subject always gets taken over by the gay "let's bash bisexuals' character" posse. I'm glad I stopped by just to say to the bisexual community at large " I support you!"

 

[mikemizanin729]

^^_ I agree and this post proves one thing. Some posters are just Biaphobic just like some people are racist. Shit exists and they show their true ugly personality by hating on Bisexual men just like Racists hate on race.

 

[Kulindahr]

Yes, and then three times in a row I pointed out that you wouldn't have the desire if you're 1%, or 10% or whatever small portion interested. Three times. In simple English.

So in your world, 1% = 0, 10% = 0, 20% = 0.

If it's zero, it's zero. If it's 10%, it's ten percent. The percentage means the desire.

So you're not using "simple English", you're just expressing a prejudice about how you think bi people should just forget that they're bi and be gay.

 

[Kulindahr]

Or maybe that guy is just going with his strong natural leanings, like 99% of the planet does? You make it sound like any guy labelling as bi and pursuing only men is somehow artificially picking more men over women. I don't have any reason to believe they're doing anything other than what their natural leanings incline them to do.

If their "natural leanings" incline them to men only, they're not bi in the first place. But if they're also attracted to women but decide to only pursue men, then they've made a conscious choice.

 

[Kulindahr]

And who are these "gay guys"
I think that's a small vocal minority

Fighting generalization with more generalization is why this is an argument. But it's being argued by people who themselves aren't doing the generalizing which is weird

Those gay gays are in this thread. One of them started it.

Others are making themselves judges of sexuality to the point of saying that someone who is attracted to women isn't really attracted to them if they prefer guys significantly. That's just pure bullshit, word games built out of prejudice.

 

[Gentleheart]

Seeing as how gay men and women often have intimate interaction with "bisexual" individuals, I don't think one can argue that we have no business discussing them. lol in fact, it's absurd. Bisexuals' actions, behaviors, proclivities and such are of great relevance to the gay community.

 

[bankside]

Seeing as how gay men and women often have intimate interaction with "bisexual" individuals, I don't think one can argue that we have no business discussing them. lol in fact, it's absurd. Bisexuals' actions, behaviors, proclivities and such are of great relevance to the gay community.

I agree with this just because we're all humans and we all have brains and we can consider ideas outside our own experience. Being told not to have an opinion because we're not bi just doesn't cut it.

But of course we also can date them so even more reason to think about it.

- - - Updated - - -

So in your world, 1% = 0, 10% = 0, 20% = 0.

If it's zero, it's zero. If it's 10%, it's ten percent. The percentage means the desire.

So you're not using "simple English", you're just expressing a prejudice about how you think bi people should just forget that they're bi and be gay.

Well said.

 

[Rolyo85]

So in your world, 1% = 0, 10% = 0, 20% = 0.

If it's zero, it's zero. If it's 10%, it's ten percent. The percentage means the desire.

So you're not using "simple English", you're just expressing a prejudice about how you think bi people should just forget that they're bi and be gay.

Ok, even slower, in even simpler English.

There are TWO things here. You think they are one thing. They are not. They are separate.


1. Attraction. It's a physical and psychological combination. You can't measure it. That's why those percentages are dumb, but I didn't start using them. If I have 1% attraction to girls, I would be unaware of it. It is too small to register, basically just some subconscious or physical footnote in a back page of the story of me. I expect the same would apply to 10% or 15%. It's like sex drive itself. If you only want sex 1% of the time, you basically will NEVER have sex, simply because it's not just about that once in a hundred moment when you do, it's also about where you will be at the time, who with, etc. To give a PERSONAL example, I would say I am 80% top and 20% bottom. Not a random percentile, I have actually thought pretty hard on that. I have explored bottoming with multiple partners, and have found it to be emotionally intense and enjoyable, but ultimately too much work for too little payoff, totally contrary to my natural leanings as well as my personality. That said, those 20% mean that once in a GREAT while I feel the urge to get fucked. Do you know how often I have so far ended up being in a situation where circumstances allowed me to act on it or even notice it before it had passed?

NONE. ZERO. All my bottoming has been a conscious decision caused by the dynamic of the sexual encounter, not out of personal desire to bottom. Now, I am gay. I have sex with dudes. Chances are, circumstances will often put me in a position where one of us will have to bottom. Yet it's never happened EXACTLY when I actually felt like bottoming. Because 80/20 doesn't mean that I bottom once every five times, it means that I PREFER TOPPING FOUR TIMES MORE THAN BOTTOMING. Bottoming is FOUR TIMES LESS LIKELY TO APPEAL TO ME IN ANY SITUATION THAN TOPPING. I could literally spend my entire life exclusively topping, and be perfectly content and never feel like I missed anything.

THIS is what those percentages mean.

What then would be the chance, if instead of the 80/20 top/bottom ratio, I was a 80/20 straight/gay dude? I would be ALL about vagina, and once in a GREAT while I might have an itch to mess around with a dude. Let's imagine for the sake of wild fantacizing that I am not a horny frat boy and don't have ready access to hot dudes in the next room. I live in a straight world because I prefer girls FOUR TIMES MORE than guys. I am FOUR TIMES MORE LIKELY to prefer a girl in ANY situation. When exactly will my random impulse to do a guy coincide with a situation where that would be even remotely possible? Why would I bother looking for it when I have FOUR TIMES BIGGER ATTRACTION to girls?

THAT is why my hypothetical 80/20 guy, while technically "bisexual" is functionally and identity-wise utterly straight, just like I always identify as a top, and not versatile. He lives a straight life in a straight environment, and that random urge is too rare and weak to actually provoke real action or soul-searching and identity-redefinition, ESPECIALLY considering the pressure for men to be straight in heteronormative culture.

You keep talking about these percentages as if they are equal parts, or just the number of your sexual encounters and attractions, divided by hundred. It isn't that at all. Hell, I could be 1% straight, or 5% straight, or 10% straight for all I know. It will never ever manifest itself, so how does it make me bi?





---------------------------

2. Desire. It isn't just a random synapses exploding in your brain randomly, out of randomness. Desire is formed by strong psychological and physical currents that you channel in conscious interest. Now in my topping/bottoming situation, 80/20 has NEVER been enough to make me actually WANT to get fucked, to find someone to do it while single. It has definitely manifested itself more during relationships, but I have the luxury of having my relationships - by virtue of the nature of homosexuality - give me ready access to satisfying that itch. And yet I still never fantasize about it, it's never part of my sexual identity, it's just a random thing I'd do once in a great while if opportunity presented itself, and not miss one bit if it never did.

The 80/20 straight dude does not have the luxury of his relationship providing him with an outlet for his unformulated itch. What's more, while bottoming and topping are natural parts of my world, same-sex intercourse is NOT part of his. He doesn't have the outlets, cultural context or sexuality-driven self-awareness that I have (since I have had to actually figure out and explore my sexuality, and he never had to). How then would he form that desire?


--------------------------


Now, you are free to make a case that he would. But I sincerely hope you understand now where I was coming from. The way I see it:

1% bi = 1% technically "bi" and = 100% functionally straight/gay as it couldn't produce a conscious strong desire.

5% bi = 5% technically "bi" and = 100% functionally straight/gay as it couldn't produce a conscious strong desire.

10% bi = 10% technically "bi" and = 100% functionally straight/gay as it couldn't produce a conscious strong desire.

Etc.

The way I see it, in order to actually produce an active desire that would drive you to actively seek encounters with the gender opposite to your default, your interest in that opposite gender would need to be if not equal, then close to that, or in dumb percentile speech - at least 35-40% and up.

-------------------------------

And another point that has been made repeatedly, and repeatedly has been ignored by you. WHY is it that only the "bi" guys on the "gay" side of the fence insist on their 1%/5%/10% attraction to women making them "bi"? Why don't the ones on the "straight" side do it?

 

[Rolyo85]

If their "natural leanings" incline them to men only, they're not bi in the first place. But if they're also attracted to women but decide to only pursue men, then they've made a conscious choice.

See, what you consistently fail to address is the reason for WHY they would make that "conscious choice". There is NO cultural factor that would make them do that. In fact, there is EVERY cultural factor to force them to go the opposite way. So doesn't that choice imply that their interest in women is perfunctory to begin with? If it's an interest that could be ignored through nothing more than a "conscious choice", it's clearly not a very strong interest. And if that is the case, and the person also only pursues men, how is he really "bsiexual" in any way that truthfully describes to the rest of the world who he is and what he does?

 

[Rolyo85]

Those gay gays are in this thread. One of them started it.

Others are making themselves judges of sexuality to the point of saying that someone who is attracted to women isn't really attracted to them if they prefer guys significantly. That's just pure bullshit, word games built out of prejudice.

I'm calling bullshit on YOU here. Putting false claims in our mouths won't make us easier to argue with, it just makes you seem more bitter. Is that what you're going for?

Nobody in this thread has said that "someone who is attracted to women isn't really attracted to them if they prefer guys significantly". That's moronic. What has been said is that said attraction to women clearly isn't strong enough to merit a "bisexual" label, which - the label - is after all meant to convey the picture of a person that has significant (whether ENTIRELY equal or not) interest in BOTH genders. Someone who likes girls somewhat but would never actually pursue one is acting like and presenting himself as gay, whether he decides to call himself bisexual, pansexual or Martian.

 

[xbuzzerx]

If their "natural leanings" incline them to men only, they're not bi in the first place.

Kuli, just pointing out, a good like... 5 pages of this thread is people freaking out because Rolyo and I implied what you just said. And in fact... you were one of the people seemingly pretty huffed at us for saying so, unless I really misunderstood you.