FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Bisexual awareness week
Bisexual awareness week
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
 | |||
 | |||
I thought I wasn't bisexual because I am on the cock is more often attractive than cunt end of the bi-sexuality scale buuuuut that is still bi. So well done me for finally understanding that at age 42.
Also I am bi sexual but that doesn't mean I want everyone.
 | |||
| |||
| |||
"I am not bisexual I just really like watching porn of cunt owners playing with themselves and of all genders having sex with each other. Oh wait... sorry flash back to 6 months ago... Oh so it turns out that yes I am bi. Thanks for helping me see the light as well as a few dark holes.
I thought I wasn't bisexual because I am on the cock is more often attractive than cunt end of the bi-sexuality scale buuuuut that is still bi. So well done me for finally understanding that at age 42.
Also I am bi sexual but that doesn't mean I want everyone.
"Dark holes  | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " I see you 
Finally someone saying I'm not greedy for wanting it all and wanting it right now. Please and thank you  | |||
"My main thing. Just because I'm bisexual it doesn't mean I want to have sex with every woman in front of me. My sexuality isn't a live porn show, designed to tittilate and tease before devouring a cock between us. " This!!!! And I don’t want to “turn” your wife - because she “might like it”  | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
LvM | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " bloody love this post | |||
"Bi isn’t 50/50 or even stable. Sometimes I’m all about the ladies. Sometimes I’m all about the men. " Exactly this! And just because I’m bi doesn’t mean I fancy ALL women and ALL men! | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2? | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2? "For exactly that reason. People falsely use etymology in regards to the base of the word | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2? "From my perspective bisexual means being attracted to both male and females - that includes if how they identify is fluid/different from birth | |||
 | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " . I had no idea of this, thanks for the thread. I think bisexuality can be a phase just for some people I think (ie it can come for a period then literally go, and I do know some people too) - it actually all happens in sexuality as we're starting to accept - but I'm not really quibbling. I had to speak to the police a couple of years ago and needed to tell them my sexuality.. I said bisexual, and to help them out I defined it as "heterosexual and homosexual". She copied that verbatim (ie "which I define as "..."). A little bit like Meghan Sussex calling herself either white or black at different times, I think it's perfectly fair for bi people to use both gay and straight (so to speak). If you are in a monogamous straight relationship (as I tend to be when I'm in relationships) then why call myself anything other than heterosexual? So it might be a 'myth' that people have to call themselves bisexual all the time I would say. pt | |||
| |||
| |||
"Am I safe to pop my head in being pan? "No you risk being panned! I think bisexual might not last forever as a term to be honest. It's never particularly settled. I sometimes call it the last taboo - but maybe that is more the idea that sexuality for a lot of people is more than a 'bi' thing in various senses of the word! pt | |||
"Am I safe to pop my head in being pan? "You can be wok u like haha | |||
"Am I safe to pop my head in being pan?
No you risk being panned!
I think bisexual might not last forever as a term to be honest. It's never particularly settled. I sometimes call it the last taboo - but maybe that is more the idea that sexuality for a lot of people is more than a 'bi' thing in various senses of the word!
pt"I like that one | |||
"Am I safe to pop my head in being pan?
You can be wok u like haha "I’m only a skillet | |||
"Our sexuality isn’t based around which gender our partner might be and it’s not evidence based. I’m still bi whoever I date and whoever I have or haven’t fucked" This for me, I may prefer to date men but I also love sex with women too, I'm still Bi Tinder | |||
"Am I safe to pop my head in being pan?
You can be wok u like haha
I’m only a skillet "Im well griddled x | |||
| |||
"We get caught up with labels. It has been argued that the term bisexual necessarily assumes 2 genders. Hence the accusation that bisexual is phobic to non binary folk. This is a case where it is more important to examine the intent behind the use of a word, rather than nit picking. . Bisexual, pansexual... in practice the effect is much the same. " I would assume bisexual means attracted to 2 genders, male and female. And not attracted the non binary etc. It's not phobic to not be attracted to someone. | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2?
For exactly that reason.
People falsely use etymology in regards to the base of the word "Not sure what you mean, sorry. The meaning has changed? Bi is 2. Pansexual covers all. Although not literally all, same as bisexual people aren't literally attracted to all men and all women. | |||
| |||
"My main thing. Just because I'm bisexual it doesn't mean I want to have sex with every woman in front of me. My sexuality isn't a live porn show, designed to tittilate and tease before devouring a cock between us. This!!!! And I don’t want to “turn” your wife - because she “might like it” "I do like that fantasy tho, don’t knock it lol. Jx | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2?
For exactly that reason.
People falsely use etymology in regards to the base of the word
Not sure what you mean, sorry.
The meaning has changed?
Bi is 2. Pansexual covers all. Although not literally all, same as bisexual people aren't literally attracted to all men and all women. "The base of a word doesn’t necessarily lead to the meaning of a word. Television is made up of Greek and Latin words which mean ‘see,see’, phobic means to be afraid but it doesn’t directly mean that. Just because Bi means two, it doesn’t mean that bisexual means two genders | |||
| |||
"Here’s me thinking out loud. I put myself as bi as I have had sexual activity with men, granted only oral and wanking. I find some men attractive however the range of men I find attractive is a lot narrower than it is with women. I do find a big difference though in the messages I receive from bi men (this includes the fab straight) to those I receive from women and straight men. I find that bi men messaging me seem to be a tad more direct shall we say. Anyway there’s my musings. " Experiencing attraction differently for different genders is completely normal. I experience it differently for different genders and that’s one of the reasons that I identify as Bi instead of Pan. | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. | |||
"Here’s me thinking out loud. I put myself as bi as I have had sexual activity with men, granted only oral and wanking. I find some men attractive however the range of men I find attractive is a lot narrower than it is with women. I do find a big difference though in the messages I receive from bi men (this includes the fab straight) to those I receive from women and straight men. I find that bi men messaging me seem to be a tad more direct shall we say. Anyway there’s my musings. Experiencing attraction differently for different genders is completely normal. I experience it differently for different genders and that’s one of the reasons that I identify as Bi instead of Pan. " I think this is a really great point OP and exactly why I identify the other way round | |||
| |||
"Here’s me thinking out loud. I put myself as bi as I have had sexual activity with men, granted only oral and wanking. I find some men attractive however the range of men I find attractive is a lot narrower than it is with women. I do find a big difference though in the messages I receive from bi men (this includes the fab straight) to those I receive from women and straight men. I find that bi men messaging me seem to be a tad more direct shall we say. Anyway there’s my musings. Experiencing attraction differently for different genders is completely normal. I experience it differently for different genders and that’s one of the reasons that I identify as Bi instead of Pan. I think this is a really great point OP and exactly why I identify the other way round "Well that educated me. Simple when you know isn't it? | |||
"Here’s me thinking out loud. I put myself as bi as I have had sexual activity with men, granted only oral and wanking. I find some men attractive however the range of men I find attractive is a lot narrower than it is with women. I do find a big difference though in the messages I receive from bi men (this includes the fab straight) to those I receive from women and straight men. I find that bi men messaging me seem to be a tad more direct shall we say. Anyway there’s my musings. Experiencing attraction differently for different genders is completely normal. I experience it differently for different genders and that’s one of the reasons that I identify as Bi instead of Pan. I think this is a really great point OP and exactly why I identify the other way round
Well that educated me. Simple when you know isn't it?"I think so too | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories." Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " I like it sort of covers it | |||
| |||
"Here’s me thinking out loud. I put myself as bi as I have had sexual activity with men, granted only oral and wanking. I find some men attractive however the range of men I find attractive is a lot narrower than it is with women. I do find a big difference though in the messages I receive from bi men (this includes the fab straight) to those I receive from women and straight men. I find that bi men messaging me seem to be a tad more direct shall we say. Anyway there’s my musings. Experiencing attraction differently for different genders is completely normal. I experience it differently for different genders and that’s one of the reasons that I identify as Bi instead of Pan. " That's another good myth that someone probably already mentioned. Bi people don't fancy *everyone*!  | |||
| |||
"I've asked chatgpt for ideas. I'm aniso-sexual where aniso comes from the Greek for unequal. Can we make this a thing? " I like that | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true " . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt " I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion" Promiscuous people isn’t a category. And “promiscuous couples” which was your initial comment definitely isn’t a category. Also being bisexual itself isn’t a risk either (though you’ve not even specified what that particular “risk” is anyway) The way that clinics will calculate your risk at having been exposed to certain viruses is linked to sexual activity, frequency, the position or role you play, whether you’re protected or not, medications you use etc etc. it’s scored on a points system. They don’t just say “oh you’re bi, I know you’ve only had sex once, and it was protected, but you’re the same as a promiscuous person” | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion" Do you know what I don't give crap if someone's bi sexual as long as their honest with who ever their fucking and their OK with other that that no body elses business . | |||
| |||
"Haha being happily married is a myth lol x " It's sad you feel that way... happiness is possible in marriage | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion Promiscuous people isn’t a category. And “promiscuous couples” which was your initial comment definitely isn’t a category. Also being bisexual itself isn’t a risk either (though you’ve not even specified what that particular “risk” is anyway) The way that clinics will calculate your risk at having been exposed to certain viruses is linked to sexual activity, frequency, the position or role you play, whether you’re protected or not, medications you use etc etc. it’s scored on a points system. They don’t just say “oh you’re bi, I know you’ve only had sex once, and it was protected, but you’re the same as a promiscuous person” " Actually, yes they do | |||
| |||
" Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2? "Labels are always tricky. I know a lot of people who consider the "2 genders" part of Bi as- people of the same gender, and people of a different gender, and that's how I feel too. Pan doesn't feel right to me personally because it sounds almost gender blind, which I am not. However, there are so many different definitions out there that I'm not surprised it means different things to different people. I'd say my attraction is equal opportunity, I fancy some people, and not others, regardless of their gender identity. I'm sure some people would say that's more Pansexual, but I use Bi personally. It's probably a bit of a fu@k you to the Bi-erasure I faced as a teen tbh, but this post is long enough already, so lets not go there... MrsGiggler x | |||
| |||
" Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2?
Labels are always tricky.
I know a lot of people who consider the "2 genders" part of Bi as- people of the same gender, and people of a different gender, and that's how I feel too.
Pan doesn't feel right to me personally because it sounds almost gender blind, which I am not. However, there are so many different definitions out there that I'm not surprised it means different things to different people.
I'd say my attraction is equal opportunity, I fancy some people, and not others, regardless of their gender identity.
I'm sure some people would say that's more Pansexual, but I use Bi personally. It's probably a bit of a fu@k you to the Bi-erasure I faced as a teen tbh, but this post is long enough already, so lets not go there...
MrsGiggler x"it's all a bit confusing. Bisexual could be a completly valid term for a person in that they are attracted to two sexes or genders. (Confusion one is it sex or gender or how one presents?) (Confusion two, if we start with the simplified notion of cis male and female and trans male and female, what do you call a cis man who fancies both cis and trans women?) Pan feels like it's all genders. Which may not be true for a person. Imo labels have their use but their limits. Bi is a term that is approximate at best with many bi ppl not feeling it is right. But its only transphobic of you make it mean everything but hetro and homo. (Confusion number 3, arguably hetro is the tag that should meant everything, except your own. I'm not sure the hetroworld is ready for that definition!) | |||
| |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion " . Excuse me, I've been what I still call 'bisexual' (and I'm more than willing to change the term) all my life. I am 53, and as a boy I fancied other boys my own age.. as a hormonal teen I was very straight.. and as an adult I find I have relationships only with women. My bisexuality has actually vanished through some long relationships in my life, including an engagement, but perhaps never completely gone - but that is me!!!! At the moment I am completely bisexual, and enjoying it. (Bisexuality was not the reason I never married or had kids btw). You just can't come on here telling everyone 'what is what' and brook no argument. I've seen *and* read about people becoming bisexual for a compact period only in their long lives. But such sexual fluctuation a recognised thing! It doesn't matter how 'unhelpful' you think that absolute-fact is - it's a fact. I find it ironic that you talk about myth dispelling. I know about the history of 'bisexuality.' Sadly in actual modern times bisexual people may well have had the highest suicide rate for a period, as for a time (the 70s into 80's largely I would say) some burgeoning homosexual-communities actually ostracised 'bisexual' people - yes - for being 'weak' and not "picking a side". Some heavy politics outshone simply humanity, and it left a lot of people feeling like they had nowhere *at all* to go. I've related that story on the Fabs a number of times, as it goes. But have you read through your own thread? You can't really be suggesting that I (or other's talking of alternative 'labels') are 'undermining' anything? Sorry, but you have absolutely no right to contort this to fit it into some quite label-branding politics. To me, *that* is what is most damaging of all in this area, manipulating something for political reasons. No matter how righteous that may seem. When critical people spot it I'm certain they just roll their eyes. Sexuality for many people is a fluid thing - that is just a simple fact. You actually don't need the "it's not a phase" line, because people aren't children. People can be sexually constant, sexually fluid and sexually unstable-even over their entire lives. It all happens. The deeper academic recognition of this - and what is actually out there in terms of sexuality - is partly how it's all exploded in recent years. Ultimately, none of this should be such a big deal surely? One day I dearly hope it won't be. pt | |||
Sweet | |||
" Why would bisexuality be transphobic? Thought pansexuality was attraction to many genders, bi just 2?
Labels are always tricky.
I know a lot of people who consider the "2 genders" part of Bi as- people of the same gender, and people of a different gender, and that's how I feel too.
Pan doesn't feel right to me personally because it sounds almost gender blind, which I am not. However, there are so many different definitions out there that I'm not surprised it means different things to different people.
I'd say my attraction is equal opportunity, I fancy some people, and not others, regardless of their gender identity.
I'm sure some people would say that's more Pansexual, but I use Bi personally. It's probably a bit of a fu@k you to the Bi-erasure I faced as a teen tbh, but this post is long enough already, so lets not go there...
MrsGiggler x"Another tick for the bisexual team is always good.
Agree about the bi erasure. "Pick a side" is annoying. | |||
| |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. " Ok | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. " Why? | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? " For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? " and pansexual is liking all genders | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. " Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist?" I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" | |||
"If you are in a monogamous straight relationship (as I tend to be when I'm in relationships) then why call myself anything other than heterosexual?" Oh dear pt you are describing bi erasure here  I agree with you that sexuality is fluid and for many people their bisexual desires can wax and wane, though often it is situational, and society will always shepherd you towards hetero expressions and encourage you to deny your homo leanings. Fair enough if you felt your mono relationships entirely defined you, it is not the case for everyone. You mentioned the high suicide rates - having to obscure your inner workings even from your life partner & closest community because they are unacceptable and you will be faced with rejection is the kind of thing that causes mental health deterioration. | |||
| |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" " This is very much what we are talking about. It’s ok for them to be moulded by heterosexual culture, but anything other is influencing their development? Why is heterosexual ok but bisexual isn’t? | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" This is very much what we are talking about. It’s ok for them to be moulded by heterosexual culture, but anything other is influencing their development? Why is heterosexual ok but bisexual isn’t? " Heterosexuality brought them into the world, it continues the species. Why would it not be a given that that's what children would grow up around. It's no wonder "they" are predicting a population crash. The correlation between the rise of these group identities and the rise in kids being anything other than "normal" is quite compelling. Gates and Co would be proud. | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" This is very much what we are talking about. It’s ok for them to be moulded by heterosexual culture, but anything other is influencing their development? Why is heterosexual ok but bisexual isn’t? Heterosexuality brought them into the world, it continues the species. Why would it not be a given that that's what children would grow up around. It's no wonder "they" are predicting a population crash. The correlation between the rise of these group identities and the rise in kids being anything other than "normal" is quite compelling. Gates and Co would be proud. " It’s not shameful or bad to be LGBTQ and labelling any sexual orientation as ‘normal’ is not ok. | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" This is very much what we are talking about. It’s ok for them to be moulded by heterosexual culture, but anything other is influencing their development? Why is heterosexual ok but bisexual isn’t? Heterosexuality brought them into the world, it continues the species. Why would it not be a given that that's what children would grow up around. It's no wonder "they" are predicting a population crash. The correlation between the rise of these group identities and the rise in kids being anything other than "normal" is quite compelling. Gates and Co would be proud. It’s not shameful or bad to be LGBTQ and labelling any sexual orientation as ‘normal’ is not ok. " Hense the "". It's not bad no, but group identity is. | |||
"If you are in a monogamous straight relationship (as I tend to be when I'm in relationships) then why call myself anything other than heterosexual? Oh dear pt you are describing bi erasure here I agree with you that sexuality is fluid and for many people their bisexual desires can wax and wane, though often it is situational, and society will always shepherd you towards hetero expressions and encourage you to deny your homo leanings. Fair enough if you felt your mono relationships entirely defined you, it is not the case for everyone. You mentioned the high suicide rates - having to obscure your inner workings even from your life partner & closest community because they are unacceptable and you will be faced with rejection is the kind of thing that causes mental health deterioration.
". "Oh dear"? Why did you start by saying that? Because of politics, I suggest. Why are you so conclusive about what society will "always do"? To me, because of politics. What right to you have to call my own personal decision "bi erasure"? Despite pretty much agreeing with me (or at least accepting me), that is what you ultimately concluded.. Again imo, because of politics. I am simply following myself, and being logical and most of all *real*. I'm not lying about anything. Nobody like myself is 'erasing' anything. It's all this silly 'politicising' that is messing everything up right now imo. The climate on the whole is so welcoming today, but the politics surrounding all of this is so OTT! OK, pro-diversity people are often 'battling' some very backward politics that are a lot, lot worse (or less 'progressive' if you like) - but that is no excuse to push people into corners just to supposedly 'free' other concepts. And - worse of all - it just doesn't help. People see straight through the BS and it ultimately strengthens the most entrenched adversity. The whole background or 'story' right now is essentially centred around expansion and labelling. Why not make room for it all, as we work it all out? Doesn't it seem to be what we are +doing+? 'Bisexuality' (purely as a term) looks like it may ultimately be the loser in this, but so what? You are saying "this is fair enough for you - but it's not the case for everyone". So rather than yourselves 'shepherd' people me around, why then not allow for us all? It just makes no sense at all to say I am 'erasing bisexuality' simply because when I find I am steadily heterosexual I tend to define myself as such. Ultimately it's actually *nobody's business* what I've done in the past or what I may do in the future is it? You can't force your favourite t-shirts on everyone guys, it's not how to work it all out. pt . | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. " . First (my annoying tip) if you begin "For starters" you really need at least some kind of list or people will be legitimately worried about what you are *not* saying! Your premiss though perhaps says it all - that non-hetero sex has something wrong with it, which 'vulnerable children' can be corrupted by. So two things here: the negative value, and the ability to be corrupted by it. You have made a strong statement that 'young and vulnerable minds' (you give no age, but I assume you mean pre-adolescent kids) "should have no" access to things of a sexual nature, because 'access = influence' by your own definition. The thing is they do have access. Neither you nor I can change that. As to whether they can be corrupted, there is not that much evidence that sexuality works that way (at least not on any low or subliminal level - and remember corrupting means changing or reversing). And even if it did in some cases, is it going to be enough to effect society in the way you seem to fear? If you have opinions or concern about how sexuality is taught in schools then I would just keep it at that tbh. Describing non-heterosexual sex as having a negative value (and less value) in any sense is completely needless - our population is not under threat - and it is obviously upsetting to various different people too! I think you may have actually forgotten this thread is about bisexuality too, not homosexuality. And guess what? Regarding your likely other concerns (about schools I am guessing)? Your OTT approach here won't help! pt . | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. Attitudes like this are exactly why we need bi awareness/pride etc Not sure how you thinking people being aware of different things will change their sexuality We're you suddenly gay when you learned that gay men exist? I'm talking about young impressionable minds, that are ripe for being molded/manipulated. This stuff being taught in schools is the crux of it tbh. What is the purpose of making a song and dance about it all, if not to bring more, raise more into the same group identify? I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago, but what does it matter to anyone? It doesn't. Should I go out on the street and raise awareness of it? "hey everyone, I had a cock in my mouth a few weeks ago. Come join me and celebrate" This is very much what we are talking about. It’s ok for them to be moulded by heterosexual culture, but anything other is influencing their development? Why is heterosexual ok but bisexual isn’t? Heterosexuality brought them into the world, it continues the species. Why would it not be a given that that's what children would grow up around. It's no wonder "they" are predicting a population crash. The correlation between the rise of these group identities and the rise in kids being anything other than "normal" is quite compelling. Gates and Co would be proud. " are "they" predicting a population crash. Or is it a slowing down of birth rates. And is this because we are saying as well as procreating with women, it's also okay to suck cock of that's your preference. Or because of infant mortality improves then poorer countries will have less need to have as many kids. Also hetro-sex may have brought ppl into the world, but it may not be hetrosexuality. Hey, your mum may like gals or your dad may like cock. Chances are they wouldn't tell you even if they did. I for one haven't had such a chat with my old man. | |||
"Since yesterday was bi visibility day (can you see me?) and this week is bisexual awareness week, this might be a good time to dispel a few myths around us lovely folks: We’re not greedy or more likely to cheat. It’s not a phase. Bisexuality isn’t transphobic, the definition is attraction to more than one gender. You don’t need to feel attraction equally for different genders, it’s completely valid to be hetero romantic and still be bisexual. Bisexual men aren’t higher risk, they are in the same risk category as promiscuous couples (aka swingers). Any more myths that you want to dispel? A lot of what you said here is untrue and made up, including the thing about risk categories. Nope. Do your research. Everything that I’ve written is true . Sorry you can't say "do your research" assuming that people haven't. While I agree with a number of your points, 'Bisexuality' (while it is still called that I think, per one of my posts above) *is* a phase for some people: they are not bisexual, they get into it for a period, and they never feel it again when they are fully out of it. It does happen like that for some people, and I can even find a scientific citation if you wish, as I read it in a science book.) I missed where you put 'bisexual men' in 'the same risk category of promiscuous couples'. Who has said that? If that is proper research, you need to cite it tbh. Bisexual men? Risk category? It does sound a bit made up that one. Also, Stonewall doesn't seem to be promoting this week (it's not on their homepage etc) - is it really that big? The term, though a lot in surveys etc, has never really settled with everyone. These terms are shifting while we are still working it all out. We are living in changing times for sure, which is why we see so much anxiety around us I think. It's an age of tipping points vs resistance to change and difficult concepts, and we are shifting through all the chaos. pt I’m not going to get into an argument regarding these things with you. When you get screened, the risk category that medical professionals use for bisexual men is the same as promiscuous people, including swingers. Often bisexual people are tarred as being uncertain, going through a phase or ‘needing to pick a side’, this is deeply damaging to anyone that is coming to terms with their sexuality or dealing with bi erasure. Whilst for some people it might be the case, undermining their ability to identify or understand themselves is not a helpful thing. So no, it’s never ‘just a phase’ for anyone identifying as bisexual. The rest is your opinion Promiscuous people isn’t a category. And “promiscuous couples” which was your initial comment definitely isn’t a category. Also being bisexual itself isn’t a risk either (though you’ve not even specified what that particular “risk” is anyway) The way that clinics will calculate your risk at having been exposed to certain viruses is linked to sexual activity, frequency, the position or role you play, whether you’re protected or not, medications you use etc etc. it’s scored on a points system. They don’t just say “oh you’re bi, I know you’ve only had sex once, and it was protected, but you’re the same as a promiscuous person” Actually, yes they do" No, they really don’t. | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. . First (my annoying tip) if you begin "For starters" you really need at least some kind of list or people will be legitimately worried about what you are *not* saying! Your premiss though perhaps says it all - that non-hetero sex has something wrong with it, which 'vulnerable children' can be corrupted by. So two things here: the negative value, and the ability to be corrupted by it. You have made a strong statement that 'young and vulnerable minds' (you give no age, but I assume you mean pre-adolescent kids) "should have no" access to things of a sexual nature, because 'access = influence' by your own definition. The thing is they do have access. Neither you nor I can change that. As to whether they can be corrupted, there is not that much evidence that sexuality works that way (at least not on any low or subliminal level - and remember corrupting means changing or reversing). And even if it did in some cases, is it going to be enough to effect society in the way you seem to fear? If you have opinions or concern about how sexuality is taught in schools then I would just keep it at that tbh. Describing non-heterosexual sex as having a negative value (and less value) in any sense is completely needless - our population is not under threat - and it is obviously upsetting to various different people too! I think you may have actually forgotten this thread is about bisexuality too, not homosexuality. And guess what? Regarding your likely other concerns (about schools I am guessing)? Your OTT approach here won't help! pt ." I was about to write a whole response to you and the other post after yours. The I realised I'm being strawmaned, taken out of context or having different opinions other than mine put back to me and finding I should argue them? Well no. If you want to argue someone's points, actually argue them. Don't make your own up to counter and expect the other person to go along with them. Cheeribye. | |||
"Eurgh, weeks/months dedicated to sexual persuasion is ridiculous. Like severely. Why? For starters, it's an influence on the young and vulnerable minds. When they should have no influence at all in regards to anything of a sexual nature. I could go on, but that alone should be enough for everyone. . First (my annoying tip) if you begin "For starters" you really need at least some kind of list or people will be legitimately worried about what you are *not* saying! Your premiss though perhaps says it all - that non-hetero sex has something wrong with it, which 'vulnerable children' can be corrupted by. So two things here: the negative value, and the ability to be corrupted by it. You have made a strong statement that 'young and vulnerable minds' (you give no age, but I assume you mean pre-adolescent kids) "should have no" access to things of a sexual nature, because 'access = influence' by your own definition. The thing is they do have access. Neither you nor I can change that. As to whether they can be corrupted, there is not that much evidence that sexuality works that way (at least not on any low or subliminal level - and remember corrupting means changing or reversing). And even if it did in some cases, is it going to be enough to effect society in the way you seem to fear? If you have opinions or concern about how sexuality is taught in schools then I would just keep it at that tbh. Describing non-heterosexual sex as having a negative value (and less value) in any sense is completely needless - our population is not under threat - and it is obviously upsetting to various different people too! I think you may have actually forgotten this thread is about bisexuality too, not homosexuality. And guess what? Regarding your likely other concerns (about schools I am guessing)? Your OTT approach here won't help! pt . I was about to write a whole response to you and the other post after yours. The I realised I'm being strawmaned, taken out of context or having different opinions other than mine put back to me and finding I should argue them? Well no. If you want to argue someone's points, actually argue them. Don't make your own up to counter and expect the other person to go along with them. Cheeribye. " . There is nothing 'straw man' about my response - it seems you no longer wish to address other's points. I have dealt with nothing that is out of context or unrelated, or has not be directly said or inferred by you. I even guessed right about your fears for education. What you have said was always going to be offensive to many. You did say you had a list of negatives. Perhaps I am 'out of context' with all those points you didn't feel you needed to make? If they are mainly about the 'population crash' that you suggest science is partly-predicting due to some kind of broadened sexuality - my answer is that there is no global population crash predicted (far from it), there are only a number of localised ones - many already being experienced - that have absolutely nothing to do with people's sexuality and are more to do with family planning and human geography. pt | |||
"Bi? Yeah that implies there's only two variations on gender. But it's kind of going in the right direction, and I'll take it for the sake of convenience. Some folk use pan as a description, but I'm tired of the jokes about "saucepan or frying pan?". On gender, I've been pushing "meta" as my preferred description, meaning stepping above the whole this-gender or that-gender dichotomy, going further than even a gender spectrum, reviewing the whole concept of gender as a useful classification. So maybe I should here and now invent the term metasexual (not to be confused with metrosexual). Hooray for metasexuality day/week/month/year/century! We can take off all those so-last-century labels now, and explore the full gamut of what sex can mean to the human race. This has been a public service announcement by Polly Chromatic, saving humanity one orgasm at a time... xxx" Such an interesting post. Is gender just a societal invention like race? | |||
"Bi? Yeah that implies there's only two variations on gender. But it's kind of going in the right direction, and I'll take it for the sake of convenience. Some folk use pan as a description, but I'm tired of the jokes about "saucepan or frying pan?". On gender, I've been pushing "meta" as my preferred description, meaning stepping above the whole this-gender or that-gender dichotomy, going further than even a gender spectrum, reviewing the whole concept of gender as a useful classification. So maybe I should here and now invent the term metasexual (not to be confused with metrosexual). Hooray for metasexuality day/week/month/year/century! We can take off all those so-last-century labels now, and explore the full gamut of what sex can mean to the human race. This has been a public service announcement by Polly Chromatic, saving humanity one orgasm at a time... xxx Such an interesting post. Is gender just a societal invention like race? " Meta will be panned for being too meta - there's a whole crazy rabbit hole there! Race and ethnicity have changed their meaning a little over the years and are certainly regarded as expedient social constructs now - ie not in any pejorative sense. (though not quite in biology and medicine for race as their are a small number of biological differences between different races of people, but so few they are considered insignificant in terms of meaningful difference). Sexuality isn't gender though - it's biological ultimately (not just genetic but hormonal etc - biology is the most complex science), but in socially complicated too as it goes hand in hand with culture and choice (just not remotely in a way that will effect things like population growth!) pt | |||
"Bi? Yeah that implies there's only two variations on gender. But it's kind of going in the right direction, and I'll take it for the sake of convenience. Some folk use pan as a description, but I'm tired of the jokes about "saucepan or frying pan?". On gender, I've been pushing "meta" as my preferred description, meaning stepping above the whole this-gender or that-gender dichotomy, going further than even a gender spectrum, reviewing the whole concept of gender as a useful classification. So maybe I should here and now invent the term metasexual (not to be confused with metrosexual). Hooray for metasexuality day/week/month/year/century! We can take off all those so-last-century labels now, and explore the full gamut of what sex can mean to the human race. This has been a public service announcement by Polly Chromatic, saving humanity one orgasm at a time... xxx Such an interesting post. Is gender just a societal invention like race? . Meta will be panned for being too meta I think - there's a whole crazy rabbit hole there! Race and ethnicity have changed their meaning a little over the years, and are certainly regarded as 'expedient' social constructs now - ie not in any pejorative or negative sense. (though not quite in biology and medicine regarding race, as there are a small number of biological differences between different races of people, but so few they are considered insignificant in terms of meaningful difference). Sexuality isn't gender though - it's biological ultimately (ie genetic and hormonal etc - biology is the most complex science), but its socially complicated too, as it goes hand-in-hand with culture and choice (just not remotely in a way that will effect things like population growth!) (just correcting some typos etc to make that actually readable.) pt " | |||
