March 21, 2014

"Well, bisexual people are kind of like that dog... They’re misunderstood. They’re ignored. They’re mocked."

"Even within the gay community, I can’t tell you how many people have told me, ‘Oh, I wouldn’t date a bisexual.’ Or, ‘Bisexuals aren’t real.’ There’s this idea, especially among gay men, that guys who say they’re bisexual are lying, on their way to being gay, or just kind of unserious and unfocused."

Said a man who identifies as a bisexual. He also identifies as a lawyer, and he once represented a lady whose gay neighbors were — as the NYT article "The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists" puts it — "trying to have her dog put down." The man, Brad S. Kane, said he took the side of the dog — not the anti-dog gay guys — because the dog was "the underdog." "The dog needed help, needed a voice."

Nothing I've quoted above says "science" to me. I think there's a social quest to affirm the existence of bisexuality. People choose (or happen) to think of themselves that way and feel that it's mean not to accept them at their word. But that can be a prompt for scientific research. Somehow, I don't believe people really want a scientific answer to the question... unless it's the answer they want.

The lack of scientific orientation is apparent in the article title, which, you'll note, is not The Scientific Inquiry Into Whether Bisexuality Exists.

Suddenly, I feel like paraphrasing Voltaire: If bisexuality did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it.

142 comments:

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

As I have mentioned in this space several times, I am a bisexual woman, and I am available to answer all your questions.

Ann Althouse said...

Where did you put your pants?

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

...

Bob Ellison said...

A bisexual woman sorta makes sense. "I Kissed a Girl, and I Liked It" and all that. But a bisexual man doesn't make as much sense. That guy John Stamos is certainly handsome, but I still don't want to get in bed with him.

We poor humans do have trouble understanding those not like us individuals, and we tend to disbelieve that which we cannot understand.

DKWalser said...

Your observation that many people aren't interested in a true scientific inquiry doesn't just apply to the topic of bisexuals. It applies to a lot of topics -- homosexuality, climate change, the origin of life, etc. Most of us have an "orientation" that we don't want disturbed.

Robert Cook said...

How can anyone presume to say bi-sexuality doesn't exist? If a man likes to have sex with both women and men, and if a women likes to have sex with both women and men, who is anyone else to tell them they're faking?

Bob Ellison said...

Yeah, Robert Cook, it's like that old joke about full-immersion baptism.

Bob Ellison said...

...though I would argue that sex and drugs and pop music and much else that motivates individuals, emotionally, seem like things that can be manipulated.

Bill de Blasio is married to a woman who used to be a lesbian. Ann Heche was a lesbian for a while, and then switched teams.

People claim to actually like modern jazz, and I submit that that is plain-out impossible.

The Drill SGT said...

I'm with Bob Ellison on this

Roughcoat said...

How can anyone presume to say bi-sexuality doesn't exist?

Here's how: Bi-sexuals are homosexuals who also have sex with the opposite sex. Bi-sexuality is a subset of homosexuality. If you have same-sex relations you're a homosexual, period. That's what defines homosexuality. Same-sex relations trumps everything else in the definition hierarchy.

gerry said...

People claim to actually like modern jazz, and I submit that that is plain-out impossible.

C'mon, let's get Crack out...I'll help: please remember that the "c" in rap is silent.

Scott said...

As a gay man, I probably wouldn't date a self-identified bisexual man. Socially we just wouldn't be on the same page. It seems like bisexuals are a sexual minority in search of someone to oppress them. Me, I don't have to look so hard.

John said...

Seems like this merits a "Bullshit" tag.

As Cook said, of course it exists in the sense that there are people who enjoy, or think they enjoy or claim to enjoy, sex with both genders.

Can someone be truly wired to be bisexual? Well, if someone can be wired to be homosexual (as claimed) or heterosexual (as with most of us) why shouldn't some people be in the middle, going both ways?

John Henry

Todd said...

I think there's a social quest to affirm the existence of bisexuality. People choose (or happen) to think of themselves that way and feel that it's mean not to accept them at their word.

If the above is "correct", is it not also correct to say:

I think there's a social quest to affirm the existence of homosexuality. People choose (or happen) to think of themselves that way and feel that it's mean not to accept them at their word.

I am not current on the subject so I am asking, is their a scientific bases for homosexuality? It is more than "that is how I feel"? Is there something physical within the human body that can be measured that says "yes, this person is gay"? That is not to say that there are not chemical reasons for feelings. I think this is part of the nature/nurture debate.

If gay is "real", why wouldn't bisexual be "real"?

Kevin said...

Once again the thing that confuses the debate is that men and women are different. The difference is due to the fact that women's sexual experience has essentially consisted of 10's of thousands of years of rape and other types of coercion, so evolution favored the sexually adaptable.

There are no or almost no bisexual men. Men who claim to be bisexual are really gay, and the vast majority of men are straight.

The vast majority of women are bisexual. A tiny percentage are purely gay and a tiny percentage are purely straight.

Both the left and the right have a vested interest in not seeing the differences between the sexes, so they stick their fingers in their ears and go la la la la, ignoring the obvious.

William said...

Some people are attracted to the other side of the envelope. If bisexuality becomes more forbidden, expect more people to become bisexuals. Then crusades for greater acceptance of bisexuals.

Bob Ellison said...

gerry, I'm was with you on rap, but I've encountered some rap and hip-hop that's actually frightfully good. Neneh Cherry, Lil' Wayne, Emenimeminemineminem. One of my sons has been getting into Brazilian rap lately, and he has a poster on his wall translating the lyrics into English.

John said...

Bob Ellison said:

Bill de Blasio is married to a woman who used to be a lesbian. Ann Heche was a lesbian for a while, and then switched teams.

But how is that even possible?

We all know that homosexuals are "born that way".

It's science!!! (tm)


How is it possible for someone to choose whether to be same sex or opposite and switch back and forth.

Perhaps the science on gay genes is not as settled as some would like to have us think?

(If it were, we could simply identify all gay fetuses and abort them. No more gays, no more problems. Stalinesque, but it would work)

John Henry

Diamondhead said...

Two other interesting quotes in the article - "People would say, 'You're gay - why aren't you helping the gay couple?'" and " Because I always side with the underdog." This is how the left thinks about things. You must always side with your identity group (if you're non-white, non-straight, non-male). The party with the least power is always in the right. Sometimes these rules are in conflict. The guy didn't even bother to mention the merits of the case. They may not have been pertinent to his argument. But wouldn't the best response be: "I chose to help the woman with the dog because she was in the right."?

Robert Cook said...

"People claim to actually like modern jazz, and I submit that that is plain-out impossible."

I went through a period of about 12 years or so where the only music I wanted to listen to was "modern jazz," by which I mean not some form of bop, but, for want of a better term, "free" jazz...amelodic, atonal, noisy, abrasive, chaotic. Living in NYC, I was also able to go to places where I could enjoy live performances of it.

I truly did love it for those dozen years. Finally, I realized I had heard just about every sort of variation of "free" music that could be heard, and I started craving melody again and have moved away from the jazz.

However, when I do hear it, I still do find it compelling. I just don't want it to be the whole of my musical diet anymore. (Also, the free jazz was sort of my gateway to more melodic forms of jazz, music which I had always considered tepid and uninteresting previously.)

Scott said...

Reading this article, it's queer to see how The New York Times once again lunges toward liberal self-parody; while The Onion is finding humor harder and harder to achieve.

Todd said...

Diamondhead said...
But wouldn't the best response be: "I chose to help the woman with the dog because she was in the right."?
3/21/14, 9:46 AM


For some that does not matter. They are in it for the challenge. It is a game. Right or wrong doesn't factor into it.

Scott said...

Hey John Henry, are you the owner of the Boston Red Sox?

Robert Cook said...

"Bi-sexuals are homosexuals who also have sex with the opposite sex. Bi-sexuality is a subset of homosexuality. If you have same-sex relations you're a homosexual, period. That's what defines homosexuality. Same-sex relations trumps everything else in the definition hierarchy."

Roughcoat, just because you assert it so, uh, assertively, doesn't make it so.

People are turned on by what turns them on. No attempts to categorize or partition sexual desires into separate little not-to-be-intermingled categories can redefine that reality out of existence.

Bob Ellison said...

Robert Cook, thanks for your comment. Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I have been playing music for several decades, and I've never understood the desire for amelodic "bop".

We learned how to play in the scale of the chord of the moment, and when to throw an accidental, and how to make that seem cool or clever, and those skills got destroyed, starting in the 1950s.

But you say you really did enjoy it, and still do to some extent. I think maybe my musical senses inhibit me; maybe I can't get outside the box.

Well, I still like pretty women and pretty melodies.

Scott said...

Straight men are so weird. They long to poke their wives/girlfriends up the poop chute, but claim to not desire the same of a male of similar age. What's with that? A sphincter is a sphincter is a sphincter...

Hagar said...

Nature's way of setting sexual orientation in mammals is such a Rube Goldberg operation that just about anything is possible, and it is a marvel that most of the time it goes well enough that the species survive.

SteveR said...

On the topic of sex, I thought we'd gone past using scientific proof as a basis for anything.

Scott said...

Everything's
concave or 'vex
and as such
has to do with sex.

--Piet Hein

Bob Ellison said...

Sex in Brighton

YoungHegelian said...

@RC,

I went through a period of about 12 years or so where the only music I wanted to listen to was "modern jazz," by which I mean not some form of bop, but, for want of a better term, "free" jazz...amelodic, atonal, noisy, abrasive, chaotic.

I did much the same thing, except with 20th C Classical, which shares many of the same qualities as "modern jazz". I never stopped listening to other classical, but I was listening to Xenakis in high school, and it took me many years later to really get into Haydn.

And, back on topic, +1 on your 9:25 comment. It is definitely strange what sexual self-revelations get accepted as presumed genuine and what gets disputed ("oh, you can't really be like that").

Enough people of both genders claim to be bisexual that, unless some rigorous scientific investigations show otherwise, I think we should just take them at their word. Notice how little reference there is in the article to any sort of rigorous scientific studies. By my count, there's one.

Roughcoat said...

Roughcoat, just because you assert it so, uh, assertively, doesn't make it so.

You are what you do. If you do homosexual sex you're a homosexual. Homosexuality is as homosexuality does.

I don't care one way or the other. Not passing judgment. You wanna be a homosexual, be a homosexual. Okay with me. But don't don't deny your a homosexual if you do homosexual things.

Todd said...

You are what you do. If you do homosexual sex you're a homosexual. Homosexuality is as homosexuality does.

Sounds like the old joke about the French painter. A French painter is in a bar downing shots. The bartender asks him what is wrong. The painter says, "For 15 years I break my back painting but does anyone say 'Look there goes that painter'?, No, but you give just one blowjob...".

Sorun said...

"..or just kind of unserious and unfocused.

I myself am a serious and focused heterosexual. There's no fucking around when it comes to my sexuality.

madAsHell said...

They long to poke their wives/girlfriends up the poop chute

ahhh.....no.

The pictures at the adult book store do not represent a statistical sample of what happens in the bedroom.

Tank said...

Bob Ellison said...

***

People claim to actually like modern jazz, and I submit that that is plain-out impossible.

Weather Report?

Bob Ellison said...

Tank, when I was a kid, Weather Report was considered "fusion". It wasn't any form of "modern jazz".

We need a concise, agreed-upon term for this stuff. 97% of scientists agree that "modern jazz" is the music where you don't give a crap where the beat or the melody is, and the listeners have never even so much as blown a harmonica, but they claim to love it because it's "hep".

tim maguire said...

Not only does bi-sexuality exist, it is the norm. Pure heterosexuality is likely no more common than pure homosexuality. Look at people's sexual history and this conclusion becomes inescapable. The problem with studies of bi-sexuality is that it relies on self-identification in a society where people are pressured to pick a side.

Women are free to be gay in college without having their straight identity threatened. It is the opposite with men, who have to be fairly far over on the gay side to even consider facing their homosexual urges. Which is why most self-identified bisexual men are more or less gay. The actually bisexual ones mostly identify as straight.

Skeptical Voter said...

I don't know or much care. But if a small child can go into a candy store, and want every kind of candy there is, why can't an adult of consenting age want every kind of sex that's available. It may not be my bon bon--or your bon bon, but if the two (or three) don't frighten the horses in the road, so what?

I'm a straight white male 70 years of age, and I just don't care to peer into other people's bed rooms.

Sam L. said...

That's why there are 53 genders to pick from on Facebook.

Robert Cook said...

"You are what you do. If you do homosexual sex you're a homosexual. Homosexuality is as homosexuality does."

Labels are just labels, after the fact descriptions. To call someone "homosexual" is to label them as just liking members of their own gender, even if that is only part of their sexual behavior. To have sex with both genders does not match the label. Which is real and which is merely the inadequate or inapt description?

To refer to Robert Anton Wilson, reality is not binary: not "yes/no," "black/white," "up/down," "good/bad," "straight/gay." To assume so is to trap oneself in a particular reality tunnel that does not reflect the multifarious reality of existence.

To follow your own statement: You are what you do. If you like to have sex with your own gender only, you can be considered homosexual; if you like to have sex with the opposite gender only, you can be considered heterosexual; if you like to have sex with both genders, you can be considered to be...what is it?...bisexual!

Bob Ellison said...

tim maquire, I think you're wrong. The gay brigade has been riding so strong for the last twenty years or so that we've lost sight of reality.

Most men are heterosexual. They just are. They crave women.

Most women, I don't know. Their sexuality might be more fungible.

In any case, Nate Silver might like to see your figures. You say "Look at people's sexual history and this conclusion becomes inescapable."

What?

You are stating an opinion based on personal belief. If I'm wrong, give me some data, and please don't just refer me to the Gay Studies section of my now-defunct local bookstore.

Titus said...

I am not bisexual=just wanted to clarify.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Roughcoat said...

You are what you do. If you do homosexual sex you're a homosexual. Homosexuality is as homosexuality does.

So if you do homosexual things, you are a homosexual.
If you do heterosexual things, you are a heterosexual.

If you do both homosexual and heterosexual things, are you a homosexual and a heterosexual? Might it not be useful for us to come up with a word for this category of people?

Robert Cook said...

"...don't don't deny your a homosexual if you do homosexual things."

Claiming to be bisexual is not a denial of one's homosexuality, (except for those for whom it is); it is a denial that one's sexuality is limited just to what the label describes.

Tank said...

@Bob

Fusion. Yeah. Now I'll be humming that song all day. Not a bad thing.

I saw them at Lincoln Center back in the day. They were outstanding in concert.

David said...

Ann Althouse said...
Where did you put your pants?


Do you really want to know?

Fred Drinkwater said...

You folks are all missing the nut sentence:
"He also identifies as a lawyer."
Consider the implications of this statement by the NYT. E.g. a long time ago I dropped out of the Berkeley physics program because I decided I was not a good enough mathematician to get a physics PhD. If I knew then what I know now, I would have simply "identified" as a PhD. Or perhaps Althouse will be out of a job, since her students can "identify" as lawyers, and of course the state's Bar association will have no standing to deny them.
Man, the possibilities are endless.

Titus said...

I was never even bi-curious.

Fred Drinkwater said...

Robert Cook says "Labels are just labels."
Yes. It's a serious error to operate as if the existence of certain words constrains reality.

Clayton Hennesey said...

If something I think might serve me in ways I've not yet been served doesn't yet exist, it will become necessary for me to invent it.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

There is certainly opportunistic substitution of male for female partners in all-male environments (e.g., boys' boarding schools, sailing vessels, prisons), so I dispute the commenters here who conclude that male bisexuality doesn't exist, period.

That said, female sexuality is a hell of a lot more fluid. The number of lesbians I know with children from their previous straight marriages alone ...

jr565 said...

Does bisexualism exist? The better question is does transgenderism exist?
Don't see why, it gays accept transgenders that they'd have a problem with bisexuals.

The whole concept of transgenderism, as defined is not scientific and is in fact quite ludicrous.
There is gender dysphiria where you think your body is wrong and you are actually a different sex. That's a legitimate psychological issue. But transgenderism where people define themselves as men women, or pa sexual and who can be male or female from day to day is simply silly. I'm a pretty flower, look at how unique I am!
How does a man know what a woman is internally, and so how can you know you're a man woman? If you feel like you're a woman today and a man tomorrow and you fluctuate, what does that even mean. What is the definition of man or woman you are operating under?
like, if you're a woman today, what does that mean?

Transgenders really are a silly bunch. Can you be a man woman if you want to play on a woman's sports team, or if you want to use a woman's bathroom? society can't accomodate your gender confusion, nor should it have to.
It really gets quite silly. People can say they're a man woman and their woman's side is a lesbian, so they like women. That's their gender. A man woman. No, they are a man.

jr565 said...

Facebook recently came up with extra genders for people to identify as. How ridiculous. There are only two genders. Saying you're a man woman is not a new gender. You're a man. Gayness is not a gender, but a sexual preference. As is bisexuality.

Robert Cook said...

"Yes. It's a serious error to operate as if the existence of certain words constrains reality."

Words do constrain reality, insofar as they can only describe an aspect of reality. Put another way, words can only describe a partial reality...and to this extent, they distort or misrepresent reality.

This is why there is technical jargon specific to particular fields of endeavor--the law, physics, philosophy, etc. Shared jargon is an attempt to particularize meaning as exactly as may be possible so those within the field may more readily understand one another and with as little misunderstanding as can be achieved. The proliferation of jargon terms is a result of the near (or complete) impossibility of particularizing language to exactly describe reality or convey meaning. (See how, in the field of law, seemingly plain statements can be interpreted and made to mean the opposite of what they appear to mean or to have been intended to mean.)

PB Reader said...

I think homosexuals don't like bisexuals because it reinforces the concept of sexuality as a choice. They all insist they were born the way they were, even though no one has proven any genetic or chemical link to homosexuality.

Lucien said...

So as soon as a bisexual woman, who clearly misplaced her pants, posted, Ann taunted her by asking where her pants were.

This was clearly a micro-aggression, if not online bullying.

Fortunately, the response was elliptical.

Bisexuality as behavior plainly exists. Some apparently doubt that the people exhibiting that behavior are sincere in their attraction to members of at least one gender -- maybe they're just really, REALLY polite.

I suspect the problem is that it is an article of faith for some that sexuality is 100% genetically determined, yet bisexuality cannot be, or otherwise threatens that sacred cow.

Why not just tolerate the idea that when we see an evident spectrum of sexual behavior, it might just be based on an underlying spectrum of disposition to such behavior?

jr565 said...

Once you get into instances of people who identify as tru gender you start realizing the ridiculousness of the gender game that is being played.
And, frankly, it's at odds with liberal values. Because feminism would say that girls don't have to conform to social stereotypes. They don't have to, for example wear pink. The easy bake oven doesn't have to be marketed to girls. Etc.
When you say you are a man woman you are saying you're a girl because you are conforming to those stereotypes that are traditionally feminine. Only, didn't you just say that those stereotypes are not real?
How the can you identify as that thing if you are railing against that thing defining your gender.
Transsexuals strike me like white guys who try to talk black. Or if you were to pretend to be gay doing the most exaggerated flamboyant gay impression you could think of.
For a gay person if imagine it might actually be offensive. You think gays are all like Jack from Will and Grace? That's your example of being feminine? It's acting and theater, not a real identity.

jr565 said...

Of course bisexuality exists.
But yeah, that does kind of undermine the idea that there is no choice in being gay. If you can choose a man or a woman then perhaps sexual preference as identity isn't as fixed as we think.

Unknown said...

Another venture into the taxonomic sub-categorization of the polymorphous perverse.

Drago said...

After reading Robert Cook's and PB Readers comments, I really don't have anything to add.

I think they've got it right.

YoungHegelian said...

I tell ya, before the 20th C, you didn't hear about all this bisexuality stuff. But then, in 1945 onwards, it just exploded. Some said it was the boys coming back home from war. But that wasn't it. It was just about men & boys parked in front of the radio & the TV who just misunderstood! **

**Link very much work safe.

Drago said...

jr565: "But yeah, that does kind of undermine the idea that there is no choice in being gay. If you can choose a man or a woman then perhaps sexual preference as identity isn't as fixed as we think."

I think we have to move away from looking at sexual preference as a "one time I did something so that defines who I am" framework to something more along the lines of sexuality as a spectrum (a range) and there are discrete (almost spelled discreet!) instances where a specific choice happened to fall more on one side of the spectrum or the other.

Cookie might find it uncomfortable but if he cared to look into it he would find that folks like Dennis Prager agree with him.

Drago said...

jr565: "That's your example of being feminine? It's acting and theater, not a real identity."

Master Thespians!

mtrobertsattorney said...

I predict that the next group to escape from the "reality tunnel" and into the bright sunlight of
"the multifarious reality of existence" will be the trisexuals.

Robert Cook said...

Drago,

I would be surprised if Dennis Prager's views agree with mine. I assume he believes that we all simply choose, willy-nilly, to be gay or straight or something-other, whereas I do not. I believe we are what we are--as a result of whatever biological or social influences (or confluence thereof)--and that there are many varieties of what people "are."

Labels cannot adequately define the varieties of people's "are"ness, and we should not/cannot assume a hierarchy of good/better/best or bad/worse/worst of the types of people that are. (We can, rightly, make such categorizations when it comes to people who harm or exploit others.)

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Concave or convex, it would ---- any sex, but oh what a terror to clean.

Drago said...

Cookie: " I assume he believes that we all simply choose, willy-nilly, to be gay or straight or something-other, whereas I do not."

Why would you assume that's what he believes?

Perhaps less assuming is in order.

Patrick O said...

No one likes wishy washy people.

William said...

It started in Japan, but, like so many Japanese kinks, it has transcended borders. I'm referring, of course, to the Japanese custom of dressing up as a stuffed animal before having sex. Some have criticized this practice as a way of infantalizing one's sexuality, but the practice is far more pernicious than that. This is the gateway perversion to bestiality. Some of these perverts won't be satisfied in simply dressing up as stuffed bunnies and will move on to the real thing. Stronger wine and madder music. It's time to nip this in the bud. I would have hoped that PETA would speak out against this practice, but it turns out that many of their members are the most flagrant practitioners of this deviation.

Patrick O said...

This comes back to a key underlying issue. Is sexuality identity?

I think the bisexuality pushes against sexuality as identity. If you are who you do, then what category are bisexuals in.

In the older approach, more Greek/Roman, who you did was just an activity, an expression. It wasn't defining or somehow bestowing of a status.

The idea of sexuality being identity or status comes out of wrongheaded moralists who sought to alienate and punish people by defining them as their supposed sins. You didn't just commit sodomy, you were a sodomist. "You did..." was replaced by "You are..."

Which, like so many things, got inverted when the Christian moralists lost the cultural dominance. Now, for the first time in history, we talk about sexuality in terms of being, not just doing.

But if you're doing, and don't fit into the "being" you strike people on both sides as suspect. You're neither "us" nor the "other."

Big Mike said...

I don't believe people really want a scientific answer to the question... unless it's the answer they want.

That certainly defines science in the era of Obama.

Jane the Actuary said...

Two words: ancient Greece.

If everyone is born either hetero- or homo-sexual, how could their culture have existed?

Robert Cook said...

"Why would you assume that's what he believes?"

Drago,

It was implicit in your suggestion that I might be unhappy to find Prager's views are in agreement with mine. This implies his views (on this subject) are distasteful or disagreeable to me...in other words, something along the lines I laid out, with the underlying notion being that, as homosexuality is freely chosen, gays cannot be rightly said ever to be a discriminated-against class, yadda yadda yadda.

If these are not his views, then what do you think I might find uncomfortable about his views possibly being in agreement with mine?

n.n said...

Of course it exists. Whether by natural predisposition or conscious decision, people like to do what feels good, irrespective of the consequences.

The normalization of homosexual behavior was the beginning, not the end of this discussion. The rejection of objective standards has created a moral hazard, including arbitrary discrimination of diverse sexual and platonic behaviors.

Furthermore, with the normalization of abortion, there are no behaviors which can be legitimately discriminated, other than through selective coercion.

The myopic vision of reactive elements, obsessed with power, money, and sex, has forced a confrontation with a reality which is incompatible with the fitness of society and humanity. I wonder how long before this latest experiment ends with a dysfunctional convergence.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Well, bisexual people are kind of like that dog...

...they'll try to hump anything they can???


( Yes, I know that I'm going to hell )

Anglelyne said...

Kevin: The vast majority of women are bisexual.

Oh bullshit.

Drago said...

cookie:"It was implicit in your suggestion that I might be unhappy to find Prager's views are in agreement with mine."

No, it wasn't implicit.

What I was suggesting is that the position you were taking is one that is not uncommon, regardless of political affiliation.

However, I do have to admit that I left too much open for interpretation.

For that unnecessary confusion, mea culpa.

n.n said...

re: vast majority of women...

Hope and Change, Anglelyne. Hope and Change. It was not a simple statement of assertion, but an invitation to cross the road.

They do not have a consensus on the social issues, but a compromise negotiated through redistributive change. However, they believe that the conspiracy of diverse interests will be sufficient to create the illusion of a universal consensus or cult.

Levi Starks said...

Bisexuality hurts the "I was born this way" brand.

Bob Ellison said...

Bisexuality doesn't hurt the "Born This Way" brand. Most of us have some "born this way" moments and thoughts. I happen to love American musical theater (though I can't abide dance scenes), and I like Barbra Streisand's voice.

That song, "Born This Way" by Lady Gaga, is pretty bad. But it expresses something that most kids should be taught: be yourself.

But do pay attention to the people around you, and don't be a jerk.

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

Experts, experts as far as the eye can see.

Todd said...

I'm no expert but I play one on TV.

Oh, and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!

Darrell said...

The vast majority of homosexuals, back in the day, used to take a wife and have kids to hide the fact that they were homosexual. "Bisexuals" carry on that tradition. Only they are even more phony than they were before.

Pippylongjohns said...

Kevin only wishes the vast majority of women were bisexual. I don't understand the appeal of female/female sex to men. Do most men get off on that? I don't believe most women would get aroused by watching two men go at it.

Darrell said...

Titus has told us about all the sex he has had with girls--they couldn't keep their hands off him--according to him. Maybe that just the same as all the other lies he has told.

Darrell said...

Women can have penetrative sex with a cucumber. And that still doesn't make them a vegesexual or tri-sexual.

n.n said...

Bob Ellison:

I wouldn't go so far as "be yourself"; but, its principle is sound: tolerance, not normalization.

We know which behaviors are dysfunctional. We know which behaviors have redeeming value to society and humanity. We classify behaviors, then either normalize, tolerate, or reject them. We do this for sexual behaviors, but very prominently to other behaviors, including platonic.

Perhaps normalization of homosexual behavior is the catalyst to force a confrontation with reality, which will dispel the false separation constructed by diverse interests for their own purposes.

n.n said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
n.n said...

Darrell:

I now pronounce you cucumber and wife.

Relationships with a vegetable are masturbatory. There is no need to invent new classifications. They are, by definition, not sexual, but asexual (not gender oriented). At least until the species barrier has been circumvented. In the meantime, it would be good practice to remove seeds from your intimate other. However, there is still a problem with delivery, which should prevent conception, unless using artificial insemination.

Gahrie said...

. I don't understand the appeal of female/female sex to men.

It's all about women having sex..who ever they are hsaving sex with.

Do most men get off on that?

Yes

Darrell said...

"Relationships with a vegetable are masturbatory."

Relationships with a member of the same sex are too.

Darrell said...

Numb Nuts

gadfly said...

It's not my world, I do not understand it, see no profit in it so I ignore it ... and that really pisses off the LGBT (and the whole string of capital letters that are now following it).

I do not have to paraphrase the circumstance of those whose sexuality is outside the norm:

"You made your bed, now lie in it!"

I read that the LGBT is willing to ignore Fred Phelps and asked its members not to protest at his funeral, but the rest of us straight folks are still on the hook because we do not give a shit.

Bob Ellison said...

We now have some years of data on same-sex marriage, and so far, the numbers seem surprising. Women who marry women seem to divorce at rates similar to those of women who marry men, and men who marry men seem to be pretty steady pair-bonders.

The old saying was "higamus hogamus". It seems to be much in dispute. The way I heard it (and the way it was like this:

Higomus, hogamus,
Woman monogamous.
Hogamus, higamus;
Man is polygamous.


This is a gender assumption widely held, yet it may not be so.

And with bisexual folks...I have no idea how to connect this to the main topic.

Anyway, Nate Silverguy may weigh in eventually. His band of merry people may tell us how people of mixed sexualities bend, and the numbers may surprise us.

Robert Cook said...

"Bisexuality hurts the 'I was born this way' brand."

How? Why?

Bisexuals were born that way, too.

Darrell said...

"Bisexuals were born that way, too."

Yeah. As homosexuals. With men, every one of them. With women, two-thirds of them--with the rest being in a same-sex relationship for reasons other than sexual attraction, according to the PET scans.

Saint Croix said...

The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists

What a bizarre way to put it! Obviously there are people who have had sex with both genders. Maybe somebody ought to introduce the NYT to porn.

David said...

Darrell said...
Titus has told us about all the sex he has had with girls--they couldn't keep their hands off him--according to him. Maybe that just the same as all the other lies he has told.


You are assuming that there is, and always has been, one Titus.

Todd said...

Saint Croix said...
The Scientific Quest to Prove Bisexuality Exists

What a bizarre way to put it! Obviously there are people who have had sex with both genders. Maybe somebody ought to introduce the NYT to porn.
3/21/14, 3:08 PM


Occasionally, at the same time...

MaxedOutMama said...

Kevin - the vast majority of women certainly aren't attracted to women sexually AT ALL. I am a woman, and I know. There's a pretty small group. There's a reason why men are the big market for woman/woman porn rather than women!

Saint Croix - I feel better, because that was my reaction. We know bisexuality exists, because there are bisexuals. Some people are sexually attracted to two different sexes.

Trying to claim that bisexuality doesn't exist is like trying to claim that homosexuals don't exist.

RecChief said...

"On their way to being gay" ????

I keep getting lectured on the fact (and I don't know why, I don't dispute it) that being gay is genetic.

What gives?

Saint Croix said...

If we're talking about the argument that sexuality is biologically determined, it seems to me that this argument is far stronger--far more scientific--in regards to bisexuality than homosexuality.

Bisexuals reproduce and pass genes to children. So if there's a genetic basis for sexual behavior, it's far more plausible that bisexuals are passing these genes.

Saint Croix said...

The New York Times summarized the study’s findings with a headline that read: “Straight, Gay or Lying? Bisexuality Revisited.”

It's kind of hilarious how rigid and square the NYT is. They sound like one of the Ayatollahs who came over for a visit. "There aren't any gay people in Iran." That's the NYT, on a quest to find this mysterious phantom, the bisexual, who may or may not exist. In New York City, no less!

Saint Croix said...

I wonder if this...

In most surveys, the institute found that women were “substantially more likely than men to identify as bisexual.”

is related at all to this...

bisexuality...remains a bewildering and potentially invented orientation

NYT subtext: women are flaky and/or bewildering. Yes, sure, they say they are bi. But it's a myth! We can't trust the women.

Deirdre Mundy said...

In college, there were a subset of girls who were 'Lesbians except for'

As in "I'm a lesbian, except for my fiance.'

"So you're bi?"

"No, I'm a lesbian"

"Do you have sex with women?"

"No, just my fiance."

"So... how are you not straight?"

"Because my fiance is the only man I want to have sex with, so I'm a lesbian."

Apparently these girls had absorbed the whole 'women should be as promiscuous as some men' meme. And since they didn't feel attracted to promiscuity, they decided they must be lesbians...

As opposed to straight and monogamous.

I wonder how many of the younger women who say that they're 'bisexual' are actually just 'not interested in sex with random frat guys.'

madAsHell said...

. I don't understand the appeal of female/female sex to men.

There are two women that I can agree with.

pst314 said...

"I think there's a social quest to affirm the existence of bisexuality"

There is also a social quest to deny the existence of bisexuality, and gay bigots are the vanguard.

pst314 said...

"Somehow, I don't believe people really want a scientific answer to the question... unless it's the answer they want."

Same goes for homosexuality. And lots of other social issues. And yet what would a "scientific" answer be? We know there are people who are bisexual in their attractions and practices. Exactly why is certainly a valid matter for scientific investigation. But most of the talk both for and against is based on personal motives.

pst314 said...

Scott "It seems like bisexuals are a sexual minority in search of someone to oppress them."

Having seen gay men and women express hostility and contempt for bisexuals, I don't think your perception is correct.

pst314 said...

Roughcoat "Bi-sexuality is a subset of homosexuality. If you have same-sex relations you're a homosexual, period. That's what defines homosexuality. Same-sex relations trumps everything else in the definition hierarchy."

Behold: The one-drop rule of sexuality.

pst314 said...

Scott "Straight men are so weird. They long to poke their wives/girlfriends up the poop chute, but claim to not desire the same of a male of similar age. What's with that? A sphincter is a sphincter is a sphincter.."

If that were true, then the family dog would be just as enticing.

Skip the trolling, Scott.

n.n said...

Too many people are missing the point. Sexual orientation and behavior is not an issue until it is. Meaning that people will do what they want to do, and other than intellectual voyeurs, this is their own business.

It does not become an issue for neighbors, community, society, and humanity, unless it is dysfunctional, and it exhibits a progressive trend (i.e. quantitative and qualitative change) in a population.

We are discussing a biological issue in the sense of evolutionary fitness. It is only a social issue for purposes of classification, then to decide what that classification entails.

Heterosexual dysfunction, including abortion (i.e. devaluation of human life), promiscuity (i.e. instability), etc., is a greater concern for society and humanity than a stable (e.g. quantitatively) minority population which exhibits homosexual, bisexual, or similar behavior. If anything, bisexual behavior is worse, because it implies promiscuity, and therefore engenders instability. Perhaps we should normalize bisexual behavior through legal bigamy or polygamy.

Normalization of homosexual behavior, and especially abortion, was the beginning, not end of this discussion. It has forced a confrontation with reality that resurrects historical debates.

Scott said...

"Skip the trolling, Scott."

Poor you.

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Drago said...

RecChief: "I keep getting lectured on the fact (and I don't know why, I don't dispute it) that being gay is genetic.

What gives?"

What gives is that the side (Ann's side) that basically took it upon themselves to lecture all the "bigots" about what was "right" and "moral" and "necessary" regarding gay marriage (redefining terms and telling everyone to stop yakking about how being gay is a "choice"(not that I agree with the "choice" argument BTW)) have now continued with their own dictating of others perception of their own sexuality.

And the irony escapes them.

Fen's Law.

Again.

n.n said...

Drago:

By rejecting objective standards for sexual behavior and human value, Ann's side has created a moral hazard, where people are now arbitrarily discriminated.

As for choice, whether homosexual behavior is intrinsic or expressive is irrelevant. Behavior, even to satisfy basic needs, is always a choice. Human beings have the capability to consciously moderate their behavior, without external stimuli or feedbacks.

The moral hazard will need to be addressed and reconciled. The progressive standard of exploiting democratic leverage, judicial and executive decrees, intimidation, and other forms of coercion are insufficient to preserve a stable state.

That said, as with other inconvenient topics, people will punt, then shunt. While this is a conservative standard which favors tolerance, the progressive standard is not nearly so equitable.

Smilin' Jack said...

If bisexuality did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it.

That is so true...especially for those cold winter nights when just one chick simply isn't enough to get the bed warm.

stlcdr said...

Once they determine that homosexuality or bisexuality - or whatever - is genetic, this problem solves itself: just abort those that will become homosexual or bisexual.

Then we can get on with our lives and not have to listen to the whiny bitchy self centered 'gay community' play the perpetual victim.

SOJO said...

AFAIK, bisexuals are scorned/bullied by gays and lesbians for the common perception that they play with people's feelings. The guys are seen as using the gay guys for the easy sex they can't get from women. The bi women are seen as flight risks. IOW, bisexuals will almost always marry straight to avail themselves of "het privilege" (aka "an easier life"), leaving the gay or lesbian ex in the dust.

Scott said...

I never heard of a self-identified bisexual who was fired from their job, beaten, jailed, or killed because of their sexual identity.

tim in vermont said...

These are the difficulties that arise when you try to define people by what they think about when they masturbate.

richard mcenroe said...

So black people can be accused of "acting white" by more "authentic" black people and now bisexuals can be accused of "acting straight" by "more authentic queers"?

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

SGT Ted said...

But a bisexual man doesn't make as much sense. That guy John Stamos is certainly handsome, but I still don't want to get in bed with him.

That is a result of your failure of imagination and not observable reality.

I have a similar take on the unattractiveness of grossly fat women, (how could you possibly want to put your dick in THAT?)but I get that there ARE chubby chasers out there that can't get enough of it.

And since when has human sexual attractions made any "sense", outside of basic biological function?

SGT Ted said...

As a gay man, I probably wouldn't date a self-identified bisexual man. Socially we just wouldn't be on the same page.

How odd.

SGT Ted said...

They long to poke their wives/girlfriends up the poop chute, but claim to not desire the same of a male of similar age. What's with that? A sphincter is a sphincter is a sphincter...

Because the sphincter looks better surrounded by a woman's hoo-hah and round ass and not dudes junk hanging there with all that hair. And, biology.

SGT Ted said...

Kevin's assertions as to the evolution of human sexuality are just silly. He ignores the entire Greek and Roman period to arrive at it.

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...

@SGT Ted: Depends on the hoo-hah. Wait, I didn't mean "Depends" on the hoo-hah. Anyway...

And on Tumblr (the world's greatest source of porn) I found a picture of a guy's muscular butt where the cheeks are perfectly smooth and spherical. Utterly. It would give the even the most hetero man serious doubts about his proclivities. I can link if you're interested.

SGT Ted said...

There is gender dysphiria where you think your body is wrong and you are actually a different sex. That's a legitimate psychological issue.

The other legitimate psychological problem that manifests as transgenderism is autogynaphilia, which is just a kinky sex thing some men are into that has been morphed into a "sexual identity" ala homosexual politics.

SGT Ted said...

If you feel like you're a woman today and a man tomorrow and you fluctuate, what does that even mean.

That the person is a bit crazy.

realwest said...

Quoting someone who's name I can't recall, "Being bisexual increases your chances for a date on Saturday night!"

Scott said...

We live in an era where people equate offense with injury. I think this is the result of the progressive left's language police, which is fond of labeling almost everything "political".

For libertarians, the bright line of what is political has to do with coercion and theft. If it involves the imposition of one of those two things by one against another, then it's political. And by that standard, the gay movement is a political movement.

Scott said...

@realwest: Gore Vidal

SGT Ted said...

I don't understand the appeal of female/female sex to men. Do most men get off on that?

I dunno about the percentages, but men's sexuality is driven by the VISUAL. Women by and large, are not.

Which is why even the regular hetero porn video market isn't appealing to most women.

Women's porn is found in the Harlequin style "romance" section of books. That's where the hard corps girly porn market resides. Those "Bodice Ripper" books rival the letters section in Penthouse as far as graphically written sex goes.

SGT Ted said...

are, by definition, not sexual

Having orgasms isn't sexual?

SGT Ted said...

By rejecting objective standards for sexual behavior and human value, Ann's side has created a moral hazard, where people are now arbitrarily discriminated.

So, what is your take on the social and legal repression of open homosexuality by straight society in the 50s and early 60s that brought us the Stonewall riots and the backlash from the gay ghettos that eventually to this point?

SGT Ted said...

a guy's muscular butt where the cheeks are perfectly smooth and spherical. Utterly. It would give the even the most hetero man serious doubts about his proclivities. I can link if you're interested.

Like I said, men are visual. Many a man has been fooled by their eyes, thinking he is seeing an attractive slender woman from the back, due to hairstyle and body, and then finds out it's a dude when they turn around, which brings about the "oops, nevermind, my bad"; they don't subsequently then go and ask for their phone number.

Or the dudes fooled by the passable CD or tranny in a bar, until they find out she has a bigger dick than they do. One of the guys in our shop is teased to this day for checking out a tranny (hubba-hubba!)from afar that the rest knew was a dude. Once he found out, he just laughed. He didn't ask for his number.

And, picture of dude with a cute butt probably doesn't show his junk a-dangling.

Plus, you are gay, so you like nice man-butt, which is a natural bias for same.

Scott said...

"Plus, you are gay, so you like nice man-butt, which is a natural bias for same."

@SGT Ted: Yeah, good point. But if the social conservatives are right, the "natural" bias isn't natural. You can be taught. :)

jr565 said...

Transgenders and the LGBT community take gender to a crazy place. once you get to pansexualism and genders that fall outside of the gender binary you are dealing with abstractiosn that border on absurdity.
There are only two sexes. Male and female. THen there's intersex that is indeterminate.
Things like trigenders, or bi genders where you identify as a man woman is just silly.
Everyone wants to be the pretty snowflake. Look at how special you are.
I'm a male female who's female side is gay so I like women. But I'm also pansexual so consider myself a woman man as well and my man side is gay. I do plan on getting a sex change to become a hermaphrodite and then I'm going to take extra testosterone and extra estrogen so that I have both male and sexual organs. I'm thinking of having them give me one set of womens boobs to go along with my male boobs. And perhaps an extra penis." How dare you judge me? This is my gender you're talking about!
This is spearate from people who are genuninely suffering from gender dsymorphia. That does not assume that gender is a social construct at all by the way. The person suffering from that thinks gender is very precise and fixed. Otherwise changing to a different gender would make no sense.