Interesting "Phases Of Coming Out As Bisexual"

[djones]

Though this is more a list of coming to terms with terms than it is the "phases of coming out", it is fun and interesting :

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/faith-cheltenham/how-to-come-out-as-bisexual_b_1856168.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices

Sadly, the article on HuffingtonPost, like most articles Bisexual articles on HuffingtonPost, was under the "Gay Voices" section (even had the rainbow flag as the graphic for the headline). Hopefully, we can increase our visibility and we will be allowed to use our own voice on HuffingtonPost, not have the gays speak for us when they deign to do so ! Oh well, interesting read none the less !

[Long Duck Dong]

snorts.... sorry but I got to a part of the article and choked on my coffee......

If you're a bisexual person and proud of it, you are courageous, and you are strong. If you are bisexual, you are a free thinker and a free being. If you are bisexual, you don't fit into a mold; you make them.

sorry, but lol I have lost count of the people that have been told they are wrong for trying not to shoved in a mold..... IE you are bisexual, you are not allowed to be monogamous, asexual natured, intersex, trans, heteroflexible, sexuality undefined, freesexual, sexuality curious, MSM, WSW, you are not allowed to use a ID / label other than bisexual etc etc.....

its hard enuf for many people to come out as bisexual without being told by some bisexuals that they do not fit the * mold * of bisexuality.....yet the majority of other bisexuals accept and embrace them without blinking.... they just say " theres the coffee, theres the muffins, theres the couch, hows ya day been " ... most bisexuals are not really worried about the politicks, the backstabbing, the BS of agenda pushing, they just want to live, laugh and be content with their lives, without feeling that they have to be visible enuf to * meet the approval * of other people.......

that is why much of the bisexual community is not as visible as some people want... they just want to live their lives, not get involved in a fight that they want nothing to do with......

[Graphfix]

Well put! :)

[tenni]

I don't know how accepted Robin Och definition of bisexuality really is. It seems to me that it is so inclusive that it waters down any understanding by the mainstream heterosexuals understanding of sexual identity. Homosexuality and heterosexuality are fairly clearly understood in the mainstream whether they like homosexuals or not. A simpler definition of bisexuality may be better. Even drew's definition of being attracted to both genders is clearer than Och. Och's definition is more inclusive though. It like a lawyer looking at bisexuality...lol If a person has so many factors in play in their sexual identity, some aspects may play a more significant factor than others. That makes the water even more muddy. An intersexed, asexual person may have factors influencing their perspective of bisexuality and yet argue that is what bisexuality is. They may even feel like a martry to a cause rather than see themself as one or another factor. Today, I am X. Yesterday I was Y. Using Och's definition for bisexual does work best for that type of approach.

In step 4 I tend to agree that bisexuality is an umbrella word. I think that the umbrella has a few holes in it and rain comes on all of us...whom ever us is? the asexual bisexual? or bisexual asexual?, the monogamous bisexual who has never had sex with the same gender but thinks about it?, the poly bisexual?, transexual bisexual? the bisexual transexual?, the Bonobo bisexual, the pansexual, etc. Maybe "we" should get more investigation to clarify various groups under this umbrella? Or should we (who ever that is) spend time educating others that fluidity of sexual attraction as a more important aspect than Robin Och's winding definition?

I'm not certain that her steps are coming out as bisexual though? Are you "out" at step 6?

I definitely agree with djones that the banner should not be "gay voices". All that Cheltenham wrote is wasted by placing bisexuality under a gay banner. The banner needs to go. It says bisexuals are really gay you know. GAY is not a universal word for all who are not heterosexuals.

djones Is there any way that we can contact Cheltenham or who do we contact to "voice" our need to have a separate banner? Any Idea? Seems like a good project for bisexual activists to go after. :) :)

[DiamondDog]

Thanks for posting the link.

[Long Duck Dong]

if you want to contact faith cheltenham... you could try reading the article and seeing that she is listed as the president of http://www.binetusa.org/ a volunteer organisation for bisexual / pansexual and fluid people or you could use the email link on the page article, its at the top of the article by her name.....

the article is featured in the bisexual section of the huffington post as well....if people click on the bisexual tab on djones link
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/bisexual/

[tenni]

Thanks for the contact information. I checked and found the bisexual section but it doesn't come up as a separate section just a composite of previous articles about bisexuals. It does have a comment section while the post that djones gave didn't have a section for comment. It is HuffingtonPost.ca here. It may be slightly different as far as layout in the US and NZ?

Sorry to have to post this and not wanting to get into a bitchy queen argument but I think that writing "" I found this contact at the bottom of the article" is informative while " you could try reading the article" is a personal attack to demean me and my thoughts that I posted. I read the article otherwise I couldn't have commented on what was written and referred to specific step numbers.

[Jobelorocks]

I found that the author didn't know the meaning of pansexuality and thought it was the same as bisexuality. Not so. Here is a link to a good definition. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pansexual

[DiamondDog]

I found that the author didn't know the meaning of pansexuality and thought it was the same as bisexuality. Not so. Here is a link to a good definition. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pansexual

Pansexuality is a subset of bisexuality and they pretty much mean the exact same thing in the way that people are using them here.

The author of the article did address this in her writing:
Oh, you don't want to use the term "bisexual" because you believe it reinforces the gender binary? Don't you know that's just internalized monosexuality coming out to bite you (http://radicalbi.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/words-binary-and-biphobia-or-why-bi-is-binary-but-ftm-is-not/)? I see, you have a problem reclaiming a term that was once used as a clinical designation?

here's the link in the article if it didn't get put in the text that goes with the "internalized monosexuality coming out to bite you" link: http://radicalbi.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/words-binary-and-biphobia-or-why-bi-is-binary-but-ftm-is-not/

I've noticed "pansexual" identified people claiming that if you're bisexual you're somehow "transphobic" which is not true and I've heard that people who ID as "pansexual" do so because of biphobia and wanting to identify as anything but bisexual.

I have also met people who are completely heterosexual and not transgendered at all who identified as pansexual since they thought it would make them cool or something.

Here's a link that says what pansexual really means: http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/bi-gay-pan-sexual-what-do-i-call-myself

As for your original embrace of "pan-sexual" as an identity, the term is, as you pointed out, a complex one. Some people think it means what you originally thought: openness to being with members of both the same and opposite sex. It is, instead, a term that arose in the early 1900s to describe a way of thinking — especially prominent in certain psychoanalytic circles — that sexual instinct plays a part in all human thoughts and activities, even being the most important or only source of real energy in our lives. In fact, its earliest uses, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, were meant as insults directed at those psychoanalysts. Over the years, though, it has come to mean an openness to all sorts of sexual activities and groupings, including ones that society considers even more taboo than same-sex love.


Tenni did it ever occur to you that this woman's writing is satire or humor? I don't care that it's in the LGBT section of the news/opinions site.

I saw how the author wrote this: OK, after talking to friends and telling people I'm bisexual, it's not really working out. Gay guys don't want to date me, because they think I'm still in the closet, or that I'll leave them for a woman. My friends insist that my relationship history decides my orientation,

That has not been my experience with being around gay men, being out as a bisexual man, dating gay men, and having relationships and friendships with gay men.

[Jobelorocks]

Pansexuality is a subset of bisexuality and they mean the exact same thing.

The author of the article did address this in her writing:
Oh, you don't want to use the term "bisexual" because you believe it reinforces the gender binary? Don't you know that's just internalized monosexuality coming out to bite you (http://radicalbi.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/words-binary-and-biphobia-or-why-bi-is-binary-but-ftm-is-not/)? I see, you have a problem reclaiming a term that was once used as a clinical designation?

here's the link in the article if it didn't get put in the text that goes with the "internalized monosexuality coming out to bite you" link: http://radicalbi.wordpress.com/2011/02/22/words-binary-and-biphobia-or-why-bi-is-binary-but-ftm-is-not/

I've noticed "pansexual" identified people claiming that if you're bisexual you're somehow "transphobic" which is not true and I've heard that people who ID as "pansexual" do so because of biphobia and wanting to identify as anything but bisexual.

I have also met people who are completely heterosexual and not transgendered at all who identified as pansexual since they thought it would make them cool or something.


Tenni did it ever occur to you that this woman's writing is satire or humor? I don't care that it's in the LGBT section of the news/opinions site.

I saw how the author wrote this: OK, after talking to friends and telling people I'm bisexual, it's not really working out. Gay guys don't want to date me, because they think I'm still in the closet, or that I'll leave them for a woman. My friends insist that my relationship history decides my orientation,

That has not been my experience with being around gay men, being out as a bisexual man, dating gay men, and having relationships and friendships with gay men.
The problem is that bisexuality would mean the attraction to two genders. The problem is that there are more than just two genders and gender identities. Pansexuals are attracted to all of the genders and gender identities including, men, women, transgendered men, transgenered women, intersex people, androgynous people, and all sorts of gender queer people. Pansexuality is not something that includes only two genders so it is not bisexuality. They are different things and the author did not understand the difference.

[DiamondDog]

The problem is that bisexuality would mean the attraction to two genders. The problem is that there are more than just two genders and gender identities. Pansexuals are attracted to all of the genders and gender identities including, men, women, transgendered men, transgenered women, intersex people, androgynous people, and all sorts of gender queer people. Pansexuality is not something that includes only two genders so it is not bisexuality. They are different things and the author did not understand the difference.

Who says that all of those genders and gender identities can't be put into the gender spectrum between "woman" and "man"?

I actually did sort of identify as pansexual since I can be sexually and/or romantically attracted to the types of people you listed. That was before I met completely hetero people who I wrote about above who ID'd as pansexual but they were nothing but completely hetero people who wanted to be edgy, shocking, etc.

Also nobody knew what pansexual meant but they knew what bisexual means.

[Jobelorocks]

Who says that all of those genders and gender identities can't be put into the gender spectrum between "woman" and "man"?

I actually did sort of identify as pansexual since I can be sexually and/or romantically attracted to the types of people you listed. That was before I met completely hetero people who I wrote about above who ID'd as pansexual but they were nothing but completely hetero people who wanted to be edgy, shocking, etc.

Also nobody knew what pansexual meant but they knew what bisexual means.
May be between man and woman, but they aren't either. Some see themselves as neither, some see themselves as both, some are born with the genes as both and embrace both genders, some see themselves as others, some feel they have no gender what so ever. Gender is way more broad than man or woman. If someone is attracted to all of these genders it is no longer two genders so it is no longer bi.

If you think that pansexual (someone who is attracted to all genders more than just the two main genders) is the same as bisexual (someone who is attracted to just two genders), you may be sincere in your belief, but you would be wrong. They are different things. I consider myself bi I guess, because I have never seen or met someone who was not of the male or female genders that I was attracted to, but I guess it is possible that I could be. I don't count it out. But I see myself as bi, not pan because I have only found myself attracted to two genders, male and female, not all of them like a pansexual.

The author does not understand the meaning if they consider bisexuals pansexual. That is like saying that homosexuals or heterosexuals are bisexual. It doesn't make sense they are attracted to a different number of genders.

[Annika L]

Let's see...lots of responses to people here.

I agree with DiamondDog that the article was meant as humor (or at least as a "flip" analysis), whereas tenni seems to be treating it seriously. (But I also agree with tenni that LDD's "you could try reading the article" was unnecessarily snarky", as tenni's post was characteristically thoughtful and clearly evidenced that he had read it...just maybe missed that detail)

I think the pansexual/bisexual thing is interesting...it really comes down to how *exclusive* you see the definition of "bisexual" as being. If you understand "bisexual" as meaning that you are capable of being attracted to both males and females (this site's definition, right? and compatible with Robin Ochs), then that does not exclude the possibility that you could be attracted to others outside (or between) the gender/sex binaries. That would seem to be DiamondDog's understanding when he says that pansexuality is a subset of bisexuality...if you are pansexual, then you are automatically bisexual...but "bisexual" would not be the *best* (most general) descriptor for a pansexual person.

On the other hand, Jo seems to take the definition of "bisexual" as being "attracted to males and females and nothing else". Not sure this is the best definition for what we want "bisexuality" to mean...it's kind of restrictive. But it *is* literal, since bi means two...but two needn't exclude more than two, so I favor the more general definition the site uses. Yes the *word* "bisexual" can be argued to be problematic, because it seems to *imply* that there are only two genders/sexes...in its own way it can be seen as an erasure of people outside the gender/sex binaries. But I think that has more to do with society and how they (meaning of course "we") *think* of the word "bisexual" than it does any inherent *meaning* of the word "bisexual".

Finally, I agree with DiamondDog that I have heard some pansexuals at least imply that bisexuals who are not pansexuals are transphobic, and I don't find this a reasonable charge. Basically, the argument would imply that if you're not attracted to a group of people, then you fear/hate that group. There are plenty of groups of people out there to whom I do not find myself physically attracted, but toward whom I hold no animosity whatsoever...and sure, if I met the right person from such a group, and felt a connection, sure, I suppose I *could* become attracted to them...but surely this is true of virtually anybody...I certainly don't think it makes me pansexual.

Anyway...interesting article and discussion. Thanks djones for starting it...and good to see you again...seems like you've been gone a while!

[DiamondDog]

Well written Annika. I am not sure why people posting here are annoyed that the article is in HuffPo's LGBT section? Or about the LGBTQ rainbow flag?

Would you rather bisexuality not be written about at all? I have been to various sites that claim to be LGBT but they write little to anything about bisexuality and it's all about the gay life. Or what now passes as and gets called a "gay culture" that's just hook up sites/phone apps being reviewed, hairless drugged out anorexic twinks doing porn that most bisexual and gay men don't find hot, and the latest flash in the pan wannabe "Diva" pop singer of the moment and her song of the summer.

I'm not big into the LGBTQ flag or any flag about sexuality but if you're out and about in your town or city lots of businesses that are either owned by LGBT people or LGBT friendly people will have it around to advertise that they're for LGBT equality or having LGBT people visit there. A lot of other places these days even if they don't have the rainbows are LGBT friendly or nobody cares.

[Jobelorocks]

I still disagree with your definition of pan and bisexual. If you went your way then I would be both a lesbian and a heterosexual because I am attracted to women (as a woman) and why would that exclude other genders, or I would be heterosexual as well because I am attracted to men, but why should that exclude other genders? The logic just doesn't work. Being bisexual means you are only attracted to two genders, just like being heterosexual means you are only attracted the the opposite gender, or being homosexual means you are only attracted to the same gender, and pansexual means you are attracted to all genders. Pansexuality includes bisexual, homosexual, and heterosexual attractions, but since there are more genders included it is not bisexuality, heterosexuality, or homosexuality anymore. Just like bisexuality includes heterosexual and homosexual attractions, but since it is more than an attraction to one gender it is not homosexual or heterosexual anymore.

If you say that pansexuality and bisexuality are synonymous or one is a subset of another, then you have to do the same with heterosexuality or homosexuality. The only thing that separates these four sexual preferences is the number of genders you are attracted to. I think that knowing people of other genders than male or female, changes my view of pansexuality. It is frustrating to them when people won't accept their gender as totally separate from male or female (at least with the people I have known).

[Long Duck Dong]

I am a person that is pansexual and in a sense, bisexual... the bisexual aspect of me refers to my attraction to males and females, my pansexuality refers to the rest of the gender spectrum....... so for me, my pansexual nature is a expansion of my bisexual nature......

for me my, pansexuality covers my attraction to intersex, gender undefined, gender queer, trans that may id as she male / lady boys and not male or female and other aspects of sexuality / gender that may not *fit * the gender spectrum....however the sticky part there, is what defines gender.... and if we use the clinical rule of * what is between our legs, then people like eunuchs / intersex etc do not really fit the *requirement *

honestly its a complicated issue.... and thats part of why I leave each person to ID themselves according to their understanding of their own sexuality....

[Annika L]

I still disagree with your definition of pan and bisexual. If you went your way then I would be both a lesbian and a heterosexual because I am attracted to women (as a woman) and why would that exclude other genders, or I would be heterosexual as well because I am attracted to men, but why should that exclude other genders? The logic just doesn't work. Being bisexual means you are only attracted to two genders, just like being heterosexual means you are only attracted the the opposite gender, or being homosexual means you are only attracted to the same gender, and pansexual means you are attracted to all genders. Pansexuality includes bisexual, homosexual, and heterosexual attractions, but since there are more genders included it is not bisexuality, heterosexuality, or homosexuality anymore. Just like bisexuality includes heterosexual and homosexual attractions, but since it is more than an attraction to one gender it is not homosexual or heterosexual anymore.

If you say that pansexuality and bisexuality are synonymous or one is a subset of another, then you have to do the same with heterosexuality or homosexuality. The only thing that separates these four sexual preferences is the number of genders you are attracted to. I think that knowing people of other genders than male or female, changes my view of pansexuality. It is frustrating to them when people won't accept their gender as totally separate from male or female (at least with the people I have known).

The definition of one word does not determine the definition of others, hon (unless one word is used in defining another). And I did not create this definition...this is the site's (Drew's) definition, that of Robin Ochs, and that of most of the LGBT world (and the non-LGBT world that thinks about bisexuality).

To my best understanding, regardless of the accepted definition of "bisexual", "homosexual" means "attracted to the same sex only" and "heterosexual" means "attracted only to the opposite sex".

But yes...for those of us who exist outside of a binary system, as all bisexuals do...it is very frustrating when people refuse to accept that the system is not binary.

[BiDaveDtown]

Long Duck you're not bisexual or pansexual at all. You're asexual and you only identify as either bisexual or pansexual when it suits you for you own agenda. Meanwhile there are times when you're against bisexual men on this site. You've said this about yourself here on this site many times about how you're asexual.
I'm asexual if you want to know what it's like to be me....think back to when you had no sexual attraction to anyone at all....and thats what its like to be me....

[Long Duck Dong]

gee bidavid, lol...... back to this crap are we ? the same quote rolled out by the same members.... in a pathetic attempt to go after me..... do you and all the other 17 accounts that have used that quote, share it or is it saved on one persons computer and used by the few members with their multi accounts, in order to stir shit as always.....

I am a lil surprised that you forget that I corrected the statement that you and others have misquoted in numerous threads, such as the asexuality thread that you, drugstore cowboy and tenni derailed, in your attempts to tell me that I had no fucking idea what I was talking about in regards to my own understanding of differing aspects of myself and my intersex, asexual nature.......

so how about you just put on your big girl panties and start acting like a adult instead of the immature and childish site bully that you and others seem to be so fond of being..... and the same goes for the rest of the goon squad that will no doubt jump on the bandwagon in this thread and try to disrupt the site again, and thread jack the thread.... other people want to enjoy the site and all it has to offer, and not have to deal with people like you and the other bully bitches that have nothing better to do than try and stir shit......

[DiamondDog]

I did get a kick out of when the author of the humor or satire writing posted above wrote the below text in her blog entry. I added my own text based on my own personal experiences in parenthesis: (People, even other bisexuals) insist that my relationship history decides my orientation, so I'm going to have to be gay (identified according to these people who don't understand bisexuality). Well, you're just not bisexual enough! (Is what they tell me all while insisting that I'm somehow really gay.)

I've connected really well with other bisexual men and women, gay men, and transmen and women.

The gay men I've dated or had LTRs with were accepting of bisexuality. While they have no sexual attraction to women at all they don't care that I do. They did not want to have a 3 way or 4 way that involved another woman at all if we had an open relationship; but they understood that some bisexuals do want to do these things sexually just like some gay men want to have 3 ways and 4 ways with other men or another couple. I can be monogamous if we both wanted that, so that could have something to do with it as well. One gay man I am friends with said how when he's with a bisexual man in a LTR how if the bisexual man really needs or wants to have sex with a woman he'd let him; but he'd want to hear all about it and it would just be purely recreational sex with her and he wouldn't have a partnership or relationship with the woman. My gay male friend would not want to have sex with other men at all except for his bisexual male partner. I would be OK with that if I was with a gay male partner and he wanted me to do this. If he didn't want to do this I would be OK with that too since I can be monogamous as well.

I agree with these comments that two people posted to the article:
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Megsie (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Megsie?action=comments) Proud to be a bleeding-heart liberal
226 Fans (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Megsie)

07:50 PM on 09/07/2012
I always feel like the term 'pansexuality' is just another form of biphobia. I've never felt like being bi limits me from being attracted to any or all genders, or that identifying myself as bi implied such. To say that it does is just one more slur against bisexuals from the LGBT community at large, which is pretty common. I generally just explain to people that I don't consider attraction to cis- or trans- individuals (or anything between or beyond those terms) is part of orientation, but a preference such as blondes vs. brunettes or tall vs. short.

Sirius2g (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Sirius2g?action=comments)
55 Fans (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Sirius2g)

01:25 PM on 09/07/2012
Sorry but these steps make no sense. Once I realized and accepted my bisexuality that was the end of it, I went out into the world and came out as bisexual and then found another bisexual man who I connected with. I may be able to at some point connect with a man who is gay but to me there are serious differences between dating a bisexual and dating a gay man. If I was dating a gay man and told him how I thought a certain girl was hot or how I wanted a threesome with a girl he would probably not understand.

[The Young Pretender]

What a lovely experience Faith points out, if you're kind enough to indulge my crude, critical reductionism:

Steps 1 & 2: Confusion. Pretty standard for the LGBT community.
Step 3: Come out as bi to some degree. People reject or misunderstand you. Fan-fucking-tastic. Also, get caught up in the politicized innuendo of sexual identity labels.
Step 4: Hand-wringing over labels.
Step 5: You're doing it (your bi indentity) wrong!
Step 6: Realize that the B community has the cohesion of a room full of sugared up 5 year olds, call yourself what you damn well please, and move on with life, never minding the issues in the preceding steps.

Now, I don't write this to criticize the author. In fact, to a degree, those steps reflect my own experiences. I just find it a somewhat unhappy outlook.

[tenni]

"Tenni did it ever occur to you that this woman's writing is satire or humor? I don't care that it's in the LGBT section of the news/opinions site."

Yes, I understood that it was not serious but I didn't find it funny at all. I think that there are things under the label bisexual that are something different. That includes terms like pansexual. I am not pansexual. I don't see it as a subset of bisexuality and it should not be considered as such. (get your fek'n umbrella..maybe cousins or something..lol) Not that there is anything wrong with being attracted to transsexuals, I would not seek out a transexual person like some posters on this site and other sites. However, I did see a pansexual man naked. I'd never seen that before. I could see myself possibly interested but never seek out such a person. I find transwomen in transition of no interest at all but a man with a vagina...well maybe remotely. Nope, I do not identify as pansexual. I clearly do not. I'm bisexual.

When someone is asexual and I know such a person very well they really have no interest in sex. My friend identifies as gay but doesn't have sex or any interest in sex. I see his dominance as asexual. Asexuals have their own little untidy house to deal with. I see asexuality as something different. If an asexual is attracted, emotionally to both genders that is fine but you primarily are not interested in sex.

I think that we need to clean house and acknowledge that all these labels such as heteroflexible, pansexual are fek'n stupid and do those of us who are attracted at least sexually to both men and women are bisexual. The others are something else. There are so many others that are being placed under a bisexual label that it does no one any good. Its like oh...anyone is bisexual..we are all bisexual. It is idealism and not practical. Since I feel this way. I didn't find her writing funny. I found it wishy washy. I understood all the thing that are hung on the bisexual clothes line and contradictions.

As a man who can be both sexually and emotionally attracted to both genders but not transexuals, I agree that with Young Pretender that this will not lead to happiness for those who are attracted in particularly sexually to both genders. If want to call people who are sexually attracted to both genders by another name than bisexuals that is fine. Och's definition is just so much vagueness that it has no value other than to state that sexuality is complex. It seems so much easier to fall under the label of heterosexual or gay. I agree that the key is that sexuality is fluid and may change but that is not the same as people identifying as hetero or gay.

If the world just accepted that people are sexual in a lot of different ways and it didn't matter that would be good. Fek...some can not even accept same sex marriage and so we know that the world will not accept all this wishy wash stuff. It is too ridiculous imo..but that is just me.

[DuckiesDarling]

If the world just accepted that people are sexual in a lot of different ways and it didn't matter that would be good.

Agreed, but you can also change it to just this site and that would be an awesome start. Time to practice what we preach, hmm?

[tenni]

I do practise what I state (I hope that I am not "preaching") This a bisexual site. The owner defines bisexuality as an attraction to both men and women. That is great. I accept that definition. Och goes on and on about all the possible permutations. If you have to go on and on, then you just have not got it correct imo. You are really discussing other sexualities. The world will not accept the idealistic concept and nor then should bisexuals accept a wishy washy over permutated options. KISS principle is better imo.

As a hetero, sticking her nose into concept discussions of bisexuality...makes me want to say mind your own business. I agree with the bi activist from Chicago that heteros nor gays can tell us what we are or help us. Let bisexuals figure this out.

If you are a person who is moving to recognize that she is bisexual and is attracted to both men and women, I wish you well on your journey.

All that you are doing is being bitchy and demeaning personal attacks on me and others imo. Stop the slurs personal attacks against me and your campaign to demean me. You are just being bitchy rude. I noticed your attacks on darkeyes as well.

[DuckiesDarling]

hands everyone a pair of hip waders cause the bullshit is now waist deep.



I do practise what I state (I hope that I am not "preaching") This a bisexual site. The owner defines bisexuality as an attraction to both men and women. That is great. I accept that definition. Och goes on and on about all the possible permutations. If you have to go on and on, then you just have not got it correct imo. You are really discussing other sexualities. The world will not accept the idealistic concept and nor then should bisexuals accept a wishy washy over permutated options. KISS principle is better imo.

As a hetero, sticking her nose into concept discussions of bisexuality...makes me want to say mind your own business. I agree with the bi activist from Chicago that heteros nor gays can tell us what we are or help us. Let bisexuals figure this out.

If you are a person who is moving to recognize that she is bisexual and is attracted to both men and women, I wish you well on your journey.

All that you are doing is being bitchy and demeaning personal attacks on me and others imo. Stop the slurs personal attacks against me and your campaign to demean me. You are just being bitchy rude. I noticed your attacks on darkeyes as well.

[SlimDandy]

Bisexuality covers a wide taste palate, indeed. However, we must not forget how we've been viewed and interpreted in the western hemisphere, throughout history. We are viewed by many as oversexed, promiscuous sluts, with insatiable sex drives, without any sexually moral scruples. We are seen by some as reluctant homosexuals. Well in my opinion, as long as you're with a sexually consenting adult, scruples don't belong in the bedroom. Most of us have the dignity, class, and unmitigated resolve, to insist upon our privacy, as most of us still have respect for civility. We are all unique in our specific tastes of sexual proclivities. However, we are the same with respect to the sexes of which we choose to share them.

Coming out as bisexual, can indeed be an arduous task for many of us. First we think we're gay. Next we're convinced that we're straight, afterall! Then finally, we feel that we must be bisexual (or some varied combination of those orientations)...However, once we know, we know! Yes, and at that point, thank god that you have finally arrived!

Should we have our own flag?.. Of course we should! There's no question that we are a separate group from those who identify as strictly gay or lesbian. However, we do share a common bond with those two groups, as well. Heck! Half of us, were once members of those two groups, at one point or another. It doesn't matter, because society as a whole will tend to lump us all in together, anyways. That said, I believe that our flag of bisexuality should be opened beneath the rainbow flag, as the rainbow flag represents the entire LGBT community. To filter or extract bisexuals from the overall LGBT community or to make any gesture of separation or segregation of political ideologies, should be viewed as foolhardy in my book. That would only serve to weaken both groups simultaneously. Whatever strides the entire LGBT group gets, we profit as well.

Does that mean that we can't have a separate single agenda that speaks only to a special case of a bisexual need?...No, it doesn't!

Of course, we do reserve the right to throw some crazy wild ass bi parties, though!

PS.

...And you can bring a couple of your cool gay or lesbian friends too!

[DiamondDog]

Bisexuality covers a wide taste palate, indeed. However, we must not forget how we've been viewed and interpreted in the western hemisphere, throughout history. We are viewed by many as oversexed, promiscuous sluts, with insatiable sex drives, without any sexually moral scruples. We are seen by some as reluctant homosexuals. Well in my opinion, as long as you're with a sexually consenting adult, scruples don't belong in the bedroom. Most of us have the dignity, class, and unmitigated resolve, to insist upon our privacy, as most of us still have respect for civility. We are all unique in our specific tastes of sexual proclivities. However, we are the same with respect to the sexes of which we choose to share them. Coming out as bisexual, can indeed be an arduous task for many of us. First we think we're gay. Next we're convinced that we're straight, afterall! Then finally, we feel that we must be bisexual (or some varied combination of those orientations)...However, once we know, we know! Yes, and at that point, thank god that you have finally arrived! Should we have our own flag?.. Of course we should! There's no question that we are a separate group from those who identify as strictly gay or lesbian. However, we do share a common bond with those two groups, as well. Heck! Half of us, were once members of those two groups, at one point or another. It doesn't matter, because society as a whole will tend to lump us all in together, anyways. That said, I believe that our flag of bisexuality should be opened beneath the rainbow flag, as the rainbow flag represents the entire LGBT community. To filter or extract bisexuals from the overall LGBT community or to make any gesture of separation or segregation of political ideologies, should be viewed as foolhardy in my book. That would only serve to weaken both groups simultaneously. Whatever strides the entire LGBT group gets, we profit as well. Does that mean that we can't have a separate single agenda that speaks only to a special case of a bisexual need?...No, it doesn't! Of course, we do reserve the right to throw some crazy wild ass bi parties, though! PS. ...And you can bring a couple of your cool gay or lesbian friends too! I agree with you 100% :)

[tenni]

"I am a lil surprised that you forget that I corrected the statement that you and others have misquoted in numerous threads, such as the asexuality thread that you, drugstore cowboy and tenni derailed, in your attempts to tell me that I had no fucking idea what I was talking about in regards to my own understanding of differing aspects of myself and my intersex, asexual nature......."

Bi Dave should not have raised this issue on this thread. Please do not refer to me. Deal with issues and not people.

Many people do not understand what you mean when you post. It is your own responsibility to communicate clearly. Much of what you posted on the asexual thread was incorrect and you didn't seem to even understand that fact even when quotes from AVEN's were posted to show the difference.

[Long Duck Dong]

"I am a lil surprised that you forget that I corrected the statement that you and others have misquoted in numerous threads, such as the asexuality thread that you, drugstore cowboy and tenni derailed, in your attempts to tell me that I had no fucking idea what I was talking about in regards to my own understanding of differing aspects of myself and my intersex, asexual nature......."

Bi Dave should not have raised this issue on this thread. Please do not refer to me. Deal with issues and not people.

Many people do not understand what you mean when you post. It is your own responsibility to communicate clearly. Much of what you posted on the asexual thread was incorrect and you didn't seem to even understand that fact even when quotes from AVEN's were posted to show the difference.

SIGHS
8389

[tenni]

post 29
Did you enjoy that? I wont respond in kind.. I have much better things to do and will allow others to decide.
I hope that you feel better now. rule 2

Now, back to the thread topic.

[darkeyes]

post 29
Did you enjoy that? I wont respond in kind.. I have much better things to do and will allow others to decide.
I hope that you feel better now. rule 2

Now, back to the thread topic.*laffs*.. oi u, ya bugger.. find ya own put downs!!!:eek2: