Bisexuals are biologically needy

[BiBiologist]

Bisexuals are biologically different: an analogy to help us understand

In many of the threads in this forum, we have explored overlapping ideas about whether bisexuality actually exists, how we see ourselves, how society sees us, and what bisexual behaviors are or are not acceptable. I think that at the heart of all this lies the biological basis for bisexuality.

We have essentially agreed among ourselves that bisexuality exists as a non-removable part of our being. It may be fluid, and vary in the way it manifests itself throughout our lifetimes, but nonetheless it is inborn and will not go away. Therefore, in one way or another, we must accommodate it in our lives just as we accommodate other physical and mental aspects of ourselves. If we are very short we will always need help reaching things or need a lot of stepstools. If we are very tall we may need to always duck through doorways or have difficulty finding clothes that fit. Our traits vary in their need for minor or extreme adaptations to the world engineered for people with the majority trait.

The main problem is that there is so little research, so little understood by the scientific community to report to society at large. Even after evidence becomes available to support the idea that a behavior, such as the bisexual trait, is inborn, it will take a long time for people to understand bisexuals are not threatening.

So until the biological basis is definitively proven, bisexuals will not be understood or accommodated by society and will have to make adaptations to live in the majority heterosexual society structure. My assertion is (yes, I'm coming to the point) that this is a trait that requires extreme adaptation. And until that time of proof, I will use this analogy to represent what I believe will be the biological truth. In another thread, someone mentioned that wanting to have a same-sex relationship when you are already married is not so insignificant as deciding to go out and buy another pair of shoes on a whim when you already have a pair at home. I would suggest that monogamy to a bisexual is more like having only one shoe. Sometimes in your life, that's OK, and maybe you can get by with no shoes at all (celibacy; no relationships). Sometimes you might try to shift the shoe back and forth if one or the other foot is sore and in need of comfort. But when it's really cold out there, or the road is rough, one foot is going to take a beating. Asking our heterosexual spouses for another shoe seems reasonable to us, but somehow, in their minds, they see us as fully shod. Society doesn't notice our feet at all, and that's fine with most of us because we are embarrassed about having only one shoe, and we try not to let anyone see us limping.

The shoe analogy as sexual/relational fulfillment works, although heterosexuals might say, "then that should mean I get to have another relationship too." But the shoes are one pair, one full compliment needed to walk around with comfort and acceptance in the majority structure. Heteros and even some bisexuals themselves look at bisexuals as wanting something extra, but actually we only have half of what we need if we are living monogamously. Bisexuals, biologically, got the rare shoebox that came off the packing line with only one shoe in it. If we want two shoes, with permission from our spouses, we may be allowed to look for another rare box with a single shoe, trying also to find one that fits. If we find it, our shoes will always be mismatched, like wearing one stiletto heal and one loafer. Stealing a shoe is, of course, a no-no.

The analogy can be extended to gays and lesbians as well. They wear two shoes, but their feet are switched left for right. Even though it is comfortable to them, they always appear to be wearing their shoes on the wrong feet. And, as heterosexual society has found, staying with the same pair of shoes for one's whole life has been difficult. And staying barefoot as a priest for a lifetime has shown its own consequences. Can we walk a whole life's journey in one shoe without consequences?

For myself, I see bisexuality as an everyday struggle. I can only see one logical solution for bisexuality to become more comfortable to the individual bisexual, and that is for extensive research to prove its biological basis, and extensive, gentle activism by bisexuals to prove we are not a threat and that we have special needs. My contribution will hopefully be a couple of books in the next few years.

Thanks for your indulgence of my long post,
sam

[bigregory]

Hey Sam.
I just put on my work boots.
Unlike you i see being Bi diffrent.
I dont give a fuck what GAYS,LESBIANS,or HETROS, Think of me or my lifestyle.
:bipride:
:three:
:flag4:
:male:
They are the one only wearing 1 shoe...
We share this planet.
>quote from JAMES DEAN when asked if he was Bi,
<I am not going through life with one hand tied behind my back>
Anyway Bi's are not abnormal everone else is :2cents: :

[codybear3]

This was funny...If I had a shoe for every foot I have, I'd own a pair...Actually, I own a few. And as far as people, society, GLBTs, or aliens from another neighborhood are concerned, I am who I am. I don't ask for permission to be who I am. I would rather be hated for what I am than to be loved for what I am not. And as for "adaptations", Sam, the world is what you make of it, mister.

:paw: :paw: :paw: :paw: :paw: :paw: :paw: :paw: :paw:

.....and a couple of books won't do a thing for closed minds or individuals that suffer from homophobia.... :banghead:

[wanderingrichard]

:cutelaugh does this mean that we practice the cinderella theory?? [try this on see if it fits?? ] :confused:

[arana]

So now I'm wondering about M.in.heels&hose who is well on his way to 100 pairs of shoes.... :eek:

I'm sorry but I feel like you're stereotyping bisexuals like those who are afraid of anything or anyone that is different from their way of life. Why do you want to make lab rats of us because we don't fit a predetermined mold? Your studies can only be as good as the people you study and are not always accurate. No two people are exactly alike no matter what their sexual preferances are and neither are their sexual needs. Although bi's have the capability to love both sexes we do not necessarily lose control if we are not able to have both whenever we so please. I've met more Bisexuals with so much compassion and acceptance for their fellow humans than many hetrosexuals and homosexuals. They have an intricate heart that feels for and nurtures those around them. Of course we are harder to understand, there is so much more love inside us wanting to be embraced and so much more frustration inside us wanting to be accepted. By blaming our emotional state to a biological predisposition you're saying we have no control over ourselves and no free will. Shoes or no shoes, I don't buy that.

Sorry if this doesn't make sense.

[Michael623]

Bibiologist,
What I need is to find a man that has all of what I want sexually from one. A man with similar interest as mine, trustworthy, appealing to me, free of std, etc. Along with the right time and place and for it to be with the woman of my dreams. That's pretty needy, think you could help out with that instead.

[allbimyself]

I'm sorry but this is complete hogwash.

Being bi does NOT exclude monogamy and to suggest a bisexual in a monogamous relationship would be unnatural or inheirently unhappy is to misunderstand the complexity of the human animal.

Carrying your logic further, the drive to procreate should mean that men should be understandably promiscuous. They don't want to put all their eggs, or sperm to be more accurate, in one basket. The same goes for women. If a woman can find a man that has both desirable physical characteristics to help insure strong, healthy offspring AND the ability to provide a safe and secure home for those offspring, she could be monogamous. However, if unable to find this person, she could marry the provider and screw every stud she meets to have the best of both worlds. And nothing would preclude the provider from being a woman in this case.

My point is that we are all different. Our needs and drives are different. You are attempting to shoehorn the individuals of a group into a mold that you feel best represents the group (the mold of yourself perhaps?) in order to further a political agenda.

Personally, I feel the only societal change that needs to be made, is to get everyone to understand that we are all different, that what makes us individuals is not threatening to the group. The fact that my neighbor might like to wear a corset when he has sex does not in anyway threaten me or my desires. Unfortunately, we as humans are also prejudiced -- we evolved that way, it was a survival characteristic. Your proposal supports the prejudice of others towards the bisexual group, enforcing their belief that an individual of the group would never be satisfied without being promiscuous and therefore automatically precluding the chance of a harmonious monogamous relationship with that individual.

Maybe you couldn't be happy in a monogamous relationship. That's fine. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with someone that wants to be celibate (I don't understand it, but I can accept it, it doesn't affect me). Your problem is that you want others to accept you. I agree, people should accept you and your desires as long as you don't wish to hurt others, i'm all for it. However, in your drive for acceptance, you want to color all of your group (bisexuals) as having the same behavior as yourself in an effort to get others to accept you by accepting the group.

You ever wonder why so many homosexuals have a hard time accepting bisexuals? It's political. They want bisexuals to identify as homosexual to "swell their ranks". This is also what drive's "outing." It's a democratic trait. If our group is large enough, we can't be ignored. But it's also wrong, and your proposal is just as wrong.

If we want to "swell the ranks" we need to accept all that have desires and behaviors that are different than "the norm." Once we as a group (a group of "deviants" if you will) accept all others, can those that suppress their individuality come out and say "hey, I like to masturbate with oven mitts and that doesn't make me less of a person!" If we can learn to accept their "deviant behavior" they can learn to accept ours. But we can't accept others by defining ourselves narrowly.

I've seen time and again people overcome their prejudice by personal interaction. "We're here, we're queer" has never worked. The prejudice in others comes from their misunderstanding. By taking your difference and "throwing it in their face" you only drive them away. But when they get to know an individual of the group on a personal basis and realize "hey, they're not so different after all" they begin to realize the only difference is who they sleep with and therefore not threatening. Queer Eye has done more for hetero acceptance of gays then all the gay pride parades combined. While laughing at sterotypical behavior, the audience is placed at ease and begins to realize these 5 guys aren't so different after all, that they are OK and maybe I was wrong.

My point here is that being homosexual or bisexual does NOT define an individual. Being lesbian does not mean you are automatically a vegetarian. Our sexual preferences are only one aspect of ourselves. But when we define ourselves by it, we enforce the notion in the ignorant that it DOES define us in all aspects of our lives, thereby enforcing their prejudice.

If you want to act politically, then be LESS specific. Work on getting others to accept EVERYONE. It's an easier sell and it works better.

[m.in.heels&hose]

Speaking as a bisexual, i dont think of bisexuals as "needy" but more like we are diverse in our desires
I dont buy into this at all, and if this were true, i would be having A massive yard sale and i would sell half of my high heels (only the lefts)
I feel we (as individuals,as humans,as bisexuals) are all different in our own way

like allbi said i could care less of what my neighbors do ! it has no effect on me, i have no problem with allbi and his cooking mitt, as he has no problem with my desire to wear high heels and pantyhose

lets keep the labels off our being's and on our clothes!

thank you for letting me have my say!
m.in.heels&hose :)

[gina42]

I'm sorry but this is complete hogwash.

Being bi does NOT exclude monogamy and to suggest a bisexual in a monogamous relationship would be unnatural or inheirently unhappy is to misunderstand the complexity of the human animal.

Carrying your logic further, the drive to procreate should mean that men should be understandably promiscuous. They don't want to put all their eggs, or sperm to be more accurate, in one basket. The same goes for women. If a woman can find a man that has both desirable physical characteristics to help insure strong, healthy offspring AND the ability to provide a safe and secure home for those offspring, she could be monogamous. However, if unable to find this person, she could marry the provider and screw every stud she meets to have the best of both worlds. And nothing would preclude the provider from being a woman in this case.

My point is that we are all different. Our needs and drives are different. You are attempting to shoehorn the individuals of a group into a mold that you feel best represents the group (the mold of yourself perhaps?) in order to further a political agenda.

Personally, I feel the only societal change that needs to be made, is to get everyone to understand that we are all different, that what makes us individuals is not threatening to the group. The fact that my neighbor might like to wear a corset when he has sex does not in anyway threaten me or my desires. Unfortunately, we as humans are also prejudiced -- we evolved that way, it was a survival characteristic. Your proposal supports the prejudice of others towards the bisexual group, enforcing their belief that an individual of the group would never be satisfied without being promiscuous and therefore automatically precluding the chance of a harmonious monogamous relationship with that individual.

Maybe you couldn't be happy in a monogamous relationship. That's fine. I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with someone that wants to be celibate (I don't understand it, but I can accept it, it doesn't affect me). Your problem is that you want others to accept you. I agree, people should accept you and your desires as long as you don't wish to hurt others, i'm all for it. However, in your drive for acceptance, you want to color all of your group (bisexuals) as having the same behavior as yourself in an effort to get others to accept you by accepting the group.

You ever wonder why so many homosexuals have a hard time accepting bisexuals? It's political. They want bisexuals to identify as homosexual to "swell their ranks". This is also what drive's "outing." It's a democratic trait. If our group is large enough, we can't be ignored. But it's also wrong, and your proposal is just as wrong.

If we want to "swell the ranks" we need to accept all that have desires and behaviors that are different than "the norm." Once we as a group (a group of "deviants" if you will) accept all others, can those that suppress their individuality come out and say "hey, I like to masturbate with oven mitts and that doesn't make me less of a person!" If we can learn to accept their "deviant behavior" they can learn to accept ours. But we can't accept others by defining ourselves narrowly.

I've seen time and again people overcome their prejudice by personal interaction. "We're here, we're queer" has never worked. The prejudice in others comes from their misunderstanding. By taking your difference and "throwing it in their face" you only drive them away. But when they get to know an individual of the group on a personal basis and realize "hey, they're not so different after all" they begin to realize the only difference is who they sleep with and therefore not threatening. Queer Eye has done more for hetero acceptance of gays then all the gay pride parades combined. While laughing at sterotypical behavior, the audience is placed at ease and begins to realize these 5 guys aren't so different after all, that they are OK and maybe I was wrong.

My point here is that being homosexual or bisexual does NOT define an individual. Being lesbian does not mean you are automatically a vegetarian. Our sexual preferences are only one aspect of ourselves. But when we define ourselves by it, we enforce the notion in the ignorant that it DOES define us in all aspects of our lives, thereby enforcing their prejudice.

If you want to act politically, then be LESS specific. Work on getting others to accept EVERYONE. It's an easier sell and it works better.



sam,
i think what allbi said was awsome...and pretty much said what i was thinking except for one thing..
being married to a bisexual man,whom i love very much...i could really care less what about what my neighbors think because i love him for him and if people judge others on there sexuality than you know what they are not worth knowing.....i have made many friends here and i love them all....
also....arana,codybear3 and bigregory...
i couldnt agree anymore with what you all have said as well as allbi's post..

[Lisa (va)]

What makes bisexuals different? About the only common thread is liking both sexes. But a persons bisexuality may mean to them something completely different than to me or others. No one has ever told me that because i have loved both men and women that i have to have them together, monogamy is not precluded by ones sexual orientation, one can love either with out haveing to have both. Enough folks try to label people, but how many categories and subcategories are needed? Just say we are all individuals with our own interests and quirks.

Lisa
hugs n kisses

[allbimyself]

Let me clarify something.... I do NOT masturbate with an oven mitt! Not that there's anything wrong with that LOL

[arana]

It's ok allbi, it slipped out. You don't have to deny it now. You're among friends. We WANT you to enjoy yourself. Just don't forget to wash them, otherwise that's nasty. Not judging mind you, just worried about your health.

:tong:

[m.in.heels&hose]

Hey lou,
I never realised that i would open up such a can of worms (so to speak) but i owe you a steak dinner!


:bibounce: your buddy, holly :bibounce:

[BiBiologist]

Well, I knew this would be controversial! But theories are made to be modified, and this is, as always, just the way I see things. I apologies for making statements like, "We as bisexuals..." I should have stated that differently. I could have said "I", but I know there are others who do feel as I do, so maybe "Some bisexuals feel..." or something. Looking at the results of the poll (a whole lot of people are out to no one), it seems that alot of us do feel the need for more acceptance from society. I think, though that some of you didn't look carefully--some of you seem to think I am male. Is it that you think biologists can only be male? Please check my sign :female:

I don't have time at the moment to respond to everyone's individual comments, but I will try to clarify a little. Analogies aside, bisexuals are different from the majority and are defined by the ability to be aroused by both sexes. I wanted not to say that we MUST have both sexes to be happy, but that it is harder. I didn't say that we CANNOT maintain a satisfying monogamous relationship, but it is harder, emotionally, for many bisexuals (maybe even a high statistical percentage?). Maybe it IS biologically harder for men (statistically) to maintain a monogamous relationship, as born out by statistics that show that more men cheat than women. Some men don't feel any need to cheat, some men do feel a need and do cheat, some feel a need but keep themselves in check. Society essentially knows all this and accepts it, and doesn't look down on men as a group and doesn't judge all men as being cheaters. I'm not saying bisexuals as a group can't go through life in one monogamous relationship. I'm saying that doing that may cause some physical, emotional, or mental consequences that heterosexuals don't have to deal with. And I should add that it may cause this for "some" or even "a high statistical percentage" percentage of bisexuals", which is what I am guessing, but there are no studies to support any of our assertions, one way or another. I would like to see more studies, I believe in science, and I believe it will slowly lead to more acceptance and less stereotyping of bisexuals as a group (i.e., the group of people defined as being aroused by both sexes) if we do have those studies.
Thanks,
sam

[codybear3]

sam...The world is still what you make of it........MISTER!

[IceLion]

OK... Time to flame.

First off, BiBiologist I commend you for a completely well thought and excellently elocuted post, and thank you for taking the time to think something like this out.

We as a bi community spend so much time on this site responding to posts regarding what position, sex toy or preference to either sex each of us has. We tell jokes, exchange recipes and in general, not much more than have fun and chide one another. Several people also talk about the fact that straight partners should be more understanding and realize our need to be with both sexes. Someone takes the time to think a VERY real life situation out and suddenly he/she comes under attack. I think most of you have mistaken this analogy.

What BiBiologist is getting at is that the vast majority of bi's feel to some degree incomplete from time to time. Whether it's nothing more than a mild crush on the cute guy/girl at the local starbucks, or a full blown infatuation with the guy down the street. Continuing the analogy, you may from time to time feel comfortable with just the one shoe, but sometimes, you might feel the need to switch from foot to foot, etc. I don't feel the purpose of this was to categorize or stereotype bisexuals as a group of people that just need a lot of sex, I believe it goes deeper than that. It seemed to me the purpose of the original post was to say that once society can realize that bisexuals are not just looking for the best of both worlds, but that we are who we are from birth, perhaps people can look at the bisexual community differently. BiBiologist didn't imply (in my opinion) that in the meantime, bisexuals should hide, or conform, or change to appease society, but that we need to take an active stand in educating people so that people will no longer look at bisexuality the way they do. It is easy to sit by and talk about how straight people and even homosexual people are so unaccepting of bis. It is a completely different challenge to try to go out in the world and make a difference, to help educate people who don't really understand what it is like to be attracted to people of both sexes.

Stereotypes have, to one extent or another, a basis in truth. The problem is that society at large tends to only focus on the negative aspects and rarely the positive. Most of the people on this site are not out or out to only a small handful of people. Lose a job or a lifelong friend because of who you are, then come talk to those of us who have. Why should we do research to identify whether bisexuality is behavioral or genetic? The answer to that is simple; Knowledge is power, all forms for all reasons. If we can enlighten even a small part of the ignorant and scared mob mentality, then we would be that much better off.

It's very easy to sit behind a computer monitor and say that you don't care what others think, especially when those others are your peers. Have a person look you in the eye and then back away when they find out that you are bi, or not return a call because someone else told them and you never know why they never speak to you again. I have experienced all of these situations and many worse... my own father calls me a half faggot because he is ignorant and doesn't understand.

Do we need to educate the masses? You're goddamn straight (no pun) we do! Our chore is double what our gay and lesbian bretheren faces, they don't like us either. Stop, think, visualize and then act.

-IceLion :bipride:

[BiBiologist]

Oh Lord, IceLion, Thank You!!
sam

[csrakate]

Bi-Biologist, we have definitely been back and forth on this one and I realize that we agreed to disagree, but I must stand firm in my belief that bisexuals can be happy in a monogamous relationship. If my husband's bisexuality has made him unhappy at any time in our marriage, it was due to his frustrations that I continued to have MY fears and worries that he couldn't and wouldn't be faithful. Your theories merely echo things that I have read in the past that caused my fears...articles suggesting that it would be impossible for him to be happy, sexually satisfied, and able to commit to a heterosexual relationship with someone he loved.

Allbi, I appreciate your statement:

"Being bi does NOT exclude monogamy and to suggest a bisexual in a monogamous relationship would be unnatural or inheirently unhappy is to misunderstand the complexity of the human animal."

It certainly makes me feel better to hear someone else suggest that it is indeed possible....

Now...about that oven mitt...

Kate

[allbimyself]

I disagree that more studies will enlighten the masses. Some yes, but not enough to make a difference. Our society, the US anyway, has a distrust of such things.

And Ice Lion, i'm not condeming bibiologist for wanting to change things. I simply disagree with the methods.

Many studies have been done that show men are more prone to "cheat." That hasn't helped cheaters become more acceptable.

The only education that needs to be done is to show that we are more alike then we are different. People don't need to understand WHY we behave/feel like we do, just that that aspect of us does not in any way affect them.

Bibiologist, I believe in science, too, but I'm also a realist. Science does NOT convince the masses of anything. If it did, we wouldn't be having court cases over teaching intelligent design in public schools or have people giving up traditional medicine for woo woo BS such as homeopathy and magnet therapy.

Studies about bisexuality ARE needed, but to expect that the results will make a difference about how society as a whole feels about us is wishful thinking at best.

[slaphappypud]

BiBiologist,

I really think that bi is the most natural state of being. The ones who hold exclusively to one gender or the other are the ones who are somehow needy.
As for a biological basis for bisexuality?? WTF?? I don't think we need an "excuse" to make our sexuality "legitimate". I don't think that saying I'm somehow defective or different is the way to go, more I think that people should see me for the great guy I am rather than a genetic misfit with a freakish sexual appitite.
I think the idea is foolish.

[IceLion]

...but I must stand firm in my belief that bisexuals can be happy in a monogamous relationship.
Couldn't agree more csrakate. I am married and excitedly awaiting the birth of my first child. However, there will always be some kind of urge/temptation/craving, this will vary of course as to the depth that you identify as bi. What I mean is that if you are like me, 4 on the Kinsey Scale, it will likely be a stronger reaction than someone who is say a 1 or a 2. Take the negative context away from urge/craving/temptation. It is 100% natural to see a person and be attracted to them, acting on that attraction is entirely a differnt ball of wax and is subject to each individuals system of morals.


I disagree that more studies will enlighten the masses. Some yes, but not enough to make a difference. Our society, the US anyway, has a distrust of such things.
All knowledge is wrought from research. Doing studies and proving connections between elements in a persons psyche, physiology and psychology is a fundamental premise that has allowed us (humans) medicines to help those with an entire library of ailments from the physical to the mental. It has almost been reduced to a single gene as being the reason gays are gay. Why should it be any different for us? Insofar as society is concerned, there will always be the bible toting, blind and recalcitrant segement that will seek to kill what they do not understand, symbolically or otherwise.


And Ice Lion, i'm not condeming bibiologist for wanting to change things. I simply disagree with the methods.

Though this is going to sound snide it is not meant to be so; At a base level, at least BiBiologist has made an attempt to concieve of a way to further our cause. Don't be fooled, we are at war, for equality and acceptance. All wars are won by small battles leading to a larger conclusion.


I really think that bi is the most natural state of being. The ones who hold exclusively to one gender or the other are the ones who are somehow needy. As for a biological basis for bisexuality?? WTF?? I don't think we need an "excuse" to make our sexuality "legitimate".
I have been ACTIVELY bi for at least 7 yrs, if not more. We are needy, but to no more or less a degree than any of our mono counterparts. I think too much emphasis is being put on the title of this thread rather than its subject matter. As for needing an excuse to make our sexuality legitimate, I would love to know if you're out. I cannot stress the importance of defeating the stigma that is placed on being bi. When you get gay-bashed by a gay man you have to stop and realize that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way we are perceived. Excuse no, acceptance yes. Gays have been fighting prejudice for years, decades even, and we sit here in comfortable annonymity and speak about how we have nothing to prove.

Test your mettle, every person who has declared that the thinking on this thread is flawed or it is not necessary to try and educate the masses and fight the ignorance, I challenge you. Pick a friend(s) that do not know, are not privy to the second life you lead and tell them. As I have stated twice now in this thread, it is all too easy to say that what both BiBiologist and are saying is not necessary. What have you sacrificed to either gain or lose? You got credit on this site for another post, one step closer to "Unoffical Community Leader".

I have lost and gained for who I am. It may seem I'm taking this post very personally, I am. Unlike a majority on this site, I am totally out, I have literally fought to defend me and others like me against the ignorance that lurks in that cold place where "straight" is the norm. For Pride this year I was lucky enough to spend the night at the bedside of a friend who was attacked for marching in the parade. Not his own bed mind you, a hospital bed.

-IceLion :bipride:

[csrakate]

IceLion,
Congratulations on the impending birth of your child. What you are about to experience will be one of the most incredibly fulfilling and awe inspiring moments of your life. When you gaze upon the face of this tiny human being for the first time, you will indeed understand true joy. Relish this moment! (It might also come in handy one day when your child is a teenager and you wonder what in the hell you were thinking when you decided to have children, LOL!)

I know I am delivering this message to you in the midst of some very serious discussion, but I just could not let this moment pass. It is indeed a wonderful journey you are about to embark on and I wanted to wish you and your wife the very best.

Kate

[allbimyself]

All knowledge is wrought from research. Doing studies and proving connections between elements in a persons psyche, physiology and psychology is a fundamental premise that has allowed us (humans) medicines to help those with an entire library of ailments from the physical to the mental. It has almost been reduced to a single gene as being the reason gays are gay. Why should it be any different for us? Insofar as society is concerned, there will always be the bible toting, blind and recalcitrant segement that will seek to kill what they do not understand, symbolically or otherwise.

And has this research generally benefitted the homosexual community? Not really. Education has, but not education of biological differences. Education that we are the same; we work, we watch sports, worry about paying the bills, etc. as do heteros. The only difference is in the bedroom. Educate THAT and we will see acceptance. Again, at a political level, no one cares WHY we are different.


Though this is going to sound snide it is not meant to be so; At a base level, at least BiBiologist has made an attempt to concieve of a way to further our cause. Don't be fooled, we are at war, for equality and acceptance. All wars are won by small battles leading to a larger conclusion.
It doesn't sound snide at all. It's totally insulting. She is not the only one proposing solutions. Perhaps you should re-read all the posts.

To further your war analogy, not all strategies are effective and some are counter-productive. "Let's charge bunkers with sling shots!" Well, at least it's an attempt to conceive a solution.

Neither you nor bibiologist have addressed HOW her strategy will further the cause of acceptance. A study into why we're bi in a biological sense makes no difference in the war against intolerance.

You wrote above "Insofar as society is concerned, there will always be the bible toting, blind and recalcitrant segement that will seek to kill what they do not understand, symbolically or otherwise." This is true to an extent. It's the difference that makes it so, not the reason for the difference. Pointing out that the difference is biological only reenforces the difference.

I guess I have to say it again and again for you to undestand: We will be accepted by showing that we are NOT so different and that differences we have do not affect anyone but our sexual partners.

The uneducated masses don't care WHY we are different, they are only scared OF the difference. Educate them HOW we are NOT different and how that the differences we have are NOT important.


I have been ACTIVELY bi for at least 7 yrs, if not more. We are needy, but to no more or less a degree than any of our mono counterparts. I think too much emphasis is being put on the title of this thread rather than its subject matter.

Good for you. I had my first "serious" encounter with a man 18 years ago. Big deal.


As for needing an excuse to make our sexuality legitimate, I would love to know if you're out.
WTF? Being out has nothing to do with it.


Test your mettle, every person who has declared that the thinking on this thread is flawed or it is not necessary to try and educate the masses and fight the ignorance, I challenge you. Pick a friend(s) that do not know, are not privy to the second life you lead and tell them. As I have stated twice now in this thread, it is all too easy to say that what both BiBiologist and are saying is not necessary. What have you sacrificed to either gain or lose?
You need to take a course in logic. Having been hurt because of "coming out" to anyone does not make your arguments on the strategy of acceptence any more valid.

The logic that "Oh, I've been hurt more, I know best." is flawed on two obvious levels. First, you don't KNOW that you've been hurt more and that we haven't. Second, that particular experience does not make you wiser in how to fight the war.

Your attempt to use sympathy to gain support for you viewpoint is insulting. Very few of the members of this site have NOT been hurt when others have gained knowledge of their sexuality.

No one that has posted here has argued that society doesn't need to be more tolerant.

Now, if you want to come down from the lofty perch that you've built for yourself and discuss the issues, rather than insult the rest of us by saying we haven't offered solutions or that our solutions are invalid because we haven't been hurt as much as you, I'll be happy to continue this discussion.

[Chaia]

Wow! Everyone has some very strong opinions about this. I read the original post by BiBiologist, about the shoes, and I thought, "Yeah, that makes sense! I like that analogy!" Of course, I am partial to shoe analogies, because my husband got me to continue dating him 14 years ago by saying that a relationship was like a pair of shoes and I should try ours on, walk around for a bit, and see how it feels. It apparently felt good, because we are still happily together. I read the responses to BiBiologist and was a bit surprised at the...outrage expressed by some people. Then, when I read the post by IceLion I thought, "Ah, now things are clarified, and we will all understand better." But again, I was surprised by the responses. I guess it just goes to show that no matter how much we are the same, we are still different--or no matter how much we are different (in our opinions), we are still the same (in orientation). I suppose that is the most important thing to remember--generalizing a group can be very tricky, because we have such varied experiences.
Chaia

[IceLion]

IceLion,
Congratulations on the impending birth of your child. What you are about to experience will be one of the most incredibly fulfilling and awe inspiring moments of your life. When you gaze upon the face of this tiny human being for the first time, you will indeed understand true joy. Relish this moment! (It might also come in handy one day when your child is a teenager and you wonder what in the hell you were thinking when you decided to have children, LOL!)

I know I am delivering this message to you in the midst of some very serious discussion, but I just could not let this moment pass. It is indeed a wonderful journey you are about to embark on and I wanted to wish you and your wife the very best.

Kate

Thank you very much! I'm very excited about it.

[IceLion]

Ok... obviously things are slightly misunderstood. I am in no way trying to state that I've been hurt more, or experienced more or anything along those lines. Nor am I trying to insult people saying that my ways are better. However, after reading and re-reading all the posts on this thread, very few people have offered alternative solutions, except to say that it's no one's business what orientation they are and so on. To an extent, it's true. People don't need to know at all times, but in order to actively fight a cause, you can't stand there hiding in the corner. Also, I was not trying to insult anyone else, nor am I trying to be argumentative. I am simply showing my opinion that any step to encourage acceptance is a good plan. And I'm sure this will continue to add coal to your fire, Allbimyself, what do you offer up as a plan to educate society? This seems to be the foucs of your perspective. Again, not trying to insult you, just asking.

I do agree, Allbimyself, that we need to show how we are NOT different as well. However, I have heard over and over again, as I'm sure everyone else here has, that bi or gay people CHOOSE to be that way. I think on a base level, showing people that it isn't a choice could help them understand. That may even bring about the later point, that while we, genetically or biologically different, are still people, like everyone else. Just like a person with red hair is different, but still a normal, functional person. You also said that research has not really benefited the gay community. I don't fully agree with that, but even if that is the case, keeping homosexuality in the public eye has lead to some changes in society. We have sitcoms, and reality tv based on gay people, and they are highly rated shows. I think that research may be one way to keep this topic in people's minds, to show them that we won't just go away, research is just one avenue that may be used to do this. If you can change the mind of a single person then you have made forward progress.

Also, I have not tried to personally attack anyone in this thread, and find it silly that people need to go down to insulting people to "prove" their point. My logic is not that I've been hurt more and know more. I am sharing personal stories that may relate to some people and may reinforce the fact that we NEED to make a change in society. I'm sure everyone on this site has a story to tell about something bad that's happened to them. Now, hopefully you can see what I was trying to get at originally and realize that I'm not trying to preach to anyone, or state that I'm better for being hurt more. Hopefully people can see that I am not avoiding issues, nor am I just speaking on sob stories to gain support.

-IceLion :bipride:

[Bi-ten]

Hello everyone,

Its interesting to see such heated discussion and division amongst like minded people. It goes to show you the challenge we have in communicating and enlightening our hetero and homosexual siblings:)

I really think that bi-biologist had a fun and interesting analogy with the shoes...and she should be thanked for her efforts. I believe the emotion arises from the fact that she has hit some sensitive issues...

1. People do not like to be classified and branded. Science is a wonderful thing, but understanding which genome is a marker for gay or bisexual behavior really only scratches the surface of a very complicated issue.

2. People want to have a choice. I want to be able to choose that which is within my power. To me, it is within my power to be monogamous or not...just like everyone else. I may be attracted to more people than a hetero or gay person, but that does not make my choice of monogamy much more difficult.

3. People want to be loved and accepted. I think the idea of relying on science to help people understand and love us is really not palatable. The most science can do is help us understand the mechanics of who were are...what people really need to know is the Spirit of who we are.

Ice Lion, and I think Albi were trying to point us in that direction. The concept is to lead by example. If we shine in the world as the beautiful, complete and spiritual human beings that we are...then some will take notice. If those who take notice understand we are bisexual, then they will begin to realize that we are not to be feared.

This is not an easy message, we are not all in a position to be pioneers for bi understanding because we have jobs and families at stake.

For those of you who are able to bring the message, thank you. For those who must live within tighter constraints, I wish you strength and happiness.

Hugs,

[DÆMØN]

Let me clarify something.... I do NOT masturbate with an oven mitt! Not that there's anything wrong with that LOL

Oven mitts aside, wouldn't it be more practical maybe using surgical gloves ( oh Joy I got a whole box of those ! ) ... and anyhoo who gives a whoopie doo what someone else uses. The point is self gratification, ain't nobubby else responsible for that but thine own self. wØØt !

Rub On, Rub On, with glee in your heart...
:tong:

[csrakate]

Very nicely stated Bi-ten...as usual, you offer a calm, well thought out response to what seems to be a volatile subject.

I think we all have to remember that we all view things differently...we all have different circumstances regarding our lives...and while we appreciate the efforts of some to try and explain things via science, philosophy, religion...whatever...we recoil the minute someone suggests that their opinions, research, etc. categorizes an entire group of people merely because they share something in common. And we also recoil when we feel others might use said opinions, research, etc. to validate a behavior that they might feel is justified, a behavior that others just don't subscribe to. Bibiologist states that:

"Heteros and even some bisexuals themselves look at bisexuals as wanting something extra, but actually we only have half of what we need if we are living monogamously."

Basically saying this suggests that you condone cheating...and I know you say that isn't what you are suggesting....then please tell me just what is it you are suggesting? I realize that biseuxality is not a choice. But what you do with your sexuality is a choice, especially when you involve the lives of others.

Live and let live...and I'll state once more that I don't care how other people choose to live their lives...that is their right and I would never sit in judgement. But don't tell me that your research suggests that we should all accept said behaviors in our own lives...I just don't buy it.

Kate

[Mistya]

As a free willed living thinking monogamous individual, I would like to add in.......keeping my two feet covered is rare, I prefer to be barefoot :bigrin:

First off, I commend everyone for openly stating their opinions and beliefs here...what an incredibly dynamic thread!

We as human beings are capable of making informed decisions in life, love and the pursuit of happiness. For each of us, there is a different answer to all of the post here. I have read research that compares the human sexual behaviours to those of the animal kingdom...do I personally go out and have sexual relations with others based on a high need for the "strongest in the pack"...no. Based on my personal values and what I feel is right for me. I do not expect others to agree with my practices nor would I pass any sort of judgement on those who are acting on their personal belief system.

I enjoyed myself while experiencing enlightenment by reading through this. Instead of choosing a side I will remain stead-fast and continue to celebrate the beauty in being different. I relish the non-linear in this life and find it ever so challenging to be comfortable with my choices.

I do believe that the proof is in the variety here...Yes, everyone needs to be free to express their views and live their lives, without fear or prejudice. The general public always questions that which it does not understand. We all agree that some in our world do not know enough about or accept those with diversity regardless of anyone's sexuality.

I agree that trying to educate others could be and would be helpful to anyone who does not fit into the normal socially acceptable mold; but then again, only those who want to learn something new will find the information to be valuable. The others will continue with their bias. :rolleyes:

Thank heavens for variety, free will and levity. :bibounce:

[BiBiologist]

This thread is eating up a lot of my life, but I guess that's just the point--it must be that important. I am figuring that I will write a memoir a few years down the road (one of my books), and none of this is wasted. My first love was when I was 13. She was 16. We never did anything outside of usual teenage friendship. I don't know for sure but I believe that she was bi or lesbian. She was in a relationship with a 42-yr old man, I think to prove herself straight. She had a couple of abortions, and a couple attempted suicides, none of which I understood at the time. I have not seen her since she graduated from high school and I don't know whether she is alive or dead. I thought someday I would write about it, and I think maybe she is one of my motivating factors for wanting societal acceptance, so 16-yr-old kids don't end up committing suicide because they just don't know who they are.

Truth is all I seek. If studies are done, maybe we will find that bisexuals are more monogamous than heterosexuals. (Maybe we try harder.) I don't know. But maybe bi's ARE less likely (statistically) to be able to maintain a monogamous relationship. And maybe it will be born out that that is partially due to society's non-acceptance of alternative lifestyles. The truth is the truth, warts and all. It will also become known what we already know, that there are so many committed, monogamous, non-promiscuous bisexuals, and that bisexuals are different in no other way but whom they find attractive. My original point was, that non-acceptance of this, and foregoing any same-sex relationships, can make a bisexual more prone to symptoms of stress, maybe serious symptoms like my friend encountered. Maybe this knowledge will allow younger people to understand their sexuality and have some confidence that they are not bad and not alone, and on a practical side that they will understand before marriage who they are, and whether marriage is right for them. Maybe they'll decide that one shoe is OK, maybe not, but it won't be too late for them. I didn't have any of that knowledge 22 years ago, and I don't think we're that much better off now. I don't feel my tone has ever been to throw anything in anybody's face. I've never been political. I just believe what we face is hard, and I'd like to believe that knowledge is power and things can be done to make us all more comfortable.
Thanks
sam

[BiBiologist]

Just one more question for everyone: In searching the site, I found that there are 3 FF couples, 8 MM couples, and 467 MF couples registered on the site. There are thousands registered singly, so it would be quite a task to look at all the profiles to see if they mention being married, single, or in a same-sex relationship. Just from reading threads, looking at many of the profiles, and from the couples numbers, it appears that there are a lot more bi's in hetero than same-sex relationships. I also notice a lot of people rate themselves as 4's--equally straight and gay-lesbian. Why, then, if so many don't care what other people think, haven't more bi's chosen a same-sex partner for their primary relationship? Shouldn't it be closer to half if we are equally drawn to either sex? Wouldn't it be just as easy to fall in love and want to spend the rest of your life with someone of your own sex? At the risk of being fried in the fall-out again, that would seem to indicate that some, many, a goodly number? of us are forcing ourselves to live heterosexually. I brace for your responses.

[garik]

First, I'd like to express my agreement with everyone who pointed out that being bisexual doesn't mean needing both at once. I like to see my sexuality as 'being attracted to people'. I know some men who claim not to be attracted to black girls (and some for whom only black girls will do); whether or not this is racist (and I don't think it is), those of us who happen from time to time to be attracted to both black girls and white girls don't tend to feel unfulfilled if we can only get one. It's also worth bearing in mind that not only are many bisexuals happily monogamous, but many fully gay or heterosexual people are apparently not.

However appealing the shoe analogy might be, I think it's misleading. If I understand how you develop the idea, bisexuals only get one shoe when they enter a relationship (while heterosexuals and homosexuals get two) and so need to find another shoe. This implies to me that chastity (being barefoot) is preferable for bisexuals than being in a monogamous relationship (having only one shoe on, which I'd certainly find uncomfortable) - and that occasional flings (i.e. hopping around in one shoe for a bit) are also rather uncomfortable, and hardly preferable to long-term relationships (long-term hopping). I’m certainly pretty sure most bisexuals I know prefer some sort of sex to going without. And if we extend the metaphor to its logical conclusion, does it mean we all look forward to the evening of our lives when we can finally slip out of our relationships and put our sex-drives up in front of the telly.

Hmmm....


In general, I’m really not sure it works.

Also, while I think finding the biological basis for bisexuality - or homosexuality, for that matter - might well be interesting, I’m far from sure that it will be much help in changing perceptions for the better. Bear in mind that much research into such questions in the past has been aimed not at greater acceptance, but at finding a ‘cure’.

Anyway, the whole ‘They were born that way, so they can’t help it’ argument for tolerance is a poor one, and actually irrelevant. If you happen to be ‘biologically heterosexual’, whatever that might mean, and suddenly decide one day to explore the delights of your own gender, so what? It should have nothing to do with whether that’s how Nature, God or Dr Frankenstein made you: it’s your choice*.

Gareth


*Of course, if you already have a wife/husband/partner/live-in sex-slave, it's probably best to at least bring the matter up with them first.

[garik]

Fair enough! Hard to disagree with that!

Gareth

Truth is all I seek. If studies are done, maybe we will find that bisexuals are more monogamous than heterosexuals. (Maybe we try harder.) I don't know. But maybe bi's ARE less likely (statistically) to be able to maintain a monogamous relationship. And maybe it will be born out that that is partially due to society's non-acceptance of alternative lifestyles. The truth is the truth, warts and all. It will also become known what we already know, that there are so many committed, monogamous, non-promiscuous bisexuals, and that bisexuals are different in no other way but whom they find attractive. My original point was, that non-acceptance of this, and foregoing any same-sex relationships, can make a bisexual more prone to symptoms of stress, maybe serious symptoms like my friend encountered. Maybe this knowledge will allow younger people to understand their sexuality and have some confidence that they are not bad and not alone, and on a practical side that they will understand before marriage who they are, and whether marriage is right for them. Maybe they'll decide that one shoe is OK, maybe not, but it won't be too late for them. I didn't have any of that knowledge 22 years ago, and I don't think we're that much better off now. I don't feel my tone has ever been to throw anything in anybody's face. I've never been political. I just believe what we face is hard, and I'd like to believe that knowledge is power and things can be done to make us all more comfortable.
Thanks
sam[/QUOTE]

[kcunderwhere]

Wow - I'm gone for a couple of days, and things explode in here!

BiBiologist, you rock! And, kudos to Ice Lion as well.

Thanks to people like you, we are no longer burning people with epilepsy at the stake because they are "possessed by the devil" or sacrificing virgins to appease the "rain gods".

Let me simplify:
Knowledge and understanding is good.
Ignorance and denial is bad.

For people with the attitude "I'm bi, screw what the rest of the world thinks!" are apathetic. For every bi (or gay) person with that attitude, there are thousands more who are hiding in the closet, full of self-loathing, feelings of helplessness and fear. It is human nature to want approval, or at least acceptance, from our peers. Does it make you weak? No - it makes you normal. For those who have the fortitude to stand up and say "Here I am!", you should be actively trying to help people understand and assist those who are too scared to accept themselves and who they are - instead of just telling everyone who doesn't like you to f*ck off.

For those who have the attitude "We must emphasize our similarities, not our differences...", you are naive. That sounds remarkably similar to "Don't ask, don't tell." It's not like we are space aliens, and we need to point out that we have two eyes, two arms, one brain... People know our similarities - we are all human. However, it is not our similarities that make people dislike us - it is our differences...differences they don't understand. And by differences, we aren't talking about discussing our sexual practices or the finer points of analingus...we are talking about helping them understand that our being bisexual (or homosexual, or transgendered...) is no more a choice then "them" being heterosexual.

Anybody who was going to unconditionally accept bi's, gays, etc. for who they are have already done so. The people we now need to educate are those who still think bisexuality, homosexuality and transgenderism is a choice, like choosing to wear a red shirt this morning instead of a blue one. They are the ones that run the Christian Youth Camps that take young, sexually confused kids and "teach" them how to make the "right choice". Unfortunately, they are not ever going to wake up one day and decide to accept us. They need to understand it's not a choice...it's not a conscious decision...it is a biologically, genetically inherent thing.

And, I wish people would stop obsessing about the monogamy thing - nobody has ever, in any way, ever suggested that bisexuals cannot be monogamous! What BiBiologist is trying to point out is that we are biological beings, driven by biological needs unique to us (as bisexuals).

For all of those who say "I am bisexual and monogamous, and just don't act on my bisexual thoughts." - why are you here in this forum? Because even you have to address those bisexual thoughts and desires to some degree. Does it mean we physically and biologically cannot be faithful? Absolutely not.

I also believe BiBiologist is not trying to say that we are sick or unable to function without having sex all the time with anything that moves. People try to compare us to homosexuals and heterosexuals when it comes to monogamy and attraction - but it is not the same. A heterosexual husband might look at other women...might look at women in pornography...might even fantasize about women other than his wife...but at the end of the day, all his sexual needs can be filled at home - because he only desires women, he has a woman at home, he achieves that sexual release, he is happy. However, a bisexual husband desires sexual release from both men and women...so he can get his needs for a woman filled at home with his wife, but is perpetually frustrated in his needs for sexual release with a man. Again, does this mean he has to cheat? Of course not. It does, however, mean that many bisexuals have an additional stressor (a very powerful, biologically and socially charged stressor) upon them that gay and heterosexual people do not have to deal with.

OK - let the flaming begin! I've got my fire extinguisher loaded with reason, logic, knowledge, love and understanding and I'm ready to go! :tong:

Post Script -
Garik -
Anyway, the whole ‘They were born that way, so they can’t help it’ argument for tolerance is a poor one, and actually irrelevant. If you happen to be ‘biologically heterosexual’, whatever that might mean, and suddenly decide one day to explore the delights of your own gender, so what? It should have nothing to do with whether that’s how Nature, God or Dr Frankenstein made you: it’s your choice*.

In an ideal world, you would almost be right. People are people, so why should it be, you and I should get along so awfully...:bigrin: Unfortunately, not everyone is as enlightened, and need a reason or explaination before making a judgement or changing their mind.

[allbimyself]

Just one more question for everyone: In searching the site, I found that there are 3 FF couples, 8 MM couples, and 467 MF couples registered on the site. There are thousands registered singly, so it would be quite a task to look at all the profiles to see if they mention being married, single, or in a same-sex relationship. Just from reading threads, looking at many of the profiles, and from the couples numbers, it appears that there are a lot more bi's in hetero than same-sex relationships. I also notice a lot of people rate themselves as 4's--equally straight and gay-lesbian. Why, then, if so many don't care what other people think, haven't more bi's chosen a same-sex partner for their primary relationship? Shouldn't it be closer to half if we are equally drawn to either sex? Wouldn't it be just as easy to fall in love and want to spend the rest of your life with someone of your own sex? At the risk of being fried in the fall-out again, that would seem to indicate that some, many, a goodly number? of us are forcing ourselves to live heterosexually.
This is an interesting idea. Unfortunately, you don't have enough data to begin to make assumptions. A hypothesis, yes. It's a heavy jump from "I .. notice a lot of peple rate themselves as 4's" to "Shouldn't it be closer to half if we are equally drawn to either sex?" Before you can get to that conclusion you have to only count those that rate themselves as 4 that are IN a relationship. Furthermore, you'd have to ask how many were in that relationship BEFORE they realized/accepted their sexuality. It wouldn't be fair to say, "oh, well, you didn't leave your wife so you aren't really bi." Throw those out and then you'll have a basis for discussion.

Yes, it's probably very likely that there are a larger number of 4's that entered into a hetero relationship after realization/acceptance than those in homosexual relationships. Why not? After all if you are equally attracted it would be easier to take the hetero road in a relationship due to societal pressures. Is that a cop out as you seem to imply? I don't think so. But that's a political/psychological discussion, not a biological one. So we are both equally (dis?)qualified to discuss it and either opinion is valid.

Look, I keep saying this, but I guess I'll have to say it again: I'm NOT against any kind of scientific study. It's just that I don't believe it will change any opinions.



For those who have the attitude "We must emphasize our similarities, not our differences...", you are naive. That sounds remarkably similar to "Don't ask, don't tell."Umm, no it's not. I'm not saying hide who you are. I'm saying don't walk up to strangers on the street and say "I'm bisexual. You must accept me because I am biologically different and can't help myself." If you think that will work YOU are the naive one.

I notice you choose not to address any of the examples I made that show that emphasizing similarities (or common ground, if you will) has changed more minds than "in your face" politics. Fine. Until you do, your dismissal of that tactic is childish.


Anybody who was going to unconditionally accept bi's, gays, etc. for who they are have already done so. The people we now need to educate are those who still think bisexuality, homosexuality and transgenderism is a choice, like choosing to wear a red shirt this morning instead of a blue one. They are the ones that run the Christian Youth Camps that take young, sexually confused kids and "teach" them how to make the "right choice". Unfortunately, they are not ever going to wake up one day and decide to accept us. They need to understand it's not a choice...it's not a conscious decision...it is a biologically, genetically inherent thing.This is wrong on so many levels. Their have been many studies that show that homosexuality is NOT a choice. These people don't care. We can pretty much split these people into two groups. Those that are "following" out of fear, and those that preach out of hate. The second group is all but hopeless. A few individuals might have an ephiphany at some point and change, but not many. The first group, CAN change, but as long as they are kept ignorant and fearful, they won't. They don't care if it's a choice or not. They're afraid that a "homo" moving in next door will corrupt their kids. That all sorts of "weirdness" will happen. THAT is the ignorance that needs to be fought.


And, I wish people would stop obsessing about the monogamy thing - nobody has ever, in any way, ever suggested that bisexuals cannot be monogamous! What BiBiologist is trying to point out is that we are biological beings, driven by biological needs unique to us (as bisexuals).Actually, yes, bibiologist HAS said exactly that. Perhaps you should read some of her other thoughts in other threads.

Her suggestion for a study not only included looking for genetic and/or other indicators of biological difference, but also stated a conclusion that bisexuals would be unhappy in a monogamous relationship.

I'm not sure if you are aware of studies that already show a biological difference between straight, gay and bisexual. MRI's of brain structure have already shown that our brains are "wired" differently. I'll leave you to google that. BiBiologists other apologizer, IceLion, has also pointed out these studies. If these studies exist why aren't these changing opinions as you state they should?


I also believe BiBiologist is not trying to say that we are sick or unable to function without having sex all the time with anything that moves. People try to compare us to homosexuals and heterosexuals when it comes to monogamy and attraction - but it is not the same. A heterosexual husband might look at other women...might look at women in pornography...might even fantasize about women other than his wife...but at the end of the day, all his sexual needs can be filled at home - because he only desires women, he has a woman at home, he achieves that sexual release, he is happy. However, a bisexual husband desires sexual release from both men and women...so he can get his needs for a woman filled at home with his wife, but is perpetually frustrated in his needs for sexual release with a man. Again, does this mean he has to cheat? Of course not. It does, however, mean that many bisexuals have an additional stressor (a very powerful, biologically and socially charged stressor) upon them that gay and heterosexual people do not have to deal with.Yes, this is a reasonable conclusion, if you make some broad assumptions about all bisexuals. THAT is the problem. We are all different. When I'm not in a relationship, I find that I can quite happily have sex with either gender. When I'm inside a relationship (a healthy, happy relationship) I do NOT miss not having sex with ANYONE else.

Another point that I'd like to make about scientific studies. People can and do draw their own conclusions to the MEANING of the studies. A study that shows biological differences CAN and WILL be used against us by those that are driven by hate to sway those that are fearful and ignorant.


I've got my fire extinguisher loaded with reason, logic, knowledge, love and understandingYou seem reasonable and logical. I don't know enough about you to judge your love and understanding. This is not a flame, but your knowledge does seem to be lacking. Lacking in an understanding of human psychology as well as lacking in knowledge of what studies have already been done.

[alleycat]

Okay.. it took me almost 40 minutes to read all of the posts on this thread and even though my head is reeling and I'm not sure exactly how to put what I think, I feel like I should at least attempt a response since I've invested some of my sleep time in this thread! So, here goes...

When I read the opening post by BiBiologist I agreed with it for the most part and liked the whole "shoe anaology" taking it with a grain of salt. The responses have been very heated and everyone is entitled to their opinion, but some have come very close to what I would call an attack on bibiologist's ideas/theoies. I would hope that forums can be a place to state opinions and debate theoretical ideas but not to attack and critize others.

It seems to come down to the whole debate as to whether or not bisexuals can be complete, whole, satisfied, fulfilled (whatever word you choose here) in a monogomous relationship. I thought the shoe analogy was good because it worked for me and my situation. I agree with others on this thread that it isn't that way for all bisexuals. I also think that the shoe analogy would work on heterosexual couples who are having difficulties in marriage - trying on another shoe could be like the drug that took the sting away for awhile. But like the saying, "the grass isn't always greener on the other side", trying to solve the problems of a marriage by putting on another shoe (finding respite in the arms of a lover) doesn't always work.

So.. I find myself, as a married monogomous bisexual, sometimes wondering about that other shoe when times in my marriage are rough. I wonder if I made the right "choice". However, like the point made in the paragraph above, I think sometimes that even if I weren't bisexual I would still be wondering if I made the right "choice" (i.e. the right man). I guess what I'm trying to say is that the problem with the shoe analogy is the amount of variables there are in determining how your shoes fit and if you need to change them.

In my own life I loose one shoe from time to time for different reasons. By this I mean that by being a married monogomous bisexual I often feel a void or an empty spot in my core that I know is not being fulfilled. Can I live with this? Probably. The nagging void is always there - an ebb and flow. But I always wonder... When will I again be intimate with someone of my own gender? When my husband dies? How old will I be then? Will I even be alive then? I'd love to say that my husband fulfills my every desire - but he doesn't. There is something that he will never be able to fulfill - and he knows this about me. He's not happy about it and it doesn't make him feel very safe. But my bisexuality and desires to be with someone of my own gender doesn't make my husband feel like he needs to go out and be with other women. Maybe this is the kind of situation that bibioligist was trying to get at with the whole shoe thing?????????????????????

Off the subject I'd like to say that I'm impressed with the intellectual thought train on this thread - one of the reasons why I liked this site. It's now late (it's all relative) and I'm going to bed. Goodnight all..

Alley

[nicad]

I think BiBiogist's shoe analogy is a very good one, but it simply doesn't fit everyone. I also agree with those who don't want to be shoehorned into a particular lifestyle.

As has also been discussed, nature builds into us a conflict of interests - between "faithfulness" and "genetic instincts" and as civilised beings we design our way of living with the best of intentions but may all come to different conclusions as to what is best.

I think that there are two issues here; both are inter-related in some ways, but both are independent of each other. I believe that separating them for the purposes of this discussion has some value in understanding ourselves and others.

One issue is our sexuality. Whatever that is for you, it is natural and right.

The other is whether we are monogamous or polyamorous. Either are equally valid and are personal to the individual.

So one might be bi, gay or straight, and happily committed to one person of whatever sex that person happened to be that one fell in love with. If you are monogamous then you are happiest committing your entire life and being to that one person regardless of your sexuality or what sex that person is provided you are attracted to them and in love with them.

On the other hand, again whatever your sexuality, you might be polyamorous. So being genuinely in love with one person doesn't prevent you from falling genuinely in love with other people. Again the sexuality issue doesn't matter, only love and compaitbility matter in this sense.

For me understanding this is enough to explain the confusions that seem to be generated from "conventional society". Perhaps BiBiologist's analogy works better in those whose instincts are polyamorous.

It may be that being bisexual draws us in the direction of a polyamorous existance, but lovers are not collectors items - "Ive got a boy now I need a girl to finish the set".

I am pansexual and polyamorous. I am in love with several people, and their gender is merely incidental, I love them for who they are not what they are.

Each person must find their own way to live with what they need both emotionally and physically. For me Polyamory works best and is the most honest solution. And it doesn't necessarily mean having many lovers, just more than one. There's a great deal to be said in favour of the good old fashioned menage a trois! It's just a question of what works for you!

The complications arise when monogamous people and poly people fall in love. The conflicts of interest that result can be hard to overcome, but perhaps those issues need another topic.

[BiBiologist]

In my own life I loose one shoe from time to time for different reasons. By this I mean that by being a married monogomous bisexual I often feel a void or an empty spot in my core that I know is not being fulfilled. Can I live with this? Probably. The nagging void is always there - an ebb and flow. But I always wonder... When will I again be intimate with someone of my own gender? When my husband dies? How old will I be then? Will I even be alive then? I'd love to say that my husband fulfills my every desire - but he doesn't. There is something that he will never be able to fulfill - and he knows this about me. He's not happy about it and it doesn't make him feel very safe. But my bisexuality and desires to be with someone of my own gender doesn't make my husband feel like he needs to go out and be with other women. Maybe this is the kind of situation that bibioligist was trying to get at with the whole shoe thing?????????????????????


Yes. It's always there, and it is something totally different than what a heterosexual has to deal with. As I said in my second post, I'm sorry I pinned the extreme need for this on all of us, by saying "We as bisexuals." I am usually very careful not to talk in absolutes. Because of my own situation I have probably overestimated whether this need is extreme in most bi's. But it's like a lot of genetically-rooted situations with a wide gradient of intensities. Some people with anxiety can get by all their lives without any real difficulty--it's just a little annoying at times. Others are debilitated by it and need drugs to control their symptoms. The shoe analogy fits the more severe cases. Many of us didn't know we were the more severe cases when we got married; I myself was marrying the man I thought was best for me, and I didn't know how my feelings were different from heterosexuals. By teasing this out with research, I think the benefits will be that bisexuals in the next generations will have more information with which to make choices for a fulfilling lifestyle, in a more accepting social environment, thereby reducing the need to cheat. I never expected any of these solutions to work right now, for any of us who are well down the paths we chose when we were young.

I disagree with allbimyself's analysis of what I am saying here and in my other posts, and I think if anybody wants to spend the time to read them, they can make up their own minds.

kcunderwhere, I was hoping you were out there--you made some great points too!

I was very interested in what nicad had to say, and I think you're right! I might be looking at polyamory v. monogamy and mixing it with bisexuality. Hmmm, so now I'm a polyamorous bisexual living in a monogamous heterosexual lifestyle. Ouch! Stay tuned for the next analogy.
sam

[Mistya]

Sam,
This is still a great case study that should be done with anyone who is willing to speak openly, honestly about their feelings. The variety in this site's membership is a great show of people who have come together to participate with others who they identify with. Fortunately this site is avaiable to those of us with "Bi" being the most common thread. While maintaining a means of exercising opinions.


Why, then, if so many don't care what other people think, haven't more bi's chosen a same-sex partner for their primary relationship?

My honest response here is that my primary partner for life is my best male friend. We love each other unconditionally. We live our lives together since we are happy together. I am not in a same sex relationship since this is the one that is working for me. When I ID'ed myself as a bi-who is equally attracted to both genders, that is an example of my capability to like, enjoy and love either male or female...if I feel an attraction for some one I feel an attraction for the person...Not a gender. I can equally dislike either gender if they are just a jerk in life too.

Shouldn't it be closer to half if we are equally drawn to either sex?

Good question and thought. Speaking only for myself here...No one has the same taste in life. For me, I am in this marrage because it makes me happy. It does not leave me with a void in my life. It allows me the pleasure of being happy and that is my priority in life...To be with a partner who is willing to enjoy life with me. I would like to add that my happiness is in being able to live my life as I see fit...I am not in this marrage to find happiness in him as I do not seek my happiness in others.

Wouldn't it be just as easy to fall in love and want to spend the rest of your life with someone of your own sex?

Wouldn't ya think!? LOL Love is blind when it comes to loving some one. I see this relationship as one of equality and acceptance. I use to question things like being able to love this person and why it was important for me to be here. After time I have learned to accept things for what and how they are. In my life, love is suppose to be blind...unconditional...an affair of the heart.

Noooo falling outs here Sam...Your post and thoughts help all of us to stop and think...and for that...Thank you. I also am going to add in...If you want my opinion, here it is. I am not a bi-woman living a forced hetro-life...I am a woman living my life in a happy place.

Supporting and accepting one another is a great way to build in a community.

[kcunderwhere]

:bounce: This is fun!!

Where do I start......

First off...for everyone taking this personally and assuming you are the alpha example of a "bisexual" or whatever - get off your high horse and get over yourself. There is a reason people use the words "some" and "many" instead of "all" and "every"...the stuff here does not apply to "every"body, and if it doesn't apply to you it doesn't mean it is wrong.

Look, I keep saying this, but I guess I'll have to say it again: I'm NOT against any kind of scientific study. It's just that I don't believe it will change any opinions.Did you miss the humor in the opening to my last post?? I guess so. Why do you think gays and lesbians have been gaining acceptance in our society? Did our sparkling personalities just suddenly win "them" over? No - alot of it has been the recent scientific evidence that shows homosexuality is not a choice. Once reasonable people understood that gays weren't being gay just to piss them off, or that being gay is not a disease, or that being gay is not something learned, then they became OK with it. Knowledge is power.

Umm, no it's not. I'm not saying hide who you are. I'm saying don't walk up to strangers on the street and say "I'm bisexual. You must accept me because I am biologically different and can't help myself." If you think that will work YOU are the naive one. UMMM...If you think anybody is talking about walking up to strangers and declaring your sexuality, I apologize. I guess I missed where you were told to put on your rainbow outfit and prance around town chanting "We're Here! We're Queer! Get Used To It!"
I notice you choose not to address any of the examples I made that show that emphasizing similarities (or common ground, if you will) has changed more minds than "in your face" politics. Fine. Until you do, your dismissal of that tactic is childish.How am I supposed to address "examples" when there weren't any, and your logic is based on flawed presumptions? Nobody is saying to emphasize our differences...nobody is saying flaunt our differences. Nobody definitely said anything about "in your face" politics. However, we cannot just ignore our differences and hope nobody notices. It is our differences that they fear, not our similarities. People fear what they do not understand...do you honestly need examples where knowledge and understanding has led to better things? How about we stop sending our kids to school, stop teaching them things at home, and see what happens. To quote you:
The first group, CAN change, but as long as they are kept ignorant and fearful, they won't.The key word there is ignorant, i.e. lacking in knowledge or education.
This is wrong on so many levels. Their have been many studies that show that homosexuality is NOT a choice. These people don't care. We can pretty much split these people into two groups. Those that are "following" out of fear, and those that preach out of hate. The second group is all but hopeless. A few individuals might have an epiphany at some point and change, but not many. The first group, CAN change, but as long as they are kept ignorant and fearful, they won't. They don't care if it's a choice or not. They're afraid that a "homo" moving in next door will corrupt their kids. That all sorts of "weirdness" will happen. THAT is the ignorance that needs to be fought.Ummm...yeah. That is what we have been saying over...and over...and over. As for the people you say don't care anyway...there will always be people who will never accept anything but their own, narrow beliefs (on both sides...). For the rest - we educate them, they understand, they accept. I have to differ on your opinion that the "choice or not" does not matter - it is the foundation of understanding. Without this, "they" will believe "homo's" are making a deliberately deviant choice, that "homo's" can teach their kids to be "homo", that "homo" is a disease.
Actually, yes, bibiologist HAS said exactly (that bisexuals cannot be monogamous). Perhaps you should read some of her other thoughts in other threads.

Her suggestion for a study not only included looking for genetic and/or other indicators of biological difference, but also stated a conclusion that bisexuals would be unhappy in a monogamous relationship.If you could give me specific quotes where she said "All bisexuals are incapable of monogamy", it would be appreciated. Again, I missed that one.
I'm not sure if you are aware of studies that already show a biological difference between straight, gay and bisexual. MRI's of brain structure have already shown that our brains are "wired" differently. I'll leave you to google that. BiBiologists other apologizer, IceLion, has also pointed out these studies. If these studies exist why aren't these changing opinions as you state they should? Well, hate to burst your bubble, but they have been changing minds for years... Like I said, there are those open minded individuals who will accept anybody. Great. There are those who need to understand something before they accept it - and many of these people have come to accepting homosexuality, etc. by understanding that we are not deliberately being different by choice, but we are inherently homosexual, etc. just like they are heterosexual. Then they can see we are not monsters, but people just like them.
Yes, this is a reasonable conclusion, if you make some broad assumptions about all bisexuals. THAT is the problem.Nobody is trying to make "broad assumptions" about bisexuals. I apologize if it seemed that way...that is why I said "SOME bisexuals have additional stressors" - not "ALL bisexuals have..."
We are all different. When I'm not in a relationship, I find that I can quite happily have sex with either gender. When I'm inside a relationship (a healthy, happy relationship) I do NOT miss not having sex with ANYONE else.Great! Welcome to the majority of the couples out there! As we have been saying...nobody has said that bisexuals cannot be monogomous or cannot be happy. However, just because you are happy, don't assume everyone is. Look at the number of other posts here posing the "cheating" question.
Another point that I'd like to make about scientific studies. People can and do draw their own conclusions to the MEANING of the studies. A study that shows biological differences CAN and WILL be used against us by those that are driven by hate to sway those that are fearful and ignorant.Almost any study (scientific or otherwise) can be misinterpreted, reinterpreted or whatever...does this mean we should stop doing anything that could possibly be taken the wrong way? Should I never walk past someone in a wheelchair, just in case they interpret it as me "showing off" my ability to use my legs? We will stop progressing as a race if we always fear somebody could "take it the wrong way".
Lacking in an understanding of human psychology as well as lacking in knowledge of what studies have already been done.I believe we have been basing our discussions on the studies and human psychology you state we are lacking knowledge of...

Just a random quote from other website:

"Becoming informed about gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues helps reduce heterosexism and homophobia. This makes it easier for everyone to live more open and productive lives in their work and home communities. The culture as a whole is therefore enriched."

Finally, we are all in this together. Not every approach or idea is perfect for every situation. All BiBiologist was saying is that she believes (as do I) that as bisexuals we are unique, and gave scientific reasoning why. And, I think she did an excellent job of later clarifying her point and specifying that she was not refering to "all" bisexuals, or that she was indicating a particular course of action, or that bisexuals could not be monogamous
BiBiologist:
I didn't say that we CANNOT maintain a satisfying monogamous relationship- although I think the shear number and verocity of debates on just these forums relating to sex, monogomy, etc. flesh out her theories about how it may be more difficult for a bisexual to have a fulfilling monogamous relationship - but it is by no means impossible.

"The more you know, the more you grow!" (isn't that lifted from some cheezy "stay in school" TV commercial??). What you do with the information is up to you.

[swingcpl57]

Hi all,
We're a male/female couple. She is "bi" and he is "bi-curious". Both tags that are used for others to understand our sexuality. We are in a monogamus relationship. Go figure! We are currently seeking other couples to "swing" with us solely for sexual pleasure. We are in love and that will not change regardless of the fact that he may have sex with another woman or a man. The same goes for her. The desire to do this cannot be explained. It's just there. Can anyone explain why they like a certain colour or smell? We can't. So why try to explain why one prefers men to women or vice-versa?
To sum it up here is a great quote...since everyone else is quoting
"Live and let live".
Worry about yourselves, not about others. Don't make other peoples hangups your problem. You might be a happier person.
Just our thoughts....
swingcpl57

[garik]

This is wrong on so many levels. Their have been many studies that show that homosexuality is NOT a choice.

I agree wholeheartedly that sexuality is not fundamentally a choice (although it's such a complex phenomenon that I suspect that all sexuality generally involves elements of choice), but really it shouldn't matter whether it is or not!

For people who think homosexual activity is wrong, choosing it would constitute a bad choice and natural homosexuality is akin to a disability. I just really don't like the patronising 'they can't help it' level of tolerance - lurking underneath we can still almost hear 'it'd still be better if they weren't'.

I'm a great believer in knowledge for its own sake, and I think that understanding sexuality is important, but I _don't_ see this as the key to acceptance.

Regardless of whether we're gay/bisexual/heterosexual through nature, choice or whatever, what's the problem?

As someone like Liz Taylor once said, 'Of course it's interesting to look into the causes of homosexuality, but it's far more useful to look into what causes homophobia.'

[bigregory]

LOL you guys are killing me.
Im just happy to be BI.
Screw the reasoning.
enjoy.
:flag4:

[arana]

Awww Greg, finally someone sensible! lol

Hugs,
Arana :tong:

[csrakate]

As someone like Liz Taylor once said, 'Of course it's interesting to look into the causes of homosexuality, but it's far more useful to look into what causes homophobia.'

This statement speaks volumes!!! The scientific reasoning behind bisexuality means nothing until the reason that people hate for no reason is understood. People who fall into this category are far too ignorant to understand or accept science.

Kate :tong:

[arana]

This statement speaks volumes!!! The scientific reasoning behind bisexuality means nothing until the reason that people hate for no reason is understood. People who fall into this category are far too ignorant to understand or accept science. Kate :tong:

Very true Kate. Maybe we should ask the various minorities how well scientific research has helped them get further acceptance in the world. Are all races treated equally now in this country? Are women accepted as equals everywhere? Understanding and accepting don't always go hand in hand. Sometimes you get people who just enjoying hating and unfortunately they are usually more outspoken then those who do not.

ok, I'll shut up now..... :eek:

[BiBiologist]

There is a new movie coming out on Friday, called "North Country", directed by Niki Caro and starring Charlize Theron and lots of others. It is filmed in the place I grew up, and I worked in those mines. I got to see it last night, pre-release. It is amazing how one person can change a lot of attitudes, and her case changed sexual harassment policy nationwide. It is based on a true story, a book called "Class Action" (but see the movie first). If nobody stands up, nothing will ever change.

[Michael623]

The main problem is that there is so little research, so little understood by the scientific community to report to society at large. Even after evidence becomes available to support the idea that a behavior, such as the bisexual trait, is inborn, it will take a long time for people to understand bisexuals are not threatening.

This is the main point of your thread Bibiologist. I am an uneducated man but have spent almost 58 years on this earth and consider myself a very logical person. I don't believe for one second what you are saying is true.

[kcunderwhere]

First off, I would like to apologize to BiBiologist…I know I have gotten off of the original post into territory I don’t think she ever intended the debate to go. Things got a little ugly.

Thank you csrakate, arana, garik…you have given succinct, relevant responses to her original post and “reeled” things in a bit.

I think she had a very good theory.
Is it the entire “solution” – No.
Is it part of the “solution” – I believe so.
Is any information or knowledge useful in combating hate, fear, ignorance and prejudice – I believe so.

There will always be those who will accept “you” for who you are…no questions asked. That is how it should be.

There will always be those who will never accept “you”…and you can’t change their minds for them. That is how it is.

For everyone else - there isn’t one “perfect plan” that will make them accept “you”…but I appreciate any attempt to help make the world a better place (for you and me…OK, now I’ve got that damn “We Are The World” song stuck in my head. You know, the one with all the 80’s pop stars…”We are the world, we are the children…we are the ones who make a brighter day, so let’s start giving…” Ahhhhhh!)

Have a beautiful day!
:flag4:

[IceLion]

The main problem is that there is so little research, so little understood by the scientific community to report to society at large. Even after evidence becomes available to support the idea that a behavior, such as the bisexual trait, is inborn, it will take a long time for people to understand bisexuals are not threatening.

This is the main point of your thread Bibiologist. I am an uneducated man but have spent almost 58 years on this earth and consider myself a very logical person. I don't believe for one second what you are saying is true.

I totally agree that there is insufficient information available to the mob-at-large. Too many people not only hate what they don't understand, but they raise children teaching this kind of hatred. They circle themselves with like-minded people who enforce and help them to rationalize what they refuse to see. They are blind and will likely never change. As AllBiMyself pointed out there is another group of people, those who are stuck in a kind of "ethical limbo". They follow the popular preconceptions and are afraid to oppose the "norm". They are ignorant, not stupid, just lacking sufficient evidence to convince them that what they don't understand isn't necessarily evil. They can change with enough evidence that their hatred is unwarranted.

As a few of us in this thread have posted, there is no one way of confronting this situation. But to sit idle and do nothing is worse than any fate the mono community can offer insofar as persecution is concerned. We condemn ourselves to live in our little holes, closets or whatever analogy you want to put to it. I think flaunting it puts us on the same level as those who refuse to accept the things that make all humans unique, so we can't go that route, not for long at least.

Mayhap some day there will be a worldwide epiphany, and we can suddenly love one another as the individual, unique and beautiful people all humans are. Maybe someday we'll reach a level of tolerance where color, creed, sexual orientation and religious beliefs can be accepted by everyone equally. Will this happen? Not likely. Until that time however, I can't stress how important it is that IF you can do even the most minute part to help effect a change, do it.

The focus of a lot of this thread has been towards doing research to "prove" who we are and why we are like this. This is not an end-all solution, but it's a start. The mere fact that we keep it in public view by itself I believe will help to at least make the concept more comfortable if not acceptable. People are less leary of things they have broader exposure to, it takes away some of the mystery that makes it unacceptable or deplorable.

"The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." -Confucious

-IceLion :bipride:

[nicad]

Just a quick followup to what I said yesterday -


"The other is whether we are monogamous or polyamorous."

Of course there are, I suppose, all the variations between monogamy and polyamory to take into account as well.... :)

[RebekaLee]

This statement speaks volumes!!! The scientific reasoning behind bisexuality means nothing until the reason that people hate for no reason is understood. People who fall into this category are far too ignorant to understand or accept science.

Kate :tong:


Very true Kate. Maybe we should ask the various minorities how well scientific research has helped them get further acceptance in the world. Are all races treated equally now in this country? Are women accepted as equals everywhere? Understanding and accepting don't always go hand in hand. Sometimes you get people who just enjoying hating and unfortunately they are usually more outspoken then those who do not.

ok, I'll shut up now..... :eek:


Kudos to Kate and Arana! :cop:

[BiBiologist]

Kudos to Kate and Arana! :cop:

So what do you suggest we do? Nothing? Take a look at retrowordsmith's post in "I need a hero". That's the kind of problem I am taliking about. How is he going to support his claims in court that his bisexuality should not be considered a factor in his parenting?

[csrakate]

BiBiologist,
As sad as retrowordsmiths predicament might be, his situation is exacerbated by other factors such as his mental health and the fact that his wife is using her beliefs in a fundamental religion to keep him from his son. His primary problem is that he doesn't have the financial resources available to him to fight this battle legally. I feel for him and I truly hope he has a satisfactory outcome for his battle, but we can't pin this on his bisexuality alone. Custody decisions are based on who would provide the best home possible for a child and sexual orientation doesn't mean squat if the a parent, like in this case the mother, is using underhanded tactics to keep a father away from the child. The legal system may be flawed, but the best interest of the child is always first and foremost. Let's not blur the issue by trying to attach sexual orientation bias to this particular case. I would hate to see this issue become an excuse to scream discrimination at every turn. It only serves to diminish the importance of it when it really counts.

Kate

[BiBiologist]

I acknowledge your feeling, Kate. But I'm not screaming discrimination, and I disagree that his sexual orientation doesn't mean squat. His mental state has a lot to do with what people tried to do to him because they disagreed with his ideals. Isn't that what we want, is to gain acceptance for everyone who is different? Where are you drawing your line? We expect courts to make a decision for what is best, but "The scientific reasoning behind bisexuality means nothing until the reason that people hate for no reason is understood. People who fall into this category are far too ignorant to understand or accept science." How much less ignorant to the facts of bisexuals are judges than the rest of society?

[csrakate]

I acknowledge your feeling, Kate. But I'm not screaming discrimination, and I disagree that his sexual orientation doesn't mean squat. His mental state has a lot to do with what people tried to do to him because they disagreed with his ideals. Isn't that what we want, is to gain acceptance for everyone who is different? Where are you drawing your line? We expect courts to make a decision for what is best, but "The scientific reasoning behind bisexuality means nothing until the reason that people hate for no reason is understood. People who fall into this category are far too ignorant to understand or accept science." How much less ignorant to the facts of bisexuals are judges than the rest of society?


BiBiologist,
I draw the line at making generalized blanket statements about a subject and expecting everyone to fall in line with my beliefs. You have absolutely no idea what caused him to have his mental issues and I will not allow you to generalize mental illness as a society caused problem. You don't know his mental status, nor do you know what caused his problems. All you seem to hear is that he is bisexual, therefore he is oppressed. You are diminishing mental illness for the rest of the population. I certainly didn't want to go there and talk about his poor man's situation like it was a case study for grand rounds...he deserves more compassion and understanding instead of becoming a poster boy for your research.

Kate

[alleycat]

What are we at war here? We just need to recognize that people have differing opinions and that's okay.

As for the "I need a hero" post - he himself says in his opening line that he is being discrimiated because of his bisexuality and worldview. He goes on to explain his struggle with depression and anxiety attacks, but he stresses that the real issue is with being discriminated against because of his sexual orientation and his athiest views.

CAn we get back to the real question/issue in this thread? What was it again??

With a smile...

Alley

[csrakate]

I apologize for getting on a soapbox in regards to the last few posts. It's just that while I agree that retrowordsmith may have suffered a great deal at the hands of society and their views of him, you can't automatically assume that his mental health issues did not have some sort of effect on the outcome of his custody battle. He himself acknowledges that he was "not himself" when he signed the papers. That alone may have had a great impact on the decision as to who would be the best parent to raise the child. All I am saying is that we have to look at individual cases with an open mind and not automatically jump on the discrimation bandwagon. And if this individual is indeed suffering from mental issues, those are things that need to be addressed and not swept under the rug with a "bisexual bias" bandaid. And while I am no expert on mental illness, I do know that certain illnesses or issues left untreated would not prove to be in the best interest of the child.

That being said, I am finished with my rant and have retired my soapbox to the closet. I am not here to argue nor do I want to exchange less than friendly comments...I just want us to remember that there are other things out there that are in play with such cases and we don't need to blindly take up a cause without regard to all that is involved. We could very well do more harm than good, especially when a child is involved.

Once again I apologize for coming on so strong...I am very supportive of bisexuals having their rights in our society, but I am also a strong advocate for the rights and the well being of the mentally ill. I just don't want to see one over shadow the other and leave something untreated as a result.

Kate

[12voltman59]

I am late to this party, but man--did the original post fire up some keyboards, the smoke is still pouring out of my monitor!!!

I thank Sam for starting this thread and everyone for putting in their two cents--goodness...

It kinda made my head spin and I don't know what to think--that's kind of a surprise for anybody who has read my other posts.

Sam--if you come back to read this post--I have a question for you--can you clone yourself? I want to marry your clone... :smilies15

[BiBiologist]

Thanks voltman. I haven't been on lately due to family obligations, and also didn't know if I wanted to stir up the hornet's nest anymore. But just wanted to note, Kate, that according to retrowordsmith, his problems were misdiagnosed, and he was given the wrong medication. I came across a very interesting article, about GLB's and suicide. There are several studies indicating that GLB's have as much as a 2 to 3 times higher adult suicide rate than heterosexuals (http://www.glbtq.com/social-sciences/suicide.html). The article is not saying that all glb's are about to commit suicide. The point is, to me, suicide is the most extreme expression of emotional angst, so glb's are likely also to have more lesser, but still painful, emotional stresses, proportionately, than the heterosexual population. THIS has been my whole point.
Thanks,
sam

[csrakate]

Sam,
God love you...you manage to take my words...whatever they may be...twist them just so...and then take them off in a new direction, until you find a new and better way to prove your point. You aren't hearing me and I am not here to dispute that bi's have a difficult road ahead of them. You have managed to take the situation with retrowordsmith and use it to your benefit. And as a scientist, I am shocked that you take your "evidence" from an unsubstantiated source and I still contend that you don't know all the facts surrounding his situation. You brought this up as a means to further your research...I merely attempted to state that not everything is as it seems. But I do not have the interest of discussing anyone's mental health issues in a public forum. That is a violation of their privacy and I will not be a party to it. Therefore, I suggest you leave the man to his privacy and remove him from your efforts to prove yourself correct. Do a little more research...I think you may find it quite eye-opening.

Kate

[BiBiologist]

"But just wanted to note, Kate, that according to retrowordsmith, his problems were misdiagnosed, and he was given the wrong medication."

I made this one-sentence statement to explain my previous post about others (doctors) misunderstanding his problems, as he said in his own post. I will certainly leave him out at this point, but you've managed to make major posts of it. I've noticed, though, that you have not made any responses to my posts of October 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, nor the article I just referred to, in any substantive, scientific way. Care to make a comment now? And by the way, I'm not looking for God's love on your terms--just truth.

[binbi42]

....and all this Science I don't understand
....It's just my job five days a week
A Rocket Man, A Rocket Man
Elton John

Does anyone own just one pair of shoes anymore?

[arana]

"But just wanted to note, Kate, that according to retrowordsmith, his problems were misdiagnosed, and he was given the wrong medication."

I made this one-sentence statement to explain my previous post about others (doctors) misunderstanding his problems, as he said in his own post. I will certainly leave him out at this point, but you've managed to make major posts of it. I've noticed, though, that you have not made any responses to my posts of October 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, nor the article I just referred to, in any substantive, scientific way. Care to make a comment now? And by the way, I'm not looking for God's love on your terms--just truth.

Do you think possibly, that the reason Kate didn't respond to your other posts was simply because she had no problem with your view on the thread but moreso that you used someone as an example when you had only hearsay on and no real evidence???

[csrakate]

"But just wanted to note, Kate, that according to retrowordsmith, his problems were misdiagnosed, and he was given the wrong medication."

I made this one-sentence statement to explain my previous post about others (doctors) misunderstanding his problems, as he said in his own post. I will certainly leave him out at this point, but you've managed to make major posts of it. I've noticed, though, that you have not made any responses to my posts of October 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, nor the article I just referred to, in any substantive, scientific way. Care to make a comment now? And by the way, I'm not looking for God's love on your terms--just truth.

Sam,
Once again you have thrown down the gauntlet and this time I was willing to come off looking stupid and speechless in an effort to maintain my civility and to not promote any more verbal sparring. But as time has passed and as I have given it more thought, I find that I cannot do so. I repeat, I have no issues with you promoting your research...I may not agree with it...but I respect it as such. I merely found it odd that someone like yourself, a person who promotes research, would take statements about how society has caused an individual all of his problems at face value, never once considering that there might be more to it than any of us could or should know. Yes...I did address this in several posts...but mostly because you continued to argue said situation with comments such as:

"His mental state has a lot to do with what people tried to do to him because they disagreed with his ideals. Isn't that what we want, is to gain acceptance for everyone who is different Where are you drawing your line?"

Excuse me...but where is that documented in this particular case. Mental illness is not purely a societal issue...it is real...painful and very difficult for the individuals who suffer from it. To say that it is caused by society disgreeing with his ideals means that you shun the possiblity of chemical imbalance...the possible delusions associated with such illnesses...all that is real and documented in many such cases. I'm not saying that it necessarily applies to this individual, but neither can you say that it does not. And yes...I accept people who are different...but I do not do so at the expense of their well being. If they are troubled, then they need help...and not just the help that carrying your banner would suggest.

And at that point I put away my soapbox...attempted to calm the fires...but no...you had to continue on...

"But just wanted to note, Kate, that according to xxxxxxxxxxxxx, his problems were misdiagnosed, and he was given the wrong medication."

Ok...fine...quite possible...but once again you have taken this statement at face value. How do you KNOW that? You don't, and to say as much is negligent on your part.

But what really angers me...and what I have debated responding to the most, was the childish, "oh yeah" tone of your last post:

"I've noticed though, that you have not made any responses to my posts of October 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, nor the article I just referred to, in any substantive, scientific way. Care to make a comment now? And by the way, I'm not looking for God's love on your terms --just truth."

Guess what?? I'm not a scientist...nor do I claim to have any more insight into your research or your findings. I know when I am not fit to argue a point and I leave it alone. All I meant to do was to draw attention to what I found as a fault in your thinking...thinking that I would hope a caring and compassionate person might be OPEN to considering somewhat faulty and misguided due to their fervor and belief in their research. That's all I was attempting to do. But then again...you said it yourself...you're not looking for "God's love" on my terms...just truth. But sadly that truth is yours and veiled by some personal, not so hidden agenda.

I had hoped not to prolong this situation any longer. I am not here to participate in a a battle of words, will, or wisdom. It is apparent that I have been heard...and I don't have the need to feel that I have won an argument with someone who obviously refuses to see another side of the coin.

Kate

[BiBiologist]

I'd like to restate the main premises of my original post, and basis for my responses to subsequent posts. First, I believe that because of societal non-acceptance of bisexuality (varying from people being mildly uncomfortable to out-and-out discrimination) there is more stress on bisexuals (also gays, lesbians and transexuals) than on heterosexuals. It is because of this non-acceptance that most bisexuals don't come out, and I believe it is also highly probable that more bisexuals choose marriage and a heterosexual lifestyle to feel accepted in mainstream society. Secondly, that bisexuality is biologically based. It should not be considered a disease or disability, but a form of biological or genetic diversity, just like handedness or eye color. I believe that research into this will ultimately lead to more societal acceptance, less stress, and therefore the ability of bisexuals in the future to make lifestyle choices that are more comfortable and sustainable for everyone in their lives. Having to remove bisexuality from any consideration of child custody in court is just one practical consideration of the need for research. I have never disputed the other factors that may arise, just like in any other custody case, but glbt's should be able to start with a level playing field as far as orientation is concerned, and that cannot yet be taken for granted universally in our court system. I believe the article I referenced above supports the premise that glbt people are currently in more danger of a difficult emotional path in life than heterosexuals. I'd like to see that changed and I am trying to contribute to that effort.

[PeterH]

Hi everybody,

wow, what an intense thread this has been.
I felt like replying, so here goes.
I think that what Bibiologist is saying is that he would like to see society accept bisexuality more, and I feel the same, as I think does everybody else here.
He also feels that some more scientific understanding about what bisexuality is will help in that. And I feel that he's right. This might not help to convince everybody, but it will help convince some and it's an important part of the process, but not all of it.
I think some other things are needed are well, but perhaps it's better to start a new thread on
"How to make society more accepting.
I look forward to your posts,

PeterH

[likalotapuss]

Bi-Biologist, we have definitely been back and forth on this one and I realize that we agreed to disagree, but I must stand firm in my belief that bisexuals can be happy in a monogamous relationship. If my husband's bisexuality has made him unhappy at any time in our marriage, it was due to his frustrations that I continued to have MY fears and worries that he couldn't and wouldn't be faithful. Your theories merely echo things that I have read in the past that caused my fears...articles suggesting that it would be impossible for him to be happy, sexually satisfied, and able to commit to a heterosexual relationship with someone he loved.

Allbi, I appreciate your statement:

"Being bi does NOT exclude monogamy and to suggest a bisexual in a monogamous relationship would be unnatural or inheirently unhappy is to misunderstand the complexity of the human animal."

It certainly makes me feel better to hear someone else suggest that it is indeed possible....

Now...about that oven mitt...

Kate

very well said Kate!!! let's just agree to disagree... there are no right or wrong answers to this.... to each his own.

[searchingbrian]

very well said Kate!!! let's just agree to disagree... there are no right or wrong answers to this.... to each his own.


I agree with Ang who agrees with Kate; can't we ALL agree!!!

[likalotapuss]

evidently not DUDE

[searchingbrian]

evidently not DUDE


Ang, are you disagreeing with me?????

LMAO

[SourGreenAppleBeauty]

[QUOTE=BiBiologist]Bisexuals are biologically different: an analogy to help us understand

The shoe analogy as sexual/relational fulfillment works, although heterosexuals might say, "then that should mean I get to have another relationship too." But the shoes are one pair, one full compliment needed to walk around with comfort and acceptance in the majority structure. Heteros and even some bisexuals themselves look at bisexuals as wanting something extra, but actually we only have half of what we need if we are living monogamously.

Well someone is into oversimplifing isn't he? I would like to state that I had a perfectly happy relationship (and still do) with or without "another shoe". While I have a gf now, that doesn't mean "I need" her....(though I will admit to being head over heels for her) it simply means I'm young, atttractive and having a good time.

I simply hate people who trap themselves into molds of what soicity percieves. It irratates me and invalidates any insightful remark said person has ever made.
:bipride: :bipride: :bipride: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce: :bibounce:

[Driver 8]

Wow, lot of interesting points here ... I've already read through this twice, and I'm still not ready to respond at length for fear I've misread someone.

However, there's one point I want to address. A lot of people seem to feel that people's prejudice against GLBT people will lessen significantly once they accept that sexual orientation (and gender identity) are inborn, not chosen.

I disagree for two reasons. First, race is inborn and always has been ... and knowing that doesn't make people less racist.

Second, evangelical Christians have quietly been moving away from the "sexual orientation as choice" angle for a while. (Some of them, I realize, still espouse it.) What I've been seeing in recent years from evangelicals is either "Sexual orientation isn't a choice, but it can still be fixed" or "Sexual orientation isn't a choice, but same-sex sexual behavior is, and if you can't be straight, be celibate."

I do think that there's been a lot of change in straight people's beliefs about sexual orientation - including a recognition that sexual orientation isn't chosen; but I don't think that's really a result of scientific studies making it into the mainstream. Rather, I think it's a result of more people being out, and more straight people who know at least one person who isn't straight, and respecting them enough to say "That's just the way he is."

And, ultimately, that's where I think a lot of the change in society is going to come from - but I'm going to save that for PeterH's thread on how to make society more accepting ;)

:2cents:

[rumple4skin]

I got here as a result of reading Peters thread on making society more accepting - took me some time to read all of the posts and my head is still spinning a bit. I think that even if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that sexuality is genetic I do not think that would make a big deference to society at large. Those that want to hate will and now will have a genetic reason to hate. Those that did not care will still not care. History had many societies that tolerated people’s sexual orientation and they did not have the "science" we have today. As far as bisexuals being more needy I can only speak for myself. I have a biological need for air, water and food. I am probably wrong but I do not see my sexuality as a biological need. It does have a strong biological drive behind it but does that make it a need instead of a want? I think that my bisexuality is based on me being open-minded and being inquisitive. That does not mean that I think that is the case for everyone. Who knows maybe bing open-minded is genteic.

[Driver 8]

Something I thought of when it was too late to edit -

- I'm not anti-science, and I think there are a number of areas where scientific research can benefit us as bisexuals. For example, the scientific evidence that kids raised by same-sex couples turn out fine might not have influenced the man on the street; but it did influence the courts in the cases that led to the creation of civil unions in Vermont, and the beginning of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. And, even though a lot of people were initially opposed to same-sex couples having more rights ... once it had happened, these same people came to see that it wasn't causing any harm.

So the science may not have directly changed minds, but it did indirectly ... along with a well-thought-out legal strategy.

[Iowabiguy]

Thank you Sam for starting this thread. It took me forever to read everything. It saddens me that some in the bi-community are so easily able to trash one another.
I come here to learn and grow from the ideas and experiences of other bisexual folks. I am learning to be more confident in my ability to come out to others even through my own fears.
I believe it is through open honest conversation and hard honest self-reflection that we must try to find common ground to accept one another. I believe that for some people the acceptance of bisexuals will come from seeing the commonalities we share with all humans. For others understanding will only come when there is proof beyond any doubt that God created bisexuals just like he created gays and straights. For still others there is always going to be fear that we as bisexuals are not trust-worthy partners and that living with that fear may take all of the energy they can muster to understand their bisexual partner. Some celebrate the differences in all people, be that sexual orientation, culture, religion, ethnicity, or political affliation.

[PeterH]

Dear Sam (and everybody else),

First of all, i would like to say sorry that I've thought you were a man (thank you Driver and Codybear for making me aware of this mistake).

I'd like to go into the shoe analogy and look at it from a moral perspective:
I'd rephrase it this way: does being bi mean that living a monogamous lifestyle basically means I'm living half-celibate?
I do expect myself to be faithful, but don't expect myself to be half-celibate. So if this is the case than I'll choose to be not monogamous, but binogamous (be faithful to one partner of each sex).
If it doesn't I would choose to live monogamously.
I don't know my own feelings well enough yet to decide that. It seems that for many people here, the shoe doesn't fit. I think science can say something about this matter as well. If this issue affects my moral choices, it will also affect (some) people's moral views. If science said monogamy is like half-celibacy for bisexuals, I think society will become more accepting of a choice for non-monogamy and relationships based on that.
I've sent a message to bibiologist asking her about the research questions that need to be asked. We could post about those questions here, or start another thread on what science needs to find out (and has found out already?) This thread is getting rather long, so perhaps a new thread for this specific issue might be a good thing.
So what do you all think about this?

[BiBiologist]

Well said, Peter. I'll leave that thread up to you to start. It's been interesting to see this thread come up again, and I think I have grown alot and become less naive than I was when I posted it. I've learned alot from you all about our individuality. For myself, I can only say that I believe my bisexuality has taken a toll on me. Kudos to all of you who are having happy lives, monogamous or otherwise.
sam