Is the kinsey scale good enough?

[M. Wolfe]

This may at first seem a strange question but hear me out.

I've had a lot of trouble trying to understand my own sexuality over the last 6-7 years. I have had even more trouble trying to make myself understood to my friends who are curious as to how I 'work'.

When I first started being attracted to other boys, I was either 13 or 14, and it freaked me out. I was a Christian then and I had inherited certain beliefs about gays and I took solace in the fact that still I was plenty attracted to girls. I spent a lot of energy repressing my homosexual side and though I didn't manage completely, I managed to minimise it.

Then around 18 I revised my beliefs about sexuality and accepted my own bisexuality - though I didn't come out till I was 19. Anyhow after this self-acceptance I noticed that my previously minor bent side exploded as I now would indulge it - to the point that I almost lost interest in girls.

WTF?! Was I gay after all? Was I just transitioning?

After a few months it recessed a bit and Gals and guys started to take up more even room in my brain, yet still from week to week I can go from fairly gay to fairly strait often influenced by friends and other people I interact with.


I've have evaluated my self on the Kinsey scale several times and have ranged from 1 to 5 at different times. I've also learnt that preference or 'lean' commonly shifts throughout peoples lives, yet other people may never change.

----Anyway to my point-----

I think the Kinsey scale is not enough, I feel a second factor should be considered when identifying oneself - the rigidity factor (please no puns).
So do you have a strong specific preference or are you far less well defined in your orientation?

I learned I have a very poorly defined orientation subject to great change and I think that is noteworthy.


(sorry about the windy post)

[Beefeater]

Personally, I find that the Klien (Dr. Fred S. Klien) scale suites my purposes just right. It ranges from 1 to 7 with equally bisexual being a 4, which is where I fit in perfectly.

[M. Wolfe]

Personally, I find that the Klien (Dr. Fred S. Klien) scale suites my purposes just right. It ranges from 1 to 7 with equally bisexual being a 4, which is where I fit in perfectly.

Not heard of the Klien Scale.

...Looking it up now.

[AmericanBeauty]

Personally, I find that the Klien (Dr. Fred S. Klien) scale suites my purposes just right. It ranges from 1 to 7 with equally bisexual being a 4, which is where I fit in perfectly.

What's it like being perfectly equal? Do you constantly want 3 ways?

I don't know anyone who is really actually equal all the time even if they are bisexual since they might be equally sexually attracted to both genders but they usually lean more towards one gender or the other when it comes to romance, having a partner, or they have one gender who they are mainly sexually attracted to.

[M. Wolfe]

What's it like being perfectly equal? Do you constantly want 3 ways?

I don't know anyone who is really actually equal all the time even if they are bisexual since they might be equally sexually attracted to both genders but they usually lean more towards one gender or the other when it comes to romance, having a partner, or they have one gender who they are mainly sexually attracted to.

This is also what I've found. I personally find it difficult to say any preference, although I find it to be easier to be attracted to girls but I think i'd like to be with another guy more.

[veganbigmac]

For the longest time I considered myself "cursed" with wanting both sexes at fluctuating amounts of time.

Increasingly I see that chaos is beauty, life is cyclical, and the ever-changing is stable in it's chaos. Despite my flowery proselytizing, I see now that to define oneself on the Kinsey scale, or the Klein scale, or whatever, is ultimately a definition of your feelings at the moment, and at that moment only. Time marches on, and our perspective is limited to one moment at a time. Why restrict ourselves to what we believe to be true one moment, when it may change the next?

When all's said and done, I still don't know why I want cock nonstop some hours/days/weeks and why I want pussy all day some weeks/days/hours. Perhaps it is true what the Buddhists say... that life is not a destination but a journey.

[M. Wolfe]

When all's said and done, I still don't know why I want cock nonstop some hours/days/weeks and why I want pussy all day some weeks/days/hours. Perhaps it is true what the Buddhists say... that life is not a destination but a journey.

It's a dualistic reality, aint it?

[bityme]

For the longest time I considered myself "cursed" with wanting both sexes at fluctuating amounts of time.

Increasingly I see that chaos is beauty, life is cyclical, and the ever-changing is stable in it's chaos. Despite my flowery proselytizing, I see now that to define oneself on the Kinsey scale, or the Klein scale, or whatever, is ultimately a definition of your feelings at the moment, and at that moment only. Time marches on, and our perspective is limited to one moment at a time. Why restrict ourselves to what we believe to be true one moment, when it may change the next?

When all's said and done, I still don't know why I want cock nonstop some hours/days/weeks and why I want pussy all day some weeks/days/hours. Perhaps it is true what the Buddhists say... that life is not a destination but a journey.

Your description fits me perfectly. I can get turned on by a nice set of breasts, an attractive pussy, a good looking cock, or a nice ass. It's all good. Quite possibly that's the reason that I really enjoy being with couples or groups. :three::grouphug:It's great being on a bed and not having to worry about who is touching, Kissing, under, on top of, or in who.

I've learned to accept that my varying desires are just part of who I am. Now I just go with the flow. The sex is great and the cuddling afterward superb. :rotate: It really doesn't matter what the gender is as long as it feels good.

[softfruit]

To step back to the original question - the kinsey scale is useful when you have nothing but "straight or gay" as terms you can use, but it has its limits; then you can develop explaining more complex things about sexuality through the Klein grid. I find both far too restricting but I still use them often when explaining bi matters to folks, because they give you a language you can speak where we don't have everyday words for things.

Even Klein for instance fails e.g around trans, around BDSM, or around whether you have a high or low sex drive / interest.

[amcur09]

I enjoyed reading all of your comments but I have to agree with the present moment in time. My preference is women but ever present in the back of my mind and surfacing at different times is my bi-side. Even though I have little experience with a man, I really enjoyed it.

[M. Wolfe]

To step back to the original question - the kinsey scale is useful when you have nothing but "straight or gay" as terms you can use, but it has its limits;

Terminology pertaining to sexuality is always convoluted. One of the first things I explained was that despite the words 'Gay' 'Strait' and 'Bi' there aren't discrete, distinct sexualities, rather this is a spectrum of orientations one can experience. Applying those three terms to a spectrum complicates matters. Where does one end and another begin? Everyone will have their own personal definitions of each of the terms.

[Devin]

I prefer the Fritz Klein Sexual Identity Grid... As presented in the book "The Bisexual Option".

:color:

It has been posted here before:

http://www.technostud.com/public/newsite/klein.html

[veganbigmac]

After reading what goes into the Klein scale via that link I realize how utterly inane a rating system really is. Not just because labeling compartmentalizes thoughts, but because most of these questions have no pertinence. For example, how does one answer the question "About whom do you have sexual fantasies ideally?" What is an "ideal" sexual fantasy and why should it's "ideal" status be contingent upon the nature of the fantasy? I am stumped, so I'll put a four down for that, true equality seems ideal (I suppose :tong:)

Or how about this question, "What is the sexual identity of the people with whom you socialize most?" Dear God! I'm bi by association! Of course :rolleyes: Seriously, how could any legitimate "scale" rate something as deeply personal as sexual identity based upon the company you keep? I'm not bi because I hung out with bi people in high school, and my sexual identity hasn't changed because my group of friends has. I guess the reason I dislike this question most of all is because it seems like the start of a slippery slope that ends in witch hunting.

Or this question "How do you think of yourself in a POLITICAL sense?" What? There is a heterosexual approach to politics...and a homosexual one? Which one are conservatives, because I'm the opposite. Am I homosexual in a political sense because I actually read what's on the Senate docket and write to my senators, or is that a heterosexual political view. What about political antipathy? This particular question (and whole scale) doesn't seem to be very introspective, accurate, or well founded in logic.

Now I haven't read the book, but with a title like "The Bisexual Option" I was initially leery. I take umbrage at the notion that one would consciously choose to be bi. The test seems to follow in the title's footsteps and asks questions that have little, if anything to do with being bi. While the idea of rating oneself based on past experience, present circumstance, and hypothetical ideals is novel, such a rating system doesn't lend itself well to some questions (like the aforementioned three).

For me the Klein scale rated me as a 4.8 or "Bisexual with homosexual tendencies". Well that's a fair approximation, I don't think that I need a test to tell me what level of bi I am, especially when said test forces me to rank the value of my homosexual and heterosexual experiences against one another. "With whom would I ideally experience love" my answer to that question can't be rated on a 1-7 scale.

The Kinsey scale isn't much better though. These scales are at best thought devices that can show people what kinds of questions they need to ask themselves to find out who they are. At worst, these scales are used in an attempt to classify and divide people. If they help you, kudos, but no scale can ever truly purport to measure the inherently subjective, and there are few things more subjective than one's sexual identity.

Sorry for the lengthy post, hope it finds you well.



Anger has two sons, hope and courage. The hope that things will get better, and the courage to make them so.

-Justinian

[M. Wolfe]

For me the Klein scale rated me as a 4.8 or "Bisexual with homosexual tendencies". Well that's a fair approximation, I don't think that I need a test to tell me what level of bi I am, especially when said test forces me to rank the value of my homosexual and heterosexual experiences against one another. "With whom would I ideally experience love" my answer to that question can't be rated on a 1-7 scale.

The Kinsey scale isn't much better though. These scales are at best thought devices that can show people what kinds of questions they need to ask themselves to find out who they are. At worst, these scales are used in an attempt to classify and divide people. If they help you, kudos, but no scale can ever truly purport to measure the inherently subjective, and there are few things more subjective than one's sexual identity.


I did that table and got 3.4, which I feel does me justice. But I've thought a lot about this 'trying to quantify one's own sexuality with numbers thing' and I'm finding it to be lacking.

The most significant oversight, I feel, is the fact that it has no way of representing how attractions to the 2 genders works. I become attracted to girls differently to the way I become attracted to guys.

Some girls will be instantly attractive to me if they are good looking and personality seems to be a modifier after that.

Guys tend to become attractive to me after I get to know them - very very seldomly will a guy be instantly attractive although I know it's not impossible.

Then after that, my feelings towards girls will... well, feel different to guys but they are both really nice, I'm not sure how to describe it but you may know yourself (none of you specifically) what I'm talking about, hence whenever I'm explaining my system of attractions, I have cover all that too.

[AmericanBeauty]

I did that table and got 3.4, which I feel does me justice. But I've thought a lot about this 'trying to quantify one's own sexuality with numbers thing' and I'm finding it to be lacking.

The most significant oversight, I feel, is the fact that it has no way of representing how attractions to the 2 genders works. I become attracted to girls differently to the way I become attracted to guys.

Some girls will be instantly attractive to me if they are good looking and personality seems to be a modifier after that.

Guys tend to become attractive to me after I get to know them - very very seldomly will a guy be instantly attractive although I know it's not impossible.

Then after that, my feelings towards girls will... well, feel different to guys but they are both really nice, I'm not sure how to describe it but you may know yourself (none of you specifically) what I'm talking about, hence whenever I'm explaining my system of attractions, I have cover all that too.

M.Wolfe-Stop over-analyzing yourself/your sexuality, and just live your life.

I know it's easier said than done at times but what good does all of this mental masturbation do?