Not enough research in college text books

[crazy_cat_lady]

Ok so I'm taking a child psychology class in my last semester at a community college. So my teacher assigned a texted book...pretty normal looking and has reletivly good information for the classes and my purposes. the books by Laura E. Berk. Anyway I was reading a sorta sub-article most text books have, about the impact of gay, lesbian and bisexual orientations on adolesents. It was nicely put together mind you, but I just couldnt help but think that she just put the word Bisexual in there for show. since she spoke in great detail about gay and lesbian and general "same sex attraction" but nothing about haveing attraction to both at the same time.

I dont know maybe I'm over reacting or something, or the books not up to date enough since its copyright 2008...but I can't help but think that psychologists that write these text books should be a bit more informed or at least put more detail in about bisexual issues in childhood and adolesence.

agree? disagree? ever experienced smething like this? lemme know!

P.S. first thread woot! :bigrin::bipride:

[TwylaTwobits]

Interesting, you'd think since it's only a few years old there would be more information regarding bisexuality in it. Wonder if there will be any expanded teaching in the class? Keep us informed please.

[Long Duck Dong]

I can answer it from the point of view as a person that has experience in the field.....

the issue is that there is no way to really define bisexuality beyond a isolated desire / attraction to a sexual object......

unlike gay and lesbian, in which there is a clear defination that can be * monitored and observed * bisexuals generally match the norm for heterosexual interaction and behievour, in that they more often develop a more intimate and closer connection to the opposite gender and a passing attraction to the same gender on a sexual level

now bisexuals will argue, bitch and moan about that constantly... but the simple truth is in their own actions and words.....

people that have a equal and balanced attraction, desire and connection to both genders are not that common amongst the bisexual community and are often labeled with a difference term

the most common understanding of bisexual people, is that they are a hetero person with a genitalia fetish..... cos most of their actions, support that finding....

[crazy_cat_lady]

wow I did not know that...no wonder. but what is the term they use for those with equal attraction on a physical and emotional level?

[Long Duck Dong]

they are more commonly referred to as polyarmous / pansexual.... but people misread that as multiple partners..... it actually means to love two or more partners of any gender

the issue comes down to personal Identity and self labelling

unbelievably, there is no *correct term * so the term bisexual is used, but as you have seen, its barely used, cos its too wide ranging and refers to attraction to both genders on a number of levels
bisexual can refer to a asexual person ( as in no sexual desires, but who can be attracted to genders ), a virgin, a bi curious, a person with a sexual fetish, a trans person ( based around the sexuality of the gender identity, not the person themselves ) yadda yadda but that actually takes it out of the bi / dual gender range and into the pansexual range....

a pansexual, such as myself, is attracted to all genders and their sub ranges, trans, intersex etc etc

[tenni]

I'm never quite certain when a person from the US uses the word "college" whether they mean a university or whether they mean a community level college. Here "college" is not a university but a lower level of education that does not go into as much theoretical detail nor may you go on to a Masters or PHD level of education in any field. The courses are frequently more "application" level rather than theoretical at the community college level here. I will guess that this is an undergraduate level course? What year is the course? (year 1 , 2, 3, 4 ) What was the name of the course? You refer to "child psychology". Is there a developmental psychology course offered? Is it a part one or part two or ? at a year 2 , 3 or 4 level ? The year level of the course sometimes indicates the detail that the course goes in to. A year 3 or 4 course specifically about sexuality may go into more details than a year 2 child psychology course etc. Courses that are specific part of a child care worker community college level may deal with bisexuality in much less detail than say a year 4 sexuality developmental psychology course. (to be honest, I'm from the dark ages and there was no year 4 developmental sexuality course...maybe there is now...lol?)

If you google bisexuality or check out university psychological abstracts, you may find that there has been far less research done on bisexuality when compared to other sexualities. Therefore, there will not be as much information about bisexuality for an undergraduate level course. There have been studies done on bisexuality though but just not as many with control factors etc. Some/many use self reporting by the subjects. Due to the complexity of bisexuality it may not be covered in as much detail at the undergrad level. (that is just a guess on my part though based on my own research into this) The most enlightening to me was to read a journal entry where the woman psychologist specializing in sexuality defined about ten different levels of bisexuality. It is her theory and she developed it based on self reporting. (forgot /lost her name) I believe that she only taught courses at a graduate level that dealt with bisexuality.

[Long Duck Dong]

your guess is right tenni...... there has been more studies into proving and disproving the existence of the * gay * gene, than there has been in understanding and defining the bisexual spectrum and what is actually bisexuality

personally I think its cos they can not define or put bisexuality into a group without A) calling a large number of bisexuals, people with a sexual fetish....or B) creating a spectrum so wide that a 100% hetero male that looks at a male penis in porn, is bisexual....lol

[TaylorMade]

There's another member on here who's getting an M.Social Work ... I could put you in touch with them and see what they have.

*Taylor*

[Gay2Bi]

the issue comes down to personal Identity and self labelling

unbelievably, there is no *correct term * so the term bisexual is used, but as you have seen, its barely used, cos its too wide ranging and refers to attraction to both genders on a number of levels
bisexual can refer to a asexual person ( as in no sexual desires, but who can be attracted to genders ), a virgin, a bi curious, a person with a sexual fetish, a trans person ( based around the sexuality of the gender identity, not the person themselves ) yadda yadda but that actually takes it out of the bi / dual gender range and into the pansexual range....

I'm actually dealing with that issue myself. I'm somewhere on the Kinsey scale between Mostly Gay/Incidentally Straight and Mostly Gay/More than Incidentally Straight. There's simply no convenient label that captures that.

I can't honestly call myself gay anymore, because I do have the occasional interest in sexual activity with women. But I can't honestly call myself bisexual either, because to me, that implies equal attraction (physical and emotional) to both men and women. Since I'm not emotionally attracted to women in the sense of wanting a relationship beyond friendship (possibly with benefits), "bisexual" doesn't really apply.

That's the trouble with labels, and why I've been gradually moving away from using any. I just wish we could all just get to the point where we can all be attracted to whom we're attracted to and nobody sits in judgment or makes a big deal about it.

Incidentally, the correct word used to be "ambisexual" = capable of loving both equally. It shares the same prefix as "ambidexterous" = capable of using both hands equally. It got shortened to "bisexual" because people thought that since "bi" means "two," someone who is "bisexual" loves two genders. It actually makes the term broader, since it applies to anyone who has any degree of interest in both men and women, but it loses the intended interpretation of "ambi-" = both equally.

Technically, from a linguistic standpoint, a bisexual person is one possessing both genders - most plants are, in fact, bisexual. A homosexual person, on the other hand, possesses a single gender - so that makes most of us really gay I suppose. Last but not least, a heterosexual person is one who changes genders during the course of his/her life. Heterosexual can also apply to plants that produce separate male and female flowers since different parts of the plant have different genders - the literal meaning of heterosexual.

What can I say, I'm a language geek! :tongue:

[tenni]

Gay2Bi

"But I can't honestly call myself bisexual either, because to me, that implies equal attraction (physical and emotional)"

I disagree with perceiving bisexuality as equal attraction both physically and emotionally. There is a very wide range and you may be more comfortable accepting the definition of bisexuality as being broader than some poster here promotes. Some bisexuals have only a physical attraction to same sex but they are still bisexuals in "most" professional pyschological standards. Then there is the fact that many bisexuals have an ebb and flow to their attraction to same sex people. Some have an equal attraction but to limit those of us who have an ebb and flow aspect to our attraction as having a fetish seems offensive to me. I would like to see and read the actual professionally accepted definition that rejects bisexuals who do not have an equal physical and emotional attraction. Othewise, I think that the people who promote such ideas are full of shit. It is like saying that you are only gay if you are attracted to doing anal sex.

[Gay2Bi]

I disagree with perceiving bisexuality as equal attraction both physically and emotionally. There is a very wide range and you may be more comfortable accepting the definition of bisexuality as being broader than some poster here promotes.

That's kinda what I said in my post. "Bisexual" IMPLIES equal attraction (at least to non-bisexuals), but as a label, it falls short of capturing the true diversity of sexual attraction. That's why I don't really like using it.

This is just my personal opinion, btw, not an indictment of anyone's choice of label.


I would like to see and read the actual professionally accepted definition that rejects bisexuals who do not have an equal physical and emotional attraction.

As I mentioned, the clinical term - used as recently as the '70's - was "ambisexual" = loving both equally. That's because it was assumed that all bisexuals were attracted to both genders equally - even if specific individuals didn't act on their attractions. The term really hasn't been used since the '70's since psychologists realized that their underlying assumption of equal attraction was incorrect. (You'd think they would've figured this out sooner, since Kinsey had published his work well before this.) In common use, the term was shortened to "bisexual" because of the misunderstanding involving the prefix "bi." People thought that since "bi" means two, "bisexual" means loving both genders. ("Bisexual" in its original clinical sense meant "having the physical or mental attributes of both sexes" - what we would call intersex today.)

[crazy_cat_lady]

whooo hooo! I love psychological debates. I'm so glad my thread sparked one.

I do believe that I am what you described as Ambisexual and I actually like the term. This is just a suggestion but why can't we have both? use Ambisexual to define equal attraction, and bisexual to define the vast range of attraction to both.