Bisexuality: Truth or Bigots and Trolls

[tenni]

I think I have been for all my life one who hides in the corner and my friends would reject me, like a lot of others I know.
Then one thing changed and I stood up one day and said to my wife ........ I am bisexual, this is me!
since then she has not liked it, but seems to be letting me be who, may be a new me, and now I can start saying to some people I am Bi this is me.

Good for you. Do you think that you will now change their mind about negative ideas about bisexuality?

Do you think that more minds will be made positive by including positive examples of bisexuality in movies, books etc?

Or other ways to change society's negative views about bisexuals, fluidity aspect of bisexuality etc.?

[dafydd]

Clearly there is a wide range of behavior amongst bisexuals. Obviously, this banter has been going on long before I posted my thread. I am sorry that some of my comments on my thread stirred the bickering here.

As I stated, I am married and monogamous, with no plans to change that approach. That said, I am interested to better understand bisexuality. I get that some bisexuals feel the need to have sex with both sexes in order to feel fulfilled. While I understand the sexual impulse, I don't think it is very conducive to relationships that work well for most people. I also do not think it is very conducive to fitting into society.

Heterosexuals and homosexuals partner up with one person at a time all the time. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't enjoy sexual activity with someone else of their preferred sex. But, relationships often come with commitments, for a variety of reasons.

Clearly, some people prefer not to marry or remain monogamous, regardless of their sexual orientation. Everyone understands this.

I don't understand the view the society must change to accommodate bisexuals' desire to have multiple partners. If bisexuals want to do that, what's stopping them? Just as nothing is stopping gays and straights from remaining single or having casual sex. I can't see society widely adopting new norms that where triads or foursomes or whateversomes are considered just another version of a healthy family. Maybe that will happen. But, that seems far fetched to me. Making lasting healthy relationships with one person is hard enough.

I don't have many opinions on committed polyamorous relationships, because I am not interested in having one. Admittedly, the fantasy of it is interesting. But, practically speaking, I think it would seem very complicated to maintain and to avoid mistrusts and emotional pain and fidelity. Regardless, I don't think society is going to conform to this in my lifetime.

I think bisexuals struggle to have an identity that is not confused with or equated to homosexual. I think bisexuals are mistrusted or feared for being too different. I think bisexuals are doubted by partners of both sexes and of other sexual orientations, due to a fear of not being enough for them. I think those issues seem to be of greater concern than pushing society to accept open polyamorous relationships.

Am I missing something? I think I'm going to regret posting. But, here goes...

no reason to regret posting. Was a very interesting read and deeply compassionate. Thx.

[dafydd]

I understand what ur trying to get at with the frog/bisexual analogy Tenni but the problem is that you start with a predefined notion of a frog (bisexual).
We should not be asking what does (or does not) constitute a bisexual, but rather who really defines what a bisexual is or isn't in the first place.
Unless I have misunderstood the analogy..

opps I'm a dumb arse .

About your monogamy issues…which you have stated yourself before many times…or is this a new year all the stuff you wrote about your monogamous relationship with DD etc. is false now?

Now about your persecution and the other comment about your persecution complex dumpling? Didn't ya love my frog / horse analogy

What about the content of post 20? The main point of the thread is about changing society.

[Long Duck Dong]

ROFLMAO.. curiousity got the better of me so I went and read the post......ROFLMAO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_frog or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frog what one is the correct defination of frog ? because one fits the defination tenni uses, the other doesn't and they are still both frogs....

I agree with you dafydd.. we should not start with a preconceived notion of what constitutes a bisexual, but who really defines what a bisexual is... and why if we use ONE image, it excludes so many bisexuals because they are not within the limited parameters of another persons notion of bisexuals and bisexuality

actually this reminds me of something somebody said to me years ago about the LGBT and different races... and about how we are all human, its just that its the aspect of us that is forgotten when it comes to treating us like everybody else, then we are only seen as a sexuality or a race....

my defination of a bisexual is a person that defines themselves as a bisexual, I have no criteria that a person has to meet or conform to in order to be bisexual as attraction is different for each person and there is no universal measurement for measuring attraction and I have no right to tell people that they do not fit the criteria of bisexuality as defined by other people...... so a persons label of themselves may be right or wrong but like myself, labels given to us by others, can be wrong IE the asexual nature for me is actually anhedonia.... and its not the asexual but not asexual label assigned to me and based around what was read on sites and twisted around.....

for me it comes under the heading of freedom to be who we are and accepted without condemnation or judgement from other people..... so I practise what I preach and what I would like to see in society... and not the people must conform to a box defination of what is acceptable because that is the core stance that is used by anti same sex / gender advocates......anybody that falls outside of what they deem to be correct and right, is not acceptable and not welcome as part of society.....and in my case and others, being told that we are not welcome in the site that embraces and accepts us for who we are, by some members of this site who are preaching about acceptance and tolerance of bisexuals

[dafydd]

I'm watching a film on tv. As I sent that last response, I looked up at the tv and a bisexual character in the film picked up a frog.

i am NOT making that up. Honest to god truth.

d

[Gearbox]

Lets go release all the prisoners who define themselves as 'innocent'.

[dafydd]

That's not the same.

[Gearbox]

Tis so! Society put them in there by it's def of 'guilty' which isn't always the same as the prisoners def of it. Many would claim that their 'crime' was a just act and not a 'crime' at all.
Ask anybody who gets a parking ticket if they were justifiably 'guilty'.lol

[tenni]

I understand what ur trying to get at with the frog/bisexual analogy Tenni but the problem is that you start with a predefined notion of a frog (bisexual).
We should not be asking what does (or does not) constitute a bisexual, but rather who really defines what a bisexual is or isn't in the first place.
Unless I have misunderstood the analogy..

Waaaaaa sniffle sniffle NO….. you studly Welshman.


The frog is not the bisexual.


The frog is the person that thinks that they are one thing despite everything about them indicates otherwise. They are another. The frog is the one who denies who they really are and blames others for seeing who the frog really is.


The horse could be bisexual, gay or heterosexual but not the asexual. Or just a horse hung cock floating in the ether.


*Now, I’m going to re register for Analogy 102 or (how to fuck up your head while giving head)

Scientists including psychologists, sexologists define what a bisexual is or is not.

There is a group of bisexuals who do not like things defined and want all inclusive whatever. That alone may be a trait of a bisexual or just a subgroup.

I think that bisexuals can help scientists define bisexuality by reporting as subjects to studies. I don't think (don't know either) if fluidity is an accepted trait of bisexuality as far as science is concerned. That may or may not be true until scientific process has been followed. I'd put my money that fluidity is a trait of bisexuality.

[tenni]

“I don't understand the view the society must change to accommodate bisexuals' desire to have multiple partners. If bisexuals want to do that, what's stopping them?


The law is stopping bisexuals from legally creating closed loop relationships. The law doesn’t stop them from creating the closed loop relationship as much it is doesn’t recognize any legal connection between the three partners. It was once far fetched that same sex marriages would be realistic. With arguments of "God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" it remained far fetched for some time and is still in more conservative societies.

. Why not support other bisexuals in a bisexual website? It appears that you do not believe in closed loop relationship.

[void()]

my defination of a bisexual is a person that defines themselves as a bisexual, I have no criteria that a person has to meet or conform to in order to be bisexual as attraction is different for each person and there is no universal measurement for measuring attraction and I have no right to tell people that they do not fit the criteria of bisexuality as defined by other people

*chuckles* Oh hi, LDD. I am a bisexual gentleman. Or at least, I try being a gentleman. *grins and chuckles, wanders back to hewing the log at the camp*

*hollering back over his shoulder* Oh yeah, they tell me I'm half loony as well. Do mind that, shall you? *snickers as he now bums a cigarette on top of his rub of snuff, goes back to his hewing*

[void()]

“I don't understand the view the society must change to accommodate bisexuals' desire to have multiple partners. If bisexuals want to do that, what's stopping them?


The law is stopping bisexuals from legally creating closed loop relationships. The law doesn’t stop them from creating the closed loop relationship as much it is doesn’t recognize any legal connection between the three partners. It was once far fetched that same sex marriages would be realistic. With arguments of "God made Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" it remained far fetched for some time and is still in more conservative societies.

. Why not support other bisexuals in a bisexual website? It appears that you do not believe in closed loop relationship.

Actually, if I were half intelligent and could read amendment number ten of the Constitution for America, note I use the for not of here, then I would see we are granted the right to have "closed loop" marriage or relationship. But I apparently am not nearly quite that intelligent, nor am I capable of reading. Oh wait, what am I doing here replying to you then? Oh, well ... erm ...

Oh yes, also merely because something is illegal does not imply or express that is unlawful. And I think a lot more folks ought to start recognizing we in America were firstly founded upon Common Law, and not Law of Admiralty, which is used only as laws to govern commerce.

Me bedding a man and woman freely, without compensation does not equate to commerce, save for the sense of capitulation.

[tenni]

Ya..good to read Void!!! Closed Loop relationships are legal across the US…but not same sex couple marriages? Now, if only the fifteen countries (Argentina, Sweden, South Africa, Canada , Australia, Denmark, Iceland, Brazil, Netherlands, etc.) that have legal same sex couple marriages could catch up and recognize the legality of closed loop relationships(dare I write marriages?)

Although we are discussing international bisexuality issues, each country's bisexual advancement is to be cheered!

illegal but not necessarily unlawful? sounds like an opener to circular logic debate?

[dafydd]

Did u know that infidelity involving the same sex, outside of a same sex marriage is not grounds for divorce in the UK?
e.g a man whose husband has had sex with another man cannot divorce on the grounds of infidelity and same with women.

[elian]

We can argue legal theories all day but until those ideas are tested in a court of law they will remain theories. Of course I learned a long time ago that if you don't want to know the answer sometimes it's better not to ask the question.

[tenni]

Daf
Am I correct in thinking that in Britain you do not have marriage equality as far as gender is concerned? I did not see Britain listed as one of the fifteen countries with legal same sex marriage?

In Canada, the marital situation is not gendered base. A person in Canada may not have infidelity as grounds for divorce or need to use infidelity but if they did then both cross gender and same gender marriages would have the same rights. If in Britain cross gender marriages may use infidelity as grounds for divorce but not same gender then Britain does not have equality of legal marriages.

I'm not a lawyer and so I am not aware of the details. What I do know is that same sex couples may marry with all the same legal rights as cross gender couples. (apparently there were hundreds of fine loop holes discriminating against same sex couples) Same sex couples may divorce on the same grounds as cross gender couples in Canada. Recently, a case came to the courts about non Canadians same sex couples marrying in Canada not allowed to get a Canadian divorce as an old divorce law stated that you must reside in Canada for a year before filing for divorce. That law was quickly changed so that those who come from other countries and marry in Canada may also get a divorce in Canada. (the couple couldn't get a divorce in their state (US) because their state of residence did not acknowledge same sex marriages as equal.

I suspect that Canada is not ready for closed loop marriages because I don't think that they legally exist in Canada. It would be beneficial for bisexuals to learn under what circumstances existing laws may interfere with closed loop relationships. If two of the three we're in a comma and on life support, the legal issue as to if the third partner would or would not have the legal right to pull the plug if they both were brain dead. Rationally based on other legality about same sex marriage and cross gender marriage it should be the third person in the closed loop situation that would have the legal right.

Elian is correct that each countries constitution's Charter of Rights and Freedoms etc. will legally guide countries via Supreme Courts. In Canada once provincial Supreme Courts began to state that the Charter gave these rights, the pace picked up and was nearly across the country by the time the Supreme Court of Canada made their decision. It looks like Britain's constitution may not be set up for equality based on sex/gender? Has Britain pussy footed around the issue by civil unions or ?

Only pressure from bisexuals will bring the equality issue of closed loop relationships to the public and eventually Supreme Courts. If the majority of bisexuals are satisfied living in heteronormative relationships and suppressing their same gender needs nothing will change. Those that are new to acknowledging the same sex attraction will continue to be unaware if sites like this do not discuss these types of relationships.