Something that really bothers me is that people often believe that sexual orientation is a choice. I feel that it could be no farther from the truth. One of the first things I ask people when they make a statement saying that it is a choice is So when did you decide to be straight? If it is as simple as a choice whether to be gay straight bi or Trans then could you choose to change your sexual orientation when ever you feel like it? I have yet to have someone be able to pin point a date that they chose their sexual orientation. If it were a choice, wouldn't you agree that it would be a very important decision, one where you know exactly when and what choice you were going to make? I do not know what decides a persons sexuality, but i can assure you its not choice. Science has taken the question of sexuality and have spent lots of time, done many experiments to find out what decides sexuality. Many scientists point to genetics as a factor. This could very well be but no one has been able to come up with a definitive answer to the question. Another thing that bothers me is that people believe that homosexuality is a disease or disorder. It is not a disease or disorder of any kind. The American Psychiatric Association states that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. They also state that sexual orientation is not a choice and cannot be altered. Well I am just scratching the surface of Sexual Orientation if you have any comments or questions post a reply. I would love to delve farther into the subject.
User login
Like This Site?
If you would like to see ProgressiveU continue to grow, why not donate?
Have You Seen This Yet?
Recent blog posts
- Comics and Cartoons as a Source of Cultural History in the United States, Part 3
- Is it racism or just art?
- Mouth and Foot Painting Artisits
- Keep the spirit alive
- Another one bites the dust: Advancements in Naturopathic Medicine
- Piltdown Man and AGW Global Warming; Scientific Fraud Unravels
- Not just because they don't want you to get high...
- Mai Evolving Understanding of the Nautre of Healing
- Unemployment vs. Un-willing-to-employ
- What would you do?
Navigation
Who's online
There are currently 0 users and 98 guests online.
Progressive U Features
Poll
Do you agree with the decision to try suspects linked to 9/11 in New York?
Yes
29%
No
38%
Undecided
19%
No opinion
14%
Total votes: 21
Vote
Many pedophiles say that their proclivity to rape children is inherent and deeply psycological, and that they have little or no control over their behavior. Serial Rapists are often diagnosed as having multiple mental disorders, all leading to inclinations of a deviant nature. I therefore assert that if we are to accept that simply because you feel a natural proclivity to your sinful behavior, we should accept that same reasoning from everyone who would express the same sentiments regarding their conditions or states.
Source? There is nothing to show that pedophiles do not have control over their actions.
Also, this post is about FEELINGS, not behaviors.
A person cannot decide to be gay or straight, only whether to act on those feelings.
Is there ANY reason why you think homosexuality is wrong, aside from the bible?
Cure heterosexuality!
No, don't you understand? That is what I am saying. It is not a choice. Its not wrong just because the bible says its wrong. the main point is Its not a Choice.
Yes, serial rapists are diagnosed with mental disorders. Therein lies the difference that the person was mentioning. Homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
You don't make a choice as to who you love, it just happens. Also, it is quite common for those that are strictly against homosexuality are lashing out because of their own oppressed emotions towards persons of the same sex.
The easiest things to look down on others for is traits that
you have.
Setting a good example for children takes all the fun out of middle age.
- William Feather
Why does the Air Force need expensive new bombers? Have the people we've been bombing over the years been complaining?
- George Wallace
I inhaled; that wa
Whenever I read one of your posts ljmitchell, I am always amazed at how utterly imaginative your view of the world seems to be.
> Many pedophiles say that their proclivity to rape children
> is inherent and deeply psycological, and that they have
> little or no control over their behavior. Serial Rapists
> are often diagnosed as having multiple mental disorders,
> all leading to inclinations of a deviant nature.
This is a fairly typical red herring. The most obvious difference between what you describe and the issue being discussed is that sexual predators (such as pedophiles and rapists) engage in sexual activities with other persons AGAINST THEIR WILL.
Most cases of child abuse, and most rapes for that matter, are committed on victims of the opposite sex. If we were to actually extend your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, then we would be forced to concluse that heterosexuality must in fact be a cause of both pedophilia and rape.
Of course, that's just as rediculous as your implication that these crimes are somehow related to the sexual orientation of gay people. In reality, the origins of sexual orientation are pretty well known. Yes, there are still some questions about precisesly WHICH genetic markers are in play, but the understanding that homosexuality is at its core a biologically determined trait (as are most aspects of human sexuality) has been a consensus of the scientific community for more than 30 years.
Homosexuality is not pathological, and comparisons such as yours from above have no real relevance to understanding this issue.
> therefore assert that if we are to accept that simply
> because you feel a natural proclivity to your sinful
> behavior, we should accept that same reasoning from
> everyone who would express the same sentiments regarding
> their conditions or states.
Wow...the number of fallacies you are able to fit into a single sentence is staggering. But, at least we do see the true basis for your opinion in this matter...religion.
Your first error is in the assumption that people's sexual orientation is somehow subject to your approval. Your religious objections are simply irrelevant. In the United States, we don't allow people to force their religious beliefs onto other citizens against their will. Thank goodness for the First Amendment.
The second (and most significant) foible in your little tirade is the suggestion that the biological basis theory for homosexuality is supported solely by the statements of gay people themselves. This opinion demonstrates an immpressive ignornace of the monumental body of scientific evidence which has long since driven the scientific community into the consensus which it now holds.
To quote the American Psychological Association...
> Is Sexual Orientation a Choice?
>
> No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or
> straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people
> in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience.
> Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings,
> psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a
> conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.
http://www.apa.org/topics/orientation.html
The reason we incarcerate rapists and pedophiles is because they force themselves onto their victims. Consexual acts of homosexuality do not share this characteristic, and thus are no different (legally speaking) to consensual, heterosexual sex.
The Supreme Court of the United States said it quite eloqently in the case of Lawrence v. Texas (2003)...
> These matters, involving the most intimate and personal
> choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central
> to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the
> liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the
> heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept
> of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the
> mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could
> not define the attributes of personhood were they formed
> under compulsion of the State." Ibid.
>
> Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for
> these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=02-102
Have a nice day,
percivale
I agree that it is not a choice. People also say that it's not "natural" And yet, there are animals such as cats, that have been studied and were dubbed "homosexual."
One of the things that annoys me is that people don't think that homosexuals can raise children properly. One of the theories is that their children will grow up to be homosexuals. And I just want to ask them, "Do you really think that the their(referring to the homosexuals) parents were homosexual? If straight parents can produce homosexual children, then what makes you think that homosexual parents can't produce straight children?
I am glad to see that someone has written something to this effect; just tonight, I encountered people who commented upon gays' decision to 'choose' to be gay.
Although the nation as a whole is becoming more accepting of homosexuality, there are still many who don't, and even those who DO accept it that don't understand it. From experience with relatives and friends that are gay, and the things they have to deal with in day-to-day life, I don't think anyone would ever CHOOSE to be gay. There are a great deal of hardships, and struggles with being accepted that no one would want to deal with if they didn't have to; it seems like someone 'choosing' to be gay would be like stabbing your own eyes out, or cutting off a foot-not that homosexuality is a handicap or a negative thing, but nonetheless, there are several struggles that one would not want to deal with unless absolutely unneccesary.
Anyway, that was a mighty long rant, considering that I agree with the original post.
"Perhaps it is better to wake up after all, even to suffer, rather than to remain a dupe to illusions all one's life."-Kate Chopin
I really don't think its a choice. I used to be all for that theory. But Imagine wakin up one morning and realizing that you were different. You weren't normal. You weren't holy and proper. You were dirty, immoral and an abomination in the sight of God. You'd rather be with Jane than dick. Jill than Jack. You knew it. Your boyfriend knew it and he kept trying to "save you". Trying to please him... but finally one day you looked over at him and go man I do not wanna be with you. I'd rather be with.... her. YOu looked over wondering whether you had missed the earth quake because what you saw in his eyes were rage and fury... Imagine that your mother stopped speaking to you because you told her you were a lesbian ... your brother slapped you in the face and then cries... your father said nothing prayed and never mentioned it again... Imagine you were kicked out your house...
You wouldn't think of it as a choice would you? Why on earth would you want to bring all this suffering on yourself? No you just feel it and feel that nothing can be done about these feelings so hating it and wishing it would go away is not an option...SO much for having a choice in the matter...
I mean did it ever occur to anyone why the rates for lgbt suicides are so high
Fahima ( she who understands( in Swahili))
I am glad that you can see that it is not a choice, but however the mention of being homosexual as immoral is not quite right. How immoral is it to love someone? This world we live in today where there is so much hate amongst people and countries, and we want to critique love? And another thing, there is nothing right or wrong about being Homosexual. Sexual orientation is just something that is, just as there is nothing right or wrong about being born with Black skin, or Green eyes. And one more thing we are all sinners, you know its an abomination to eat shellfish right? I love God but I also love my shrimp scampi and lobster bisque. We all sin but, I don't think that God is going to smite me down for loving someone. God loves all his children.
It homosexuality was not natural then people would not be homosexual, cause that would not be how they naturally feel.
"I have yet to have someone be able to pin point a date that they chose their sexual orientation."
My Date of Bisexuality-February 21st 2006. There you go.
I am one of those rare little nuggets in the LGBT community (not an ADVOCATE an actual member) who believes sexuality orientation isn't simply something you're born with. Do I believe that genetics have absolutely nothing to do with it? No, but I do believe sexuality (whether hetero, homo, bi or transexual leaning) is a case of both nature AND nurture. The truth of the matter is, we ARE influenced by society and our environment (why do you think it's more "womanly" to cry in public, yet if a man does it, he's a "fag" or a "sissy"?). I personally don't believe sexuality is an exception to that.
And how exactly was I nurtured into becoming lesbian in a highly religious society where I did not even KNOW what lesbians were?
you've ever had in your life was/is your family? Give me a break. What you are assuming is that "nurture" implies a cultivation-you're family "raised you to be lesbian". That isn't always the case. The fifth definition of nurture from dictionary.com is simply "development". Not only that, but the nature to nurture ratio varies from person to person. I too was raised in a religious home, where my brother, cousins, and even during rare times myself, used phrases such as "Stop acting gay", etc. Influence goes beyond the people who live in your home, way beyond.
...I was raised in a community where I did not KNOW what homosexuality was. What would you suggest caused my becoming lesbian?
Oh, and how do you explain such interesting developments as identical twins likely to both be gay if one is, more so than fraternal twins?
I am not trying to explain HOW you became a lesbian. You became a lesbian however you became one. I couldn't care less. You are MISSING my point and responding out of emotion.
"I was raised in a community where I did not KNOW what homosexuality was. What would you suggest caused my becoming lesbian?"
I had not heard of BDSM until I was 19 years old, however I'd had inclinations toward certain aspects of it from around the age of 17 or 18. I was not "born" with an interest in BDSM. It was something that developed over the years, through interacting with my environment. With or without a label for it, SOMETHING influenced me subconsciously to be attracted to it. For two years I thought I was weird as hell, and that something was wrong with me. After admitting my bisexuality a year ago (bisexuality was something I HAD heard of), I started learning lots of new things about sexuality. One of those things was BDSM, and I realized that what I had been feeling for two years finally had a name, and that I wasn't alone. The same thing could happen for someone who is gay, bisexual, or lesbian. What I am NOT saying (and what you fail to grasp) is that it happens to everyone. But I DO believe that it happens to many of us in the LGBT community, some more than others.
"Oh, and how do you explain such interesting developments as identical twins likely to both be gay if one is, more so than fraternal twins?"
I never said that I don't believe in sexuality being genetic. Obviously you did not read my original post clearly enough if you could not grasp that concept.
You say that your "Date of Bisexuality" was "February 21st 2006." So, I have a question for you. Were you ever physically attracted to someone of the same-sex prior to this date?
percivale
"I have yet to have someone be able to pin point a date that they chose their sexual orientation."
^^ That was your question, and that date IS the date I chose my bisexuality ('chose' was your word, not mine, as you can plainly see). However you are sadly mistaken if you believe that what I experienced started from birth (because I know for a fact it did not). I think I know myself a little bit better than you do.
I am sorry, but you are mistaken. I was not the one who said, "I have yet to have someone be able to pin point a date that they chose their sexual orientation." The question that I ask you (and which you avoided answering) was whether or not you were ever attracted to someone of the same sex PRIOR to the date you announced as your "date of bi-sexuality."
As for what "experienced from birth," I cannot say. That is why I asked you the question. But I do have to say that if you are actually aware of your feelings from infancy, then your level of awareness is far superior that what one would normally expect to find in a human being.
I don't know the particulars of your life, but I do know that there is a vast body of research that has driven the scientific consensus towards the idea that sexuality is fixed at birth for all practical purposes for at least the vast majority of people.
percivale
did not even BOTHER to read the title of my post as I answered your question in my title.
"I don't know the particulars of your life, but I do know that there is a vast body of research that has driven the scientific consensus towards the idea that sexuality is fixed at birth for all practical purposes for at least the vast majority of people."
I am aware of this "body of evidence", however I do not believe, based on my experience and the experiences of others, that it is wise to completely dismiss the influence of environment and society in the development of sexuality. This is precisely why I believe orientation is birthed through a combination of nature and nurture.
The title of the post is not be a place to answer questions. Common rules of engagement over the internet have built up over years, it is always best to observe them if you do not wish to be ambiguous and misunderstood in your post. While I am at the nit picking it is also convention that quotes should either be in a blockquote tag, or at the very least in italics.
Now my questions for you are:
1) Was the date you quote the first time you had sexual contact with someone of the same sex?
OR
2) Was it the first time you looked at someone of the same sex with some form of sexual connotation & how old where you at the time?
IF question 1 is true THEN
3)How old were you the first time you looked at someone of the same sex with some form of sexual connotation?
Cathii
-------------------------------------------------------
Those who know everything have learned little from life.
And I have never heard of such a rule. But thanks *slight sarcasm* As far as block quotes, I have not found any forum codes on ProgressiveU. If you could perhaps point them out, that would be great. If they do not exist, well then that's pretty much a moot point. -_-
To answer your question(s):
I have never had sexual contact with anyone of either sex, so no, that is not what the date represents.
To the second question, I do believe I've already answered this question to percivale, HOWEVER I will state again that no this was not the first time I looked at someone of the same sex in a nonplatonic way.
Thats fine, you can continue to be misunderstood. That is your right.
The conventions I am talking about have existed since the bulletin board days back in the late 70's and 80's. The were continued on through the net. Why do they exist? In one word - Clarity. If you want to be understood on this emotionless medium you use the conventions built up over time and people WILL understand you. I known that you do know something of them because of your use of astrisks to enclose the words "slight sarcasm"
Progressive U uses raw html code mixed in with your post. Just take a look underneither the comment box and note the words "Input Format" if you click on that you can toggle between completely raw html and filtered html. The "<I>" tag starts italics and the "</I>" tag stops italics and so on. Go ahead try it, put those two tags around the text when you next quote somebody and see how it appears in your post. A little extra effort and your posts would be so much more readable and not misuderstood by others.
Responses to your answers
1) Thats fine, sexual contact does not define sexuality
2) So the date of choice of your bisexuality wasn't the first time you looked at some one of the same sex in *that* way. OK I can accept that by itself, it may not be indicative of your claim being false. However, the next question is.... Was it the first time you looked at someone of the opposite sex in *that* way?
Oh and you left out one vital piece of information that I requested, ie your age at the time.......
Have fun
Cathii
-------------------------------------------------------
Those who know everything have learned little from life.
how long they have existed. I have been on message boards since the age of 17 years old-I am now 20. I have NEVER seen these "rules" put to practice. Considering the number of message boards I am a member of, I should have come across a few of these instances by now. I have not (I am speaking specifically about the "answers don't go in the title" thing). As a matter of fact, people do it ALL the time, and there has never been any confusion.
"Was it the first time you looked at someone of the opposite sex in *that* way?"
No. I kind of thought that would be understood, but ok.
"Oh and you left out one vital piece of information that I requested, ie your age at the time....... "
Age at the time of what?
Hey I am not the convention police, I just thought I might point out why percivale misunderstood you (ie missed the information you used as part of the reply in the title) and suggest how you might be able to make your posts a little more easily understood. If people do it all the time then I am not surprised there are so many misunderstandings both here and elsewhere on the web.
FYI my first contact with a bulletin board was back in 1979 when my father bought our very first modem (an accoustic coupler - a rubber thingy you put the handset of your phone into). Since that day I haven't been without a live connection to the outside world. Let me assure you those conventions do exist and there are a great many places on the net that you will get flamed simply for not following them.
"No. I kind of thought that would be understood, but ok."
Well actually no. You can't take anything for granted. For all I know you may have identified as gay up until that point when you "chose" to be bi.
With the age thing, it really doesn't matter now because you have pretty much told me the answers anyway.
Now that I have sufficent information I can quite conclusively say that you are very much mistaken in your assertion that the date you quoted was the day you chose to be bi.
The date you quote may have been the conscious choice of the affirmation of what you felt before, but it wasn't a conscious decision to "become bi".
Regards
Cathii
-------------------------------------------------------
Those who know everything have learned little from life.
stated to another poster that for me choosing and accepting are the same thing. There is no one on this earth I have to answer to for that.
The fact that I did not choose to accept that I was transsexual up until a few short years ago did not mean that I wasn't transsexual. If choice and acceptance were the same things then I would not have suffered from Gender Dysphoria *before* accepting my transsexuality. Ergo choice is NOT acceptance.
Perhaps you would like to prove me wrong by accepting that you are the richest person in the world and by making that choice of acceptance *become* the richest person in the world?
Cathii
-------------------------------------------------------
Those who know everything have learned little from life.
between someone who is transexual and sexual orientation. I am not, nor have I ever been in this discussion, talking about transexuals. I am talking about sexual orientation. Not only that, but I said specifically that choice and acceptance are the same thing for ME. I cannot speak for anything nor anyone else. Either way, many people here seem to harp on the fact that I believe in choice while ignoring the fact that I also believe in a genetic basis. Sometimes I think people just like to argue.
> I have been on message boards since
> the age of 17 years old-I am now 20.
> I have NEVER seen these "rules" put
> to practice. Considering the number
> of message boards I am a member of,
> I should have come across a few of
> these instances by now.
Here is a excellent resource that you might want to consider investigating...
Netiquette Home Page
"Netiquette" is network etiquette, the do's and don'ts of online communication. Netiquette covers both common courtesy online and the informal "rules of the road" of cyberspace. This page provides links to both summary and detail information about Netiquette for your browsing pleasure.
http://www.albion.com/netiquette/
percivale
...and thank you for pointing it out. But do you realize that your "yes" to that question rather seriously undermines your argument thus far? People have been making the "environment" argument for many, many years but the evidence really doesn't point to that being the case. Most people are fairly unaware of sex until the onset of puberty, and I think few (if any) 11 to 14-year-olds have the kind of self-awareness that "choosing" one's sexuality would entail. So even if you weren't aware of your orientation from birth, it was already there.
percivale
my 'yes' answer undermines my argument. You say that most people are fairly unaware of sex until the onset of puberty. I am not one of those people (and I know plenty of people just like me). I can assure you, as I've already stated, that I think I know myself and my history better than you (and I'm noting here that you've acknowledged this too, so don't go all crazy on me). Personally I only trust science to a certain extent anyway, and no not because I'm some ignorant shlub who just wants to "go against the grain". I have my reasons for believing what I do, and I think they are just as valid as someone who believes orientation is strictly a genetic thing. As I've stated, I don't believe it is wise to completely dismiss the idea that environment affects sexuality. It affects many other things in life-why should sexuality, a very diverse and subjective subject, be any different? Outside of experiences I've had myself, and others, how do you explain people who have NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER (I'm stressing this for a reason) had an inclination toward the same sex, no "signs", no struggles about whether they're "weird"- all of a sudden finding the same sex attractive? I personally think the amount of people whose sexuality IS influenced by society/environment, etc. are a minority, but that doesn't mean they should be completely dismissed just to be able to say "You're born that way and there's nothing you can do about it!!!" Everyone is different and everyone's experience is different.
...you gave us one, and then admitted that it was not the first time you felt attracted to someone of the same sex. The admission contradicts your original answer. It is my experience that being "believe" a lot of things about theselves because they are unwilling to accept, or are simply unaware, of the reality of the way that human biology works. Since you have already stated that you are bi-sexual, I wonder if you are confusing your "decision" with "acceptance."
In order for your description of yourself to be consistent, you must have decided which sex(es) to be attracted to BEFORE you began to feel those attractions, and that is not what you have described. How do you explain this contradiction?
percivale
"I wonder if you are confusing your "decision" with "acceptance.""
For me they are one and the same.
...but your argument seem to be a bit evasive. Words have definitions, and "acceptance" and "decision" aren't synonyms. So, lets try this again.
Can you, or can you not point to an instance BEFORE your experienced attaction to either sex at which you "decided" what your sexual orientation would be?
So far, your answers would seems to indicate that this was not the case, and if not, then your claim is inconsistent with the information you have provided us.
percivale
that I don't fit into your little box of what an LGBT person is supposed to be. I have no obligation to answer your questions.
You are correct jorden. You have no OBLIGATION to respond. But by refusing to answer questions regarding your claim, you have completely undermined your credibility, and your evasions would seem to support that what I am suggesting is in fact true.
percivale
However, you may continue to believe that it isn't.
Over and out
-_-
I think the evasiveness of your attitude is quite telling. Nevertheless, your story is still inconsistent.
percivale
The true crux of this disaster is that there will always be debate over whether or not homosexuality is moral or immoral, no matter which arguments we make to try to sway or lean one way or the other. I think it's fair to say that in most instances, ones POV is determined at least in part by ones own proclivities and perogatives.
Why should it matter what people think of the issue. If one is homosexual or straight it is their own business. The only reason this is such a big debate is because of the bible and these ignorant politicians want to say the right thing to Americans who supposedly are choosing "the right religious morals." Even though most of these people have sinned. Its is a stupid debate that I believe individuals would see fall under the category of segregation. Doesn't it. Everyone should be free to be what they want to be, and more when it wasn't their choice. The mainstream public seems to be becoming more liberal and accepting this asides from those stupid politician. Hopefully in the years to come it will be shunned upon.
You just can't be gay in the weekends and be straight on the weekdays. that's impossible. you can choose what you are.. no one is gonna kill you.
As far as the nature vs. nurture argument here, I think that homosexuality and bisexuality is a bit of both. Both sex hormones, estrogen and testosterone, are present in both sexes. Generally, males have more testosterone and females have more estrogen. Some people are born with awkward levels of these hormones, but our society also has an effect on people's choices. Some people are just experimenting, but others are genuinely gay.
-----
Do read my post fully. Not only does it help you understand my point instead of making rash statements, but it also gives me some semblance of faith that people can read and understand an argument.
It seems clear to me that lots and probably most homosexuals have no choice. There are quite a few on this thread who assert that is the case for them personally and I see no reason to think they are liars.
But some do seem to have a choice. Bi-sexuals seem to be able to jump back and forth from homosexual to heterosexual as a matter of choice. And then there are the cases like V. Gene Robinson the previously heterosexual and now homosexual Epsicopal Bishop of New Hampshire. He was married to a woman, had a few children and then divorced and hooked up with a man.
I think some people are clearly in the homosexual camp, some are in the heterosexual camp and some are right on the boundary. I think it is these boundary people are the ones that can be influenced by environment. They are also the homosexuals that the Christians occassionally "cure".
My brother-in-law is a Urologist and very rarely he is asked to consult on the very rare cases where babies are born with both male and female genitilia, He told me that in the old days, the standard procedure was to lop off the male parts because that was the simpler surgery and then give the kids a massive dose of estrogen which at that tender age seems to almost guarantee they will be behaviorially infuenced to be female. In more modern times, they now test these babies to look at their arrangements of X and Y chromosones to see what nature intended. Based on those tests they then perform the appropriate sex operation and administer the appropriate hormones. Hormones I think have a lot to do with sexual orientation.
Bisexuals don't jump back and forth between homo and hetero. They jump back and forth between men and women, That does not change their sexual orientation. If a person has a black parent and a white parent they don't jump back and forth between black and white do they?
In more modern times, they now test these babies to look at their arrangements of X and Y chromosones to see what nature intended.
isn't what they're born with what nature intended? Some kids are born with xxy chromosomes, which I think is still considered male.
Bisexuals don't jump back and forth between homo and hetero. They jump back and forth between men and women, That does not change their sexual orientation.
Convenient semantics which are often used to refute the inconvenient fact that some people can indeed choose to be homosexual or heterosexual.
If a bi-sexual man is having sex with a man it would be considered by most to be homosexual sex. If that same bi-sexual man later has sex with a woman it would be considered heterosexual sex. It seems to me that it is just semantics and you are splitting hairs.
I'm not sure if it is possible to have "bi-sexual sex"? A threesome maybe?
It's all a word game. But the fact remains that some sub-set of people can indeed choose.
They can choose between acts, not who they are attracted to, which seems to be your point. Attraction is what defines a person's sexual orientation. If a bisexual man has sex with a woman that does not mean that he is not still attracted to men, just that at that particular moment in time he's not engaged in sex with a man. If I happen to be listening to a gospel song, it does not mean that I don't also like rock. Sexual orientation is the only topic in which people believe that things have to be either or. It might be just semantics for you but the fact remains that bisexuals, just like everyone else, can't choose who they are ATTRACTED to, regardless of who they may be sexing at the moment.
Unfortunately, (for you) these are the semantics which frame and define the way that psychologists today describe the phenomenon of sexual orientation. As much as some would like to reduce human sexuality to the mere grunting of a two-backed beast, the observed ranges of sexual orientation are a just a bit more complicated than that, and the research indicates that sexual orientation involves a complex interaction of attractions and identity that are expressed through behaviors. On both a biological and psychological level, not everyone responds the same way to the same stimuli, and thus not everyone is attracted in the same way to the same people. A bi-sexual person demonstrates a (roughly) equal propensity to experience attraction to both members of the same and the opposite sex. Heterosexual and homosexual people however, tend to experience attraction only for the opposite and same sexes, respectively. The evidence simply does not support the idea that people can consciously choose to be attracted to one or the other or both. They CAN choose to express or to not express the behavior, but the root attractions occurs as it does regardless.
TTFN,
Blackout
---
Check out Progressive PRIDE, a Gay-Straight Alliance for the Progressive U community.
Yeah, that's about the act of the sex itself. However, the person's being bisexual does not change.
-----
Do read my post fully. Not only does it help you understand my point instead of making rash statements, but it also gives me some semblance of faith that people can read and understand an argument.
isn't what they're born with what nature intended?
You could choose to look at it that way and I could not say you were wrong.
Personally, I think nature makes mistakes.
I have to agree with Meke here. Bisexuals don't jump between two sexualities. We're attracted to both sexes simultaneously.
-----
Do read my post fully. Not only does it help you understand my point instead of making rash statements, but it also gives me some semblance of faith that people can read and understand an argument.
i do believe that sexual orientation has more to do with hormones than genetics in the womb.
Hormone levels are controlled by genetics.
-----
Do read my post fully. Not only does it help you understand my point instead of making rash statements, but it also gives me some semblance of faith that people can read and understand an argument.
true, but i meant hormone levels in the womb and the type of environment the fetus is exposed to.
I'm no expert on this subject but I think hormones can get out of whack for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily genetic.