What if this thing happens? Does it really matter or it won't be much of a big deal?
Let me know in the comments section below.
Its also interesting to point out that there are also instances where a gay man fell in love with a lesbian woman (and vice versa) and they got married. I'm not saying they were both secret homosexuals(which also happened albeit with a more negative ends) but have openly came out before so they were both aware. Yes, these things happened.
I don't see the issue.
If she's heterosexual, she'd still have sexual desires for men. Now she has both, so what? She better bring her lesbian friend for a threesome!
I'd love to date a bisexual girl. But that's just me.
I guess it depends on the person, and whether they're comfortable with that. And it might depend on whether the relationship is monogamous or not, what all rules apply.
I guess a lot of factors must come into play, and that is why OP seems to be unsure how he feels about it.
No issue at all, also she can **** girls if she wants but I want details or even be allowed to watch/join please lol
What if this thing happens? Does it really matter or it won't be much of a big deal?
Let me know in the comments section below.
My wife is bi. Just opens up options for you. ;)
I think they lean one way or the other and are lying about the rest.
Couldn't it be that they lean one day one way and another day another way? I think human sexuality is not really completely fixed and most scientific studies show that. For example, as a metaphor, you might like to eat pasta a lot and it could be your favorite meal but that doesn't mean you would feel like eating pasta everyday of the week for the rest of your life. Maybe one day you feel a craving for fish and prefer that to pasta. I see sexuality in a similar light, in the end it is just another human preference and those vary and are not really static or fixed.
I think they lean one way or the other and are lying about the rest.
Couldn't it be that they lean one day one way and another day another way? I think human sexuality is not really completely fixed and most scientific studies show that. For example, as a metaphor, you might like to eat pasta a lot and it could be your favorite meal but that doesn't mean you would feel like eating pasta everyday of the week for the rest of your life. Maybe one day you feel a craving for fish and prefer that to pasta. I see sexuality in a similar light, in the end it is just another human preference and those vary and are not really static or fixed.
I can't feel that you are more wrong. Your sexuality is not your appetite. It's hard wired into you. if you were hard-wired to eat pasta, you'd NEVER eat fish.
@TheHighWind: "Your sexuality is not your appetite. It's hard wired into you."
Proof? It is not even hardwired in more simple animals so why do you think more complex animals like humans couldn't have more complex behaviors?
I can't feel that you are more wrong. Your sexuality is not your appetite. It's hard wired into you. if you were hard-wired to eat pasta, you'd NEVER eat fish.
Sexuality is far more complex than this. Which imo also includes choice... probably on some kind of spectrum that is determined by your biology, parents, how you were raised, etc.
This is actually one of the arguments ive disliked from people about homosexuality... not say its wrong or that i dont support gay people, no. I believe they should have every right that everyone else does. Not to mention if i were to suggest which would be "nature", it would probably be bisexuality and not straight or gay as we are very complex when it comes to sexuality and most people seem to have a scale more than either/or.
BUT, in the 1970s people started to declare that it was biological. Now i get the need to go a bit extreme in order to get gay people rights, but im not a fan of lying. And this is exactly what happened (and we are actually seeing this with trans people right now as well) because the fact of the matter is there are no scientific studies even today, that say this. There is a handful of studies (most post-2000, so 25 years or so of people lying) where people think they might have something and are peer reviewed, but the conclusions are not.
Other than the fact that you only have half the chance of her being interested in you, I don't think it's all that different....
I can't feel that you are more wrong. Your sexuality is not your appetite. It's hard wired into you. if you were hard-wired to eat pasta, you'd NEVER eat fish.
Sexuality is far more complex than this. Which imo also includes choice... probably on some kind of spectrum that is determined by your biology, parents, how you were raised, etc.
This is actually one of the arguments ive disliked from people about homosexuality... not say its wrong or that i dont support gay people, no. I believe they should have every right that everyone else does. Not to mention if i were to suggest which would be "nature", it would probably be bisexuality and not straight or gay as we are very complex when it comes to sexuality and most people seem to have a scale more than either/or.
BUT, in the 1970s people started to declare that it was biological. Now i get the need to go a bit extreme in order to get gay people rights, but im not a fan of lying. And this is exactly what happened (and we are actually seeing this with trans people right now as well) because the fact of the matter is there are no scientific studies even today, that say this. There is a handful of studies (most post-2000, so 25 years or so of people lying) where people think they might have something and are peer reviewed, but the conclusions are not.
I agree, I think the gay rights movement did a mistake with fighting sexual preference as being a kind of trait you are born with, like with any behavior of a living organism usually the answer is a combination of nature and nurture and not just one without the other. Also research has pretty much shown that sexuality is a fluid trait, and that its social function goes beyond pure reproduction. They should have fought for this more accurate, scientific interpretation and just claim that, even if being homosexual is in part a choice or, in part, a product of your environment, it's a harmless choice and shouldn't concern anyone other than the people making that choice or that feel that they feel more comfortable being that way. That is a more effective and stronger argument IMO since it appeals to personal freedom and it is actually easy to back up scientifically.
This happens more often than you know.
And you do know what "bisexual" is, right? And how a woman can fall in love with a bisexual man, too?
It'll be the same was if she was heterosexual. Only now you have a chance of threesomes.
And you've also doubled the chances of her cheating on you, more or less.
I can't feel that you are more wrong. Your sexuality is not your appetite. It's hard wired into you. if you were hard-wired to eat pasta, you'd NEVER eat fish.
Sexuality is far more complex than this. Which imo also includes choice... probably on some kind of spectrum that is determined by your biology, parents, how you were raised, etc.
This is actually one of the arguments ive disliked from people about homosexuality... not say its wrong or that i dont support gay people, no. I believe they should have every right that everyone else does. Not to mention if i were to suggest which would be "nature", it would probably be bisexuality and not straight or gay as we are very complex when it comes to sexuality and most people seem to have a scale more than either/or.
BUT, in the 1970s people started to declare that it was biological. Now i get the need to go a bit extreme in order to get gay people rights, but im not a fan of lying. And this is exactly what happened (and we are actually seeing this with trans people right now as well) because the fact of the matter is there are no scientific studies even today, that say this. There is a handful of studies (most post-2000, so 25 years or so of people lying) where people think they might have something and are peer reviewed, but the conclusions are not.
I agree, I think the gay rights movement did a mistake with fighting sexual preference as being a kind of trait you are born with, like with any behavior of a living organism usually the answer is a combination of nature and nurture and not just one without the other. Also research has pretty much shown that sexuality is a fluid trait, and that its social function goes beyond pure reproduction. They should have fought for this more accurate, scientific interpretation and just claim that, even if being homosexual is in part a choice or, in part, a product of your environment, it's a harmless choice and shouldn't concern anyone other than the people making that choice or that feel that they feel more comfortable being that way. That is a more effective and stronger argument IMO since it appeals to personal freedom and it is actually easy to back up scientifically.
Or maybe it is a choice that stems from biological factors. Contrary to what you wrote, there are plenty of scientific studies and a lot of psychology (science) on the subject, and it is as natural as anything.
I do like your social arguments, though; I think it was a mistake to go the "it's totally natural" and then "God made me this way" route, they were never going to win over creationists and religious people that way (were they ever going to win them over?). I think they need to win over patriots, nationalists, "'muricans", and so forth with a freedom of choice stance.
"I want to shoot my guns, and marry other men! That's my choice! And nobody is going to take my job, neither!"
Or maybe it is a choice that stems from biological factors. Contrary to what you wrote, there are plenty of scientific studies and a lot of psychology (science) on the subject, and it is as natural as anything.
Right, but natural does not say biological (and biological factors is a pretty generalized term. We can say this about pretty much anything really) or as many suggest, that its within our genetics, which there is zero evidence of (in terms of hard sciences). As mentioned there are a handful of studies that people do point to, but none of them actually prove this. You kind of have to make jumps in order to say they do. Psychology.. meh... its fun but its far too reliant on society telling it where to go instead of coming up with predictive models on its own.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment