Bi-Sexuals: do they exist?

bi-sexuals: real or imaginary


  • Total voters
    73
  • #1
ok its a weird question but here goes.

i was reading a so-called scientific study into sexuality and the author claimed that bisexuality does not exist people are either hetrosexual or homosexual, no in betweens.

now personalley i find this laughable.

so people who thinks bisexuals exist and who thinks they are a figment of our imagination.

i will also note here right from the start i have nothing against bisexuals (if they exist) i'm gay myself
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
1,250
2
I think there is no such thing as a perfect bisexual; desiring men and women exactly equally over the course of a lifetime.

Just because I prefer chocolate to vanilla, doesn't mean that I will forsake vanilla for my whole life. That means that heterosexuals can still be consider such despite the occasional homosexual meanderings. Or is this the definition of bisexual? If so then there would be hardly any perfect non-bisexual person.
 
  • #3
664
3
Before discussing the phenomena of bisexuality, some things needs to be made clear. How can one reach a conclusion on something if the basic facts are unknown or not well researched?

What is sexuality?
What makes people homosexuals? Is this an exclusive thing, or can it be altered in any way?
What is the biochemistry behind 'love'?
How much does genes play a role? How much does the structure of society play a role?

As there are people in the world who call themselves 'bisexuals', they obviously exists.
 
  • #4
well i will attempt to answer the questions posed.

what is sexuality? here are the most common definitions:
Involves giving and receiving sexual pleasure, as well as enabling reproduction. Sexuality is a total sensory experience, involving the whole mind and body--not just the genitals. Sexuality is shaped by a person's values, attitudes, behaviors, physical appearance, beliefs, emotions, personality, likes and dislikes, and spiritual selves, as well as all the ways in which one has been socialized.
www.thehardnessfactor.com/exclusives/glossary.html

Term generally used to refer to sexual orientation. In Freudian psychoanalysis, sexuality is formed in the gradual organization of the libidinal drives to focus upon a particular object. The character of that object depends upon the subject s particular path through the various stages of psychic development.
www.adamranson.freeserve.co.uk/critical%20concepts.htm[/URL]

what makes people homosexuals? well its fairly easy
sexual desire within the same sex.
[url]www.willdurant.com/glossary.htm[/url]

Sexual relationships with individuals of the same gender.
[PLAIN]www.sexualcounselling.com/Glossary/Glossaryh.htm[/URL]

Being attracted to or aroused by members of the same gender. See Sexual Orientation.
allpsych.com/dictionary/dictionary2.html

a sexual attraction to (or sexual relations with) persons of the same sex
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

what is the biochemistry behind love? is this really relevent to the topic in hand?

and the final question "nature vs nature"? still havent got a definite answer to this one but general consensus is that its partly both.

i think that in general people are classed as homosexual if they only like people of their own gender, and classed as straight if they only like the opposite sex. this doesnt been that everyone is bi sexual as you seem to suggest crosson as statistically only one in 7 men have homosexual, tendencies so that means an awful lot of guys are in fact completely straight (damn), however homosexual tendencies may mean either being a full blown queen like i am, or it could just mean having a quick paddle in the gay pool but not going in for a full swim. which would seem to indicate bisexuality. however if a guy trys gay sex just once in his life during his college years perhaps would this make him bi? how many times do you need to experiment before it classes as bi or are "bisexuals" simply greedy peple who cant decide what they want so they keep on experimenting?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #5
matthyaouw
Gold Member
1,153
5
From personal experience, I'm inclined to say bisexuality does exist.

i was reading a so-called scientific study into sexuality and the author claimed that bisexuality does not exist people are either hetrosexual or homosexual, no in betweens.
I don't suppose you could link to it could you? I wouldn't mind reading it.
 
  • #6
664
3
what makes people homosexuals? well its fairly easy: sexual desire within the same sex.
You are looking at the result, not the origin or cause. Your definition of 'sexuality' does not cover the most basic reason for its existence; reproduction and the biological origin of it.

Since so much is apparently unknown or much of it lacks true scientific scrutiny or research, it is beginning to look as quite a pointless question for me. There are so much left to be answered, such as

If you have intercourse with a same sex individual, does that make you a homosexual, even though you do not have any sexual desire for the same sex? Is homosexuality just a slanderous definition of people who took part in the sexual liberation in the 60s, just not with the opposite sex by religious institutions? Would no one care if religion was not such as strong force?

I am not asking for answers to these questions, just trying to highlight the sort of semi-philosophical nature of the question. Add to that the fact that sexuality is such a taboo subject for some circles to the extent that the American Psychiatric Association declared it a mental illness in the 19501, preventing studies on sexuality to a greater extent due to its controversial nature back them. Even though it was retracted, this controversy still exists today.

Perhaps the most basic question should be answered: What if someone just likes sex, no matter which gender it is having sex with?

1Garret, Laurie The Coming Plague - Newly Emerging Diseases in a World out of Balance 1995
 
  • #7
Gokul43201
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,051
18
i was reading a so-called scientific study into sexuality and the author claimed that bisexuality does not exist people are either hetrosexual or homosexual, no in betweens.
Could you include a citation or link to this study?
 
  • #8
unfortunatly the article i was reading was in an british newspaper and i cant remember which issue so no citations im afraid.

moridin, re-read my definitons of homosexual you will see that i do not state it as being merely intercourse with a same sex person, it is a sexual desire / attraction to the same gender. almost all counties have a problem of some sort with homosexuals, however this does not define what sexuality is.
 
  • #9
178
0
Interesting http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/h...ok&adxnnlx=1176340916-VBDOPQJK+D83TicunN6mwg" touching on this.

Says men are wired, at least, to be gay or straight, while women can go either way (in terms of brain wiring).

Their sexual arousal seems to be relatively indiscriminate — they get aroused by both male and female images,” Dr. Bailey said. “I’m not even sure females have a sexual orientation. But they have sexual preferences. Women are very picky, and most choose to have sex with men.”

Dr. Bailey believes that the systems for sexual orientation and arousal make men go out and find people to have sex with, whereas women are more focused on accepting or rejecting those who seek sex with them.
I do wonder how much culture influences sexuality, though, telling women to be more passive and react to suitors rather than seeking partners themselves.

side note - 2 years back I talked about the latter part of the article in https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=788559&highlight=sykes#post788559" post.

I was referring to this theory
A somewhat more straightforward clue to the origin of homosexuality is the fraternal birth order effect. Two Canadian researchers, Ray Blanchard and Anthony F. Bogaert, have shown that having older brothers substantially increases the chances that a man will be gay. Older sisters don’t count, nor does it matter whether the brothers are in the house when the boy is reared.

The finding suggests that male homosexuality in these cases is caused by some event in the womb, such as “a maternal immune response to succeeding male pregnancies,” Dr. Bogaert wrote last year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Antimale antibodies could perhaps interfere with the usual masculinization of the brain that occurs before birth, though no such antibodies have yet been detected.

The fraternal birth order effect is quite substantial. Some 15 percent of gay men can attribute their homosexuality to it, based on the assumption that 1 percent to 4 percent of men are gay, and each additional older brother increases the odds of same-sex attraction by 33 percent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
devil-fire
i think iv heard of a study with results like in the OP. the study im thinking of went something like this:

people were shown straight and homo porn and they had a lever they could adjust to express their arousal of the images. they also had their physical arousal measured. when straight/gay men were shown the respective porn, the arousal as indicated by the lever matched the physical arousal fairly well (gay men were not aroused at all by straight porn and the same for straight men with gay porn...well mostly:wink: ) but when bisexual men were show straight and gay porn, they indicated arousal via lever with both images, but were only physically aroused by one or the other. women on the other hand were physical aroused by both gay and straight porn, regardless of sexual preference but their sexual preference matched the arousal as indicated by the lever.

the conclusion that could be made was that quite often men are either straight or gay, and women are bisexual.

to me this really is irrelevant if people dont act on these impulses, so sexual preference is what really matters. if a person is physically sexually dysfunctional and becomes physically aroused by taking viagra, it dose not mean they are sexually inclined to not being straight, gay or bi, but some kind of sexual preference to do with ingesting drugs. imo this study has more to do with the sexual systems of the male/female and not to do with sexuality
 
  • #11
178
0
Wow, great find! Thanks for the info. Good point about the biological and social distinction in sexuality.
 
  • #12
85
0
Is anyone on this forum not heterosexual... if so there input might be of value...
 
  • #13
Mk
1,984
3
i think iv heard of a study with results like in the OP. the study im thinking of went something like this:

people were shown straight and homo porn and they had a lever they could adjust to express their arousal of the images. they also had their physical arousal measured. when straight/gay men were shown the respective porn, the arousal as indicated by the lever matched the physical arousal fairly well (gay men were not aroused at all by straight porn and the same for straight men with gay porn...well mostly:wink: ) but when bisexual men were show straight and gay porn, they indicated arousal via lever with both images, but were only physically aroused by one or the other. women on the other hand were physical aroused by both gay and straight porn, regardless of sexual preference but their sexual preference matched the arousal as indicated by the lever.

the conclusion that could be made was that quite often men are either straight or gay, and women are bisexual.

to me this really is irrelevant if people dont act on these impulses, so sexual preference is what really matters. if a person is physically sexually dysfunctional and becomes physically aroused by taking viagra, it dose not mean they are sexually inclined to not being straight, gay or bi, but some kind of sexual preference to do with ingesting drugs. imo this study has more to do with the sexual systems of the male/female and not to do with sexuality
That experiment perfectly resembles or may have been done first by J. Michael Bailey.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey
 
  • #14
honestrosewater
Gold Member
2,105
5
0TheSwerve0 said:
Dr. Bailey believes that the systems for sexual orientation and arousal make men go out and find people to have sex with, whereas women are more focused on accepting or rejecting those who seek sex with them.
Hah! That is so in line with my recent experiences, it's (not) funny. (Perhaps the women would look if they actually had time.) Anyway...

Is anyone on this forum not heterosexual... if so there input might be of value...
I consider myself bisexual, but that actually only changed a few months ago. I considered myself heterosexual previously. (I'm a 24-year-old woman.) I had deliberated about my sexual preference before, and being bisexual always seemed more rational to me. But I had just never felt physically attracted to a woman (except perhaps passingly while intoxicated and partying when I was younger or whatever).

But I came across this woman on a dating/socializing site OkCupid and was totally attracted her -- in the same way that I am attracted to men. She was also bisexual and told me that she had had a similar experience.

I think now that it might have been that I had just never seen in a woman certain qualities that I find attractive and are typically considered masculine. And I suppose there are also several feminine qualities that I find unattractive. I am talking about personality traits, by the bye, not physical features. There are actually a couple of women here at PF that I find attractive -- in a perfectly innocent, benign way -- now that I think of it.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
turbo
Gold Member
3,077
50
honestrosewater, I was in a position in about 1972-3 when I was is in relationships with two ladies. One was a a young lady that I had known since childhood (a tall slim girl that grew up on a dairy farm some miles away and that I had not been drawn to until that time) and another shorter younger more voluptuous lady that was emotionally involved with the slim farm-girl. It was too much for us to process, because we lacked the maturity and commitment to make it work. Personal dynamics are important. If a facet of your make-up is important to you, you may have to decide to "settle" in the short terrm and to hang back until circumstances line up for you. I wish you the best of luck and trust that your intuition and self-awareness will pull you through. Ultimately, we love who we love because we just do, and at that point, we are compelled to act accordingly. The sociological and personal expressions of love are far more important than the sexual ones. People that you love and respect (will die for) are key. They define your character.
 
Last edited:
  • #16
honestrosewater
Gold Member
2,105
5
Thanks, turbo. I'm perfectly happy being bisexual. I try not be unduly influenced by the norms of my society or other people in general. In fact, if someone asked me what exactly I meant by "woman" and "man", it would take a while for me to try to explain. Bisexuality always fit better with my other values (though, if I had my choice, "whatever-sexuality" is more accurate). I had just never felt physically attracted to a woman and couldn't picture myself having a woman as a partner in the same way that I could a man. I just figured that that's physical attraction for you and moved on.

It wasn't even a big change. I just had to check a different box and send out a little newsflash that I was now technically bisexual. No one that knew me was even surprised.
 
  • #17
nabuco
It seems to me that "homosexual" means "someone who's attracted to the same sex", as opposed to "someone who is not attracted by the opposite sex". As far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as a bisexual person, only homosexuals who occasionally engage in normal sex.

But hey, who owns the language anyway?
 
  • #18
honestrosewater
Gold Member
2,105
5
It seems to me that "homosexual" means "someone who's attracted to the same sex", as opposed to "someone who is not attracted by the opposite sex". As far as I'm concerned, there is no such thing as a bisexual person, only homosexuals who occasionally engage in normal sex.
Is there a reason that you prefer these definitions? They seem quite inconsistent to me. Why do you mix attraction with performance? And how do you know that strict heterosexuality is even normal under that categorization, if you lump all non-strict-heterosexuals together? (I assume that, by "normal sex", you mean heterosexual sex.)
 
Last edited:
  • #19
147
0
Why not?

People just look for mindless sexual pleasure. By claiming they are bi-sexual they are just announcing that they play both sides of the field. Its just sexual deviation from mainstream affection but then again I have no idea how the rest of the United States shows love.
 
  • #20
honestrosewater
Gold Member
2,105
5
People just look for mindless sexual pleasure. By claiming they are bi-sexual they are just announcing that they play both sides of the field. Its just sexual deviation from mainstream affection but then again I have no idea how the rest of the United States shows love.
How do you know what their sexual habits are? Are you spying on them?
 
  • #21
147
0
Everyone's a voyeur, their watching me watch them, watch me right now..
 
  • #22
matthyaouw
Gold Member
1,153
5
Just wondering- why do those of you who voted 'no' feel that way?

For the record, I'm bisexual but have been in a heterosexual relationship for the past year.
 
  • #23
147
0
The reason why bi-sexual exists.. Very obscure opinion but.. A homosexual life style is completely contradicting to the human race - to have children and pass genes on to your off-spring. If you're a homosexual, it seems that you unconsciously lead a very destructive life style in that sense. Bi-sexuals do have the ability to create children with another individual despite whether or not they are trying to concieve or not.
 
  • #24
nabuco
Is there a reason that you prefer these definitions?
Homo = the same

They seem quite inconsistent to me.
Few things make sense in this debate about human sexuality since too many political decisions depend on the definition of particular words. I prefer to steer clear of the politics and concentrate on the purity of the language.

Essentially my position is that we have to stop thinking of sex as something we do for pleasure, and return to the original meaning of the word, which is the biological activity required for reproduction. It's perfectly possible to have sex without any pleasure - just ask any woman with an abusive husband.

If we think of sex as something we do for pleasure, then we will no longer understand each other when we talk about it. But I'm a couple of decades late, that is already happening.
 
  • #25
honestrosewater
Gold Member
2,105
5
Homo = the same
So you think the Ancient Greeks own Modern English? :smile:

It wasn't actually your definition of "homosexual" that I was confused about; it was your definition of "bisexual". Do you deny that bisexuals are attracted to people of the opposite sex and can be attracted to them without actually having sex with them? Both are true for me.
Few things make sense in this debate about human sexuality since too many political decisions depend on the definition of particular words. I prefer to steer clear of the politics and concentrate on the purity of the language.
Whew, I thought I might have mistakenly wandered into the politics section.

I study linguistics. I would love to know what you think is pure about English. I think it's a mutt if there ever was one. Are you perhaps trying to use something about the history of the language to dismiss other people's arguments? I am asking honestly.

Essentially my position is that we have to stop thinking of sex as something we do for pleasure, and return to the original meaning of the word, which is the biological activity required for reproduction. It's perfectly possible to have sex without any pleasure - just ask any woman with an abusive husband.

If we think of sex as something we do for pleasure, then we will no longer understand each other when we talk about it. But I'm a couple of decades late, that is already happening.
Why would we have to do that? You think there is something wrong with bringing pleasure to people?

I don't think of sex as something to do merely for pleasure, though I don't deny that pleasure is part of what's nice about sex. I am actually quite nun-like as far as my sexual habits go. How does that fit with my being bisexual according to your view?
 

Related Threads on Bi-Sexuals: do they exist?

  • Last Post
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
8K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • Last Post
4
Replies
84
Views
31K
  • Poll
  • Last Post
3
Replies
59
Views
18K
  • Last Post
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
22
Views
4K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
Top