I have this recurring thought/theory...greenspun.com : LUSENET : Naked Eye : One Thread
which always annoys people. I say ... I don't think there is such a thing as a "straight" human being - that we are all "born" with the proclivity towards sexuality - which includes bi-sexuality. That everyone, at some point and in some fashion, has considered/thought about/fantasized a sexual act with a member of each sex.
What say you?
-- Catherine (email@example.com), October 16, 1999
Yeah - Anthony, you probably pegged it with the comment about what we knew as children.
In the wild animals engage in homosexual acts all the time. Apparently without any fallout from the herd. Children and animals are a far more sociable lot than adults, anyway.
I've never met a person without some proclivity towards both sexes. Period.
My mother hates these sorts of discussions. Heh.
-- Catherine (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 17, 1999.
I think you're right... I tend to regard sexuality (in all its flavors, not just partner preference) as a continuum. That it's not just yes/no, either/or, but more like where you fall on a line. In this case from very, very opposite sex oriented to very, very same sex oriented, but that most people fall somewhere in the middle rather at either extreme.
And of course, orientation or tendancy toward a certain thing is much different than inclination to act on it (or even acknowledge it) - that involves a whole 'nother crop of parameters, from personal values to taboos put in place as a kid, to 'what will the neighbors say', to simple opportunity. Those things can move that natural tendancy either way on the line when it comes to a conscious understanding of where we fall and move it still further in terms of what we choose to act upon. (Early morning expression of a theory - I suspect it makes no sense right now)
-- Lynda B. (email@example.com), October 16, 1999.
I was just coming in here to post my own continuum theory, only to find that Lynda had already posted pretty much exactly what I think.
Wonder if it's become "the theory of the day" or something? LOL
-- Jo (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 16, 1999.
I say you're right enough to know now what we all knew when we were children and so unaware that we were supposed to know anything at all
-- Anthony V. Toscano (email@example.com), October 16, 1999.
I had a friend who stoutly maintained that he wasn't homo-, bi-, or heterosexual; "I'm just *sexual*," he said with a wicked grin. I agree completely. We're all just sexual, each of us being somewhere along a continuum that is completely same-sex on one end and opposite-sex on the other. Though I have to say, I've met *extremly* few people who were 100% either, and I find them kind of scary. Me, I hate giving myself a label/pigeonhole, but I's have to say I'm almost dead-centre in the middle. (ah, and here I say that my sex life isn't going to be a topic for my OLJ ;)
-- Cameron Perry (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 16, 1999.
Truth? I have the same theory you do, Catherine. Or I did, but then some of my friends (rightfully) pointed out that I get all jumpy and complainy whenever I come across 'universal' theories and insist that there are always some exceptions and that I am Personally Offended by being locked into a theory without any exceptions in it. So, here is my new theory: Most people are born bisexual and just turn out one or the other or both or neither, all to varying degreees, according to whatever happens from then on (purposefully vague because 'environment' is one hell of a big umbrella); however, *some* people, not very many, are born 100 percent straight or gay. Since my friends who Insisted that They Were Not Born Bisexual are probably right. At least some of them.
-- Marianne Aldrich (email@example.com), October 16, 1999.
I think anyone with imagination has imagined all sorts of sex acts, with all sorts of ranges of partners, many of which we would blush to recount. In fact, I think it's a major part of adolescence.....trying to determine where one's sexuality lies, watching oneself, seeing where the majority of your libido lies. I think it's always a case of majority rules. Bisexuals come close to a split vote. Those who consider themselves straight might be an eighty per cent vote, but rarely a hundred per cent vote.
Question though: does that work the other way? Is there no such thing as a truly, totally homosexual person? We tend to shy away from that implication---for to say that is to make those who think homosexuals can or should be "cured" of such things might be correct, in their methodology, although I personally deplore their intent. I wish they would leave the gay or lesbian person alone. It's not a politically correct thing to think. Yet if the "straight" person is not totally straight.-- isn't it true that the same must be true of the gay or lesbian person? That they need not be totally gay or lesbian?
Something to think about.
-- Al Schroeder (firstname.lastname@example.org), October 16, 1999.