Interesting that this study was only about men. I will say there’s a huge stigma against bisexual men in particular. I’d love to see a similar study about bisexual women, considering we’re often...
Interesting that this study was only about men. I will say there’s a huge stigma against bisexual men in particular.
I’d love to see a similar study about bisexual women, considering we’re often accused of being with women just to please men.
Is there a good reason not to dismiss this sort of nonsensical accusations as anything but a closed mind? I imagine it gets fuckin' annoying hearing this day in and day out, but would such a study...
Is there a good reason not to dismiss this sort of nonsensical accusations as anything but a closed mind?
I imagine it gets fuckin' annoying hearing this day in and day out, but would such a study make significant difference to the general population?
I'm not sure a scientific study would be enough to counter this shallow perception. It would certainly be a welcome addition to one's erudition arsenal, but I'm not sure it would quite suffice as...
I'm not sure a scientific study would be enough to counter this shallow perception. It would certainly be a welcome addition to one's erudition arsenal, but I'm not sure it would quite suffice as a tool of education on matters of sexuality in as repressive a society as the US.
There are some people whose prejudices are so strong that they will not be convinced by scientific studies, but I think studies still have significant value as a way of highlighting their...
There are some people whose prejudices are so strong that they will not be convinced by scientific studies, but I think studies still have significant value as a way of highlighting their obstinance.
For example, I see this a lot in regards to trans people. For a long time there wasn't a lot of strong science supporting trans identities, so, unfortunately, prejudice led the way for many and it was able to go mostly unchecked. In recent years, however, strong scientific support has developed supporting trans people's identities and experiences, so those leading with prejudice now can only do so by willfully ignoring or rejecting widely agreed-upon science. It's one thing to be obstinate from a place of legitimate ignorance, but it's another to cling to a deliberate ignorance as a justification for obstinance.
It's similar to the anti-maskers and COVID-deniers in America right now. They maybe had a leg to stand on back in February, when there was still a lot of uncertainty about things. Their ignorance could be genuinely attributed to a lack of available knowledge. At this point in the pandemic, however, anyone holding that position is effectively burying their head in the sand. They might genuinely believe they're seeing the truth from their point of view -- bent over with their head in the ground -- but everyone else around only sees them as, well, an ass.
There are unfortunately still widespread prejudices that bisexual people don't exist; are lying; are claiming it for attention; are claiming it to rebel; are claiming it to be trendy; are confused; are in denial. Some people will undoubtedly continue to hold those prejudices, but the more that studies like this one erode the foundations for their misguided beliefs, the shakier the ground they'll have to stand on to assert them.
Perhaps you're right. It's not all one side or the other, and people have a tendency to change their minds when presented with proof under the right circumstance, even if they held their position...
Perhaps you're right. It's not all one side or the other, and people have a tendency to change their minds when presented with proof under the right circumstance, even if they held their position strongly.
It was awfully pessimistic of me to suggest it's not going to make any change. I'd like to see something shift the Overton window more radically when it comes to personal identity, sexuality, and romantic preferences. I'm impatient like that: when people suffer prejudice over nonsense and fear, I want to punch something. The prejudiced feel superior in their aggrandized worldview, while the targets of their bullying often hurt themselves or even – most aggravatingly – commit suicide.
So, I suppose anything that changes the conversation towards acceptance and understanding is something I should back.
Personally, I think studies like this are mirrors of social change, as opposed to engines. Or maybe further on the mirror side of the spectrum. Screw the binary! So I don't particularly think more...
Personally, I think studies like this are mirrors of social change, as opposed to engines. Or maybe further on the mirror side of the spectrum. Screw the binary! So I don't particularly think more studies would help. Even the most rigorous of studies could fail to convince a closed mind.
Not possible, since the way arousal is 'measured' is different between sexes. This study, for example, measured penile hardness as a physical measure used traditionally as a proxy for arousal....
I’d love to see a similar study about bisexual women, considering we’re often accused of being with women just to please men.
Not possible, since the way arousal is 'measured' is different between sexes. This study, for example, measured penile hardness as a physical measure used traditionally as a proxy for arousal.
Modern measurements of arousal are based on brain activity because physical measures are a poor indicator, hence the 'need' for this study to contradict prior studies.
Ah gotcha, if you're looking for some arousal papers on bisexual women, here's a few utilizing different measures of arousal, published at different points in time (newest first) to provide some...
Ah gotcha, if you're looking for some arousal papers on bisexual women, here's a few utilizing different measures of arousal, published at different points in time (newest first) to provide some context of how it's been measured historically and how things are changing/evolving.
Bisexual men, with Kinsey scores between two and four in this experiment, showed 3.3 times more genital arousal when presented with erotica from their "non-preferred sex," compared to men who rated themselves a zero or a six. For a man with a 2 on the Kinsey scale that "non-preferred sex" would be another man, for a 4 that would be a woman.
Men who place themselves in the zero or six categories tend to show very little arousal to their non-preferred sex – they were 10.16 times more aroused by their preferred sex, going by the penile gauge measurements. By comparison, the bisexual men were only 2.2 times more aroused by one sex compared to the other.
That difference "strongly confirmed" that bisexual men tend to be more attracted to both sexes than monosexual men, the study team says.
Neat. One of the things of note to me is that the orientations "straight", "gay/lesbian" and "bi" (how important is it that I call them by their formal names? I do not know much about the...
Neat. One of the things of note to me is that the orientations "straight", "gay/lesbian" and "bi" (how important is it that I call them by their formal names? I do not know much about the LGBT/GSRM community) Doesn't seem to be real according to this study, more so a spectrum, which is quite a change compared to how it is usually portrayed.
Yeah, It's hard to say how this has evolved. I think it's nowadays mostly young or newly come out people who get fixated on finding strict labels. When I was new to this all, I remember very...
I think the greater LGBT-community has been pretty keyed in to this for a long time. However, I am a Millennial. I wasn't around for the more turbulent times my elders were. This might be a misconception on my part. But among peers, I don't know a single non-cishet person who would take the stance that they're 100% gay, or perfectly 50/50 bisexual. The Kinsey Scale is an imperfect, but well known thing.
Yeah, It's hard to say how this has evolved. I think it's nowadays mostly young or newly come out people who get fixated on finding strict labels. When I was new to this all, I remember very specific labels being mostly useful for realizing that something is a possibility. And it's very powerful to have those available. But nowadays most of my peers tend to use more general descriptors like Gay (as a catch-all) or queer.
The Kinsey Scale has been around for nearly a hundred years, and is still the best thing we have in terms of defining sexual orientation. The fluidity of the scale, and the directive of 0-6, I am...
The Kinsey Scale has been around for nearly a hundred years, and is still the best thing we have in terms of defining sexual orientation.
The fluidity of the scale, and the directive of 0-6, I am amazed never became more commonplace. Happy to see more and more people (myself included) are beginning to use it more freely.
I should have thrown in the adjective 'simplest', as in I believe the Kinsey Scale is likely the simplest and best to explain to others and have a near complete understanding of. The KSOG is...
I should have thrown in the adjective 'simplest', as in I believe the Kinsey Scale is likely the simplest and best to explain to others and have a near complete understanding of.
The KSOG is somewhat excellent, but harder to explain and use in the modern day-to-day.
Given his reply to you, I think he means it's the best system for uninitiated people who don't really know that much about what non-cishet people can be, like me. Basically he's saying it's for...
Given his reply to you, I think he means it's the best system for uninitiated people who don't really know that much about what non-cishet people can be, like me.
Basically he's saying it's for beginners, like me, which is pretty fair. While KSOG does seem intuitive to me given Wikipedia, it does require a bit more of an explanation, enough for it to be something someone has to ask for, and if you have a bad memory, you will probably forget the questions.
Oh, okay. I was just thinking the word 'straight' might be a bit insulting since it can often be used in a positive context in other places and 'gay' can be an overgeneralization and also an...
Obviously I can't speak for the whole community, but I would hazard to say that most of us probably don't care very much. I personally notice and use a lot of shorthand among relevant persons in relevant contexts. Anybody who'd rake you over the coals for saying 'bi' instead of 'bisexual' is almost certainly in the minority. Formal names should probably be used if you're writing something formal, but in any kind of casual context I don't see there being any issues.
Oh, okay. I was just thinking the word 'straight' might be a bit insulting since it can often be used in a positive context in other places and 'gay' can be an overgeneralization and also an insult. In hindsight that very much is the kind of pedantic "SJW bickering" stuff that ends up on shoeonhead videos, and it's also not 1995 anymore, there aren't that many people who don't know what "LGBT" means/stands for and homophobes are a minority with too much power (unless you're in Russia/MENA/South Asia/Southeast Asia/Africa. Then you're more than screwed.)
I think the greater LGBT-community has been pretty keyed in to this for a long time. However, I am a Millennial. I wasn't around for the more turbulent times my elders were. This might be a misconception on my part. But among peers, I don't know a single non-cishet person who would take the stance that they're 100% gay, or perfectly 50/50 bisexual. The Kinsey Scale is an imperfect, but well known thing.
Fair enough. Unless they're, like, literally totsuka saika from oregairu (i.e comically, stereotypically effeminate) I won't care so I will I identify myself as "100% hetero".
It makes sense too, to me. Biology & genetics are messy & imperfect (not to mention social or environmental factors). For anything to be somewhere vaguely between 0% & 100% just seems to be waaay more likely solidly one way or the other, or exactly in-between.
Fair enough. Not even human biology is fixed (evolution), so nothing really is. It's all a spectrum, and it has always been like that. I'm autistic, so that should be intuitive to me, but ah well.
I don't usually bump old stuff, but I do have some insight on the following that you might find useful Coming to terms with being trans is one hell of a process, and it takes some people a very...
I don't usually bump old stuff, but I do have some insight on the following that you might find useful
I don't know what to make of people like this, I don't understand them. I've bumped into a few people like this on grindr, and while I never perceived malicious intent in their actions or their words, it's kind of bad vibes. On their profiles they'd be rather open about everything, so there was no deception, but also self-identified with a word that implies deception.
Coming to terms with being trans is one hell of a process, and it takes some people a very long time to get there. I've known people like this who did eventually come out as trans, but they were 'stuck' in this state of denial for quite some time. In a lot of societies (Japanese as an example) it's much more acceptable to be a cross-dresser than it is to be trans. For their own safety they may identify publicly in a different way than they identify internally.
Furthermore, it's not entirely uncommon for trans acceptance to come in stages. In my experience this is most often experienced through gradually redefining gender. They don't feel like they're quite a man or a woman anymore, so they identify as gender non-conforming, gender-fluid or non-binary. Over time as they start transitioning or spend more time not conforming to their birth gender, they may redefine again later as trans binary in their preferred gender or continue along a spectrum slowly pushing away from their assumed gender over time and eventually towards their preferred gender.
This also gets more complicated when you throw in genderfuckery (something I quite enjoy) in which the actual identity may not match what they are claiming, but they are specifically identifying or acting in ways which are designed to confuse and bring the entire concept of gender into question. I've never understood gender and people's fascination with it, so I often amuse myself by making others confront gender by fucking with their ideas of gender perception.
Interesting that this study was only about men. I will say there’s a huge stigma against bisexual men in particular.
I’d love to see a similar study about bisexual women, considering we’re often accused of being with women just to please men.
or as "just experimenting"
Is there a good reason not to dismiss this sort of nonsensical accusations as anything but a closed mind?
I imagine it gets fuckin' annoying hearing this day in and day out, but would such a study make significant difference to the general population?
I'm not sure a scientific study would be enough to counter this shallow perception. It would certainly be a welcome addition to one's erudition arsenal, but I'm not sure it would quite suffice as a tool of education on matters of sexuality in as repressive a society as the US.
There are some people whose prejudices are so strong that they will not be convinced by scientific studies, but I think studies still have significant value as a way of highlighting their obstinance.
For example, I see this a lot in regards to trans people. For a long time there wasn't a lot of strong science supporting trans identities, so, unfortunately, prejudice led the way for many and it was able to go mostly unchecked. In recent years, however, strong scientific support has developed supporting trans people's identities and experiences, so those leading with prejudice now can only do so by willfully ignoring or rejecting widely agreed-upon science. It's one thing to be obstinate from a place of legitimate ignorance, but it's another to cling to a deliberate ignorance as a justification for obstinance.
It's similar to the anti-maskers and COVID-deniers in America right now. They maybe had a leg to stand on back in February, when there was still a lot of uncertainty about things. Their ignorance could be genuinely attributed to a lack of available knowledge. At this point in the pandemic, however, anyone holding that position is effectively burying their head in the sand. They might genuinely believe they're seeing the truth from their point of view -- bent over with their head in the ground -- but everyone else around only sees them as, well, an ass.
There are unfortunately still widespread prejudices that bisexual people don't exist; are lying; are claiming it for attention; are claiming it to rebel; are claiming it to be trendy; are confused; are in denial. Some people will undoubtedly continue to hold those prejudices, but the more that studies like this one erode the foundations for their misguided beliefs, the shakier the ground they'll have to stand on to assert them.
Perhaps you're right. It's not all one side or the other, and people have a tendency to change their minds when presented with proof under the right circumstance, even if they held their position strongly.
It was awfully pessimistic of me to suggest it's not going to make any change. I'd like to see something shift the Overton window more radically when it comes to personal identity, sexuality, and romantic preferences. I'm impatient like that: when people suffer prejudice over nonsense and fear, I want to punch something. The prejudiced feel superior in their aggrandized worldview, while the targets of their bullying often hurt themselves or even – most aggravatingly – commit suicide.
So, I suppose anything that changes the conversation towards acceptance and understanding is something I should back.
Personally, I think studies like this are mirrors of social change, as opposed to engines. Or maybe further on the mirror side of the spectrum. Screw the binary! So I don't particularly think more studies would help. Even the most rigorous of studies could fail to convince a closed mind.
Not possible, since the way arousal is 'measured' is different between sexes. This study, for example, measured penile hardness as a physical measure used traditionally as a proxy for arousal.
Modern measurements of arousal are based on brain activity because physical measures are a poor indicator, hence the 'need' for this study to contradict prior studies.
I’m aware it wouldn’t be the same study, hence why I said “similar.”
Ah gotcha, if you're looking for some arousal papers on bisexual women, here's a few utilizing different measures of arousal, published at different points in time (newest first) to provide some context of how it's been measured historically and how things are changing/evolving.
HETEROSEXUAL, BISEXUAL, AND LESBIAN WOMEN
Thanks; these look like some interesting reads!
If I remember correctly the study does address this and make amends to the data for it.
Neat. One of the things of note to me is that the orientations "straight", "gay/lesbian" and "bi" (how important is it that I call them by their formal names? I do not know much about the LGBT/GSRM community) Doesn't seem to be real according to this study, more so a spectrum, which is quite a change compared to how it is usually portrayed.
Yeah, It's hard to say how this has evolved. I think it's nowadays mostly young or newly come out people who get fixated on finding strict labels. When I was new to this all, I remember very specific labels being mostly useful for realizing that something is a possibility. And it's very powerful to have those available. But nowadays most of my peers tend to use more general descriptors like Gay (as a catch-all) or queer.
The Kinsey Scale has been around for nearly a hundred years, and is still the best thing we have in terms of defining sexual orientation.
The fluidity of the scale, and the directive of 0-6, I am amazed never became more commonplace. Happy to see more and more people (myself included) are beginning to use it more freely.
I should have thrown in the adjective 'simplest', as in I believe the Kinsey Scale is likely the simplest and best to explain to others and have a near complete understanding of.
The KSOG is somewhat excellent, but harder to explain and use in the modern day-to-day.
Given his reply to you, I think he means it's the best system for uninitiated people who don't really know that much about what non-cishet people can be, like me.
Basically he's saying it's for beginners, like me, which is pretty fair. While KSOG does seem intuitive to me given Wikipedia, it does require a bit more of an explanation, enough for it to be something someone has to ask for, and if you have a bad memory, you will probably forget the questions.
Oh, okay. I was just thinking the word 'straight' might be a bit insulting since it can often be used in a positive context in other places and 'gay' can be an overgeneralization and also an insult. In hindsight that very much is the kind of pedantic "SJW bickering" stuff that ends up on shoeonhead videos, and it's also not 1995 anymore, there aren't that many people who don't know what "LGBT" means/stands for and homophobes are a minority with too much power (unless you're in Russia/MENA/South Asia/Southeast Asia/Africa. Then you're more than screwed.)
Fair enough. Unless they're, like, literally totsuka saika from oregairu (i.e comically, stereotypically effeminate) I won't care so I will I identify myself as "100% hetero".
Fair enough. Not even human biology is fixed (evolution), so nothing really is. It's all a spectrum, and it has always been like that. I'm autistic, so that should be intuitive to me, but ah well.
Trans people consider that term offensive nowadays
That wasn't supposed to be an allegory for a real person? It's a stereotype.
I don't usually bump old stuff, but I do have some insight on the following that you might find useful
Coming to terms with being trans is one hell of a process, and it takes some people a very long time to get there. I've known people like this who did eventually come out as trans, but they were 'stuck' in this state of denial for quite some time. In a lot of societies (Japanese as an example) it's much more acceptable to be a cross-dresser than it is to be trans. For their own safety they may identify publicly in a different way than they identify internally.
Furthermore, it's not entirely uncommon for trans acceptance to come in stages. In my experience this is most often experienced through gradually redefining gender. They don't feel like they're quite a man or a woman anymore, so they identify as gender non-conforming, gender-fluid or non-binary. Over time as they start transitioning or spend more time not conforming to their birth gender, they may redefine again later as trans binary in their preferred gender or continue along a spectrum slowly pushing away from their assumed gender over time and eventually towards their preferred gender.
This also gets more complicated when you throw in genderfuckery (something I quite enjoy) in which the actual identity may not match what they are claiming, but they are specifically identifying or acting in ways which are designed to confuse and bring the entire concept of gender into question. I've never understood gender and people's fascination with it, so I often amuse myself by making others confront gender by fucking with their ideas of gender perception.
Just a thanks.
This was a good conversation. I don't think I have any questions left to ask.
Ok, I've somewhat uneasily edited it to this:
Is that good?