Gay is more or less 50% biological and 50% sociopsychological and cultural
Perhaps the split is more unique to each person, but I’d agree it skirts the 50/50 line pretty well. Makes me wonder where bi comes in, though.
It’s when you’ve either tasted both sides of the action, or, like me, figured out that personal compatibility matters more than sexuality. I am a proud Bisexual
I really think there is something to the kinsey scale, however, I tend to be pretty much full on gay. I wish I could be bisexual, and maybe for that one in a billion woman, i could be, but she would have to be the most awesome woman that ever lived lol
That’s actually really beautiful. I’m straight, but, if a guy were to totally blow me off my feet, be the greatest person I’ve ever met, seem perfect for me in every way…
+1 to you.
From what I’ve read, humans statistically tend to follow normal distribution when it comes to sexuality – i.e. a bell curve. A tiny percentage (generally estimated at about 5%) is completely gay, probably about the same amount is completely straight, and everyone else falls somewhere in between on the Kinsey scale. In that case, you’d be an outlier, but you’d be an outlier with a few million companions in the US alone.
I know I read this in someplace like Scientific American or New Scientist, but I honestly can’t remember which it was, or the month/issue (beyond it being “The Sex Issue”), or anything beyond the bit that stuck with me – the bell curve – and that female bonobos use lesbian action to keep the peace (sort of like, “oh no, I’ve legitimately upset you? Here, have some sex to make it up to you/distract you!”), which is probably why their genitalia faces slightly forward.
Anybody who knows the magazine, issue and volume should totally post it, especially since the more stuff like this comes up in conversation, the more it bugs me that I don’t recall who did the study, when they did, their sampling method, etc., and I am pretty sure I no longer have the issue or else have it in storage, where it will probably never see the light of day again. :\
But I do find the idea that humans are mostly some degree of bi while a small percentage aren’t, to make complete sense. It would explain a lot, and it would also fit well with what we know of sexual behavior in other primates and in humans (as it would explain how some boys and girls “always felt different” whereas others came to it gradually and some have never felt those urges towards the same sex. Also, the “totally gay” being a small percentage also fits with the idea of it being usually biological; it’s often selected against, but sometimes happens anyway for probably very complex reasons having to do with an interplay of genes, hormones, and epigenetic influences).
GOD DAMMIT, JW!
You could have just said “Sexuality follows a bell curve.”
Exactly. Personallity, emotional connections, intellectual connections are most important. I mean, physical connection is good in conjunction with the rest, but, to me, anyway, gender is on par with eye color and hair style as far as a relationship goes.
well yeah. im on the hetero side, being a male. I don’t think, even if another male was just to good to be true, i could with him. as a friend, sure, but male on male sex, is such a turn off for me. as leslie stated, it just seems to invasive for my taste.
however. i can only envy the feeling you have.
My fiancee is bisexual, and I swear to God that they are the BEST kind of people you can imagine. Ughh . . . just thinking about the hot action is enough to make typing this response difficult.
I have thought about this before, strangely the hardest part for me to wrap my head around, and also why i couldn’t be bi, is being intimate with a guy.
I am a straight guy and honestly the thought of sex with a guy doesn’t gross me out much, but say, the thought of making out with a guy does. the emotional part doesn’t really bother me either.
Well, I wouldn’t be uncomfortable with physical intimacy with other men myself. I’ve never really been physically attracted to other men though. I can objectively tell another man is “attractive,” by society’s standards, but I’ve never seen a man that really did it for me. As much as I’d rather be able to pick my partners solely for personality, if there’s no physical attraction mixed in I don’t think it could work for me.
I would have to state that your sexual attractions are 90% genetic. If Homosexuality runs in the family, and not even the branch you are in, there is a good chance you’ll turn out to be a homosexual. The last 10% is what I like to call the “enviroment factor”. Everything that you come into contact with in life compiles into this small 10%. I find the thought of other men repulsive, but that doesn’t mean I’m not a touchy-feely guy. I can get really freaking emotional, and I have been dubbed “the teddybear” in 2 elementary schools. (WHILE I WAS IN ATTENDANCE, you disGUSTing PEDO’s!!!!) The smple reason: I love gettng, and giving hugs. I retty much took care of myself before my aunt took me n, so I have had repressed needs of that calber. But, then again, I’m always being prased for my babysitting skills. I also can be really shy around grls. Whc s another reason wh “teddybear” was my nickname. In conclusion: Sexuallity matters on everythng around you. I’m usally pretty mild, since I have a testosterone defficancy or something. guess I was only one gene away from being a lez… ^_^;
“I would have to state that your sexual attractions are 90% genetic.”
…Based on absolutely nothing besides my own anecdotal evidence, which, scientifically speaking, is worth approximately one fart in a big-ass blizzard.
being gay myself, I would be inclined to agree, however, it doesn’t account for those that were brought up in a straight household where homosexuality wasn’t mentioned much.
I suspect it may be moe complex than that.
why is everyone soo worked up over if your gay straight or in between i meen isint it better to love someone for whats inisde there minds and hearts than wats in there pants.
ya i dont really care but it seems like the right thing to type in this situation.
No, sexual chemistry is an integral and necessary part of any healthy adult relationship.
Unless you’re asexual, like me. Don’t forget us asexuals. There are more of us than you think.
*Intrigued* Sexual intimacy is extremely important for a relationship. If you are asexual and in a relationship what do you replace that deeply personal and intimate giving of yourself to another with?
Unlike other animals, we have sex primarily as a non-procreative act. I think this is in part why we are one of the few species that will stay with one mate for life. (I know there are others, but it’s the exception not the rule) I’m curious to know what binds an asexual couple together. If you have an opinion, please share it.
I’ve gotten intrigued by this a lot lately, so I’ve come across probably more on it than you have and can add a couple of clarifications here.
First, you should be aware that “attraction” comes in more than one flavor. There is such a thing as being drawn to a person, or enjoying being with them, for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with sexual urges. For instance, maybe the person is charismatic, or kind, or makes you “feel safe”, or shares a lot of your interests and sense of humor.
Heck, speaking as someone who is borderline demisexual, all of those things are absolutely more important to me than sexual interest. (I suspect more women are demisexual than men, because I’ve noticed men I’ve known have generally been more influenced by sexual desires whereas many women often aren’t thinking about sex when they start a relationship… but I have only anecdotal evidence on that).
Basically, it’s just a matter of what needs drive you more; in asexuals, sexual urges are weak or nonexistant, so instead of chemistry being sexually-based, it’s based on other emotional needs.
It’s also possible, mind you, for asexuals to still have or enjoy sex – those individuals just don’t have a particularly strong desire for it and could just happily go without it. The range that “asexual” covers is pretty flexible, and depending on who you talk to, may even cover those who are non-permanently disinterested in sex.
Anybody who thinks sex is THAT important to a relationship, needs to stop and think that not everybody’s needs are balanced the same way. Because that is definitely what this boils down to.
Also, you CAN have physical affection without it being sexual, coincidentally. In fact, that’s my favorite kind of physical affection – just hugs and snuggles and backrubs. I’m aware that this is rare, and for non-asexual men sometimes can be baffling, but it is true.
unless you are asexual like Jill, then I would say no. Sex matter. I state the following to be true, for non asexuals:
emotional and intelligent compatibility is very important. You can have a relationship witout it, but it will either not last long, or not be very healthy. But if there is no sexual connection whatever, or if one part seems to “need more” from the relationship, sexually, then it will either break, or you will find a way to get rid of that sexual tension. Affairs, swinger clubs, having a open relationship, whatever. If one part isn’t getting the sexual stimuli it needs, you won’t last long.
WAY more complex than that.
-You can have urges that are based on your reaction to pheromones.
-You can have urges based on your sexual identity (evidence seems to point to a structure in the brain that has male and female “settings”).
-You can have urges based on your upbringing (dad was mean so all guys are mean; mom was mean so “replace” her with women).
Personally, I fall pretty middle-of-the-road on all of them and have no strong leanings so I could likely bond with anyone I was intellectually and emotionally compatible with.
I am straight because fuck yeah boobs.
And that’s about as good an answer as I could give you. I never thought about why I am that specific sexuality, besides a biological and instinctual preference to be straight that pervades the species so we can reproduce and continue our existence as a collective.
Pretty much this.
I’m really not the kind of guy who says “EW YOU HAVE A PENIS I WILL FEIGN AN OVERREACTED DISLIKE FOR YOU TOUCHING ME”. I’m pretty much 100% straight in that I literally have no attraction to males, but I don’t find the concept of guys kissing or having sex to be repulsive, and have even told my wife I’d make out with another man if we were all comfortable with it (however, sex requires attraction, so I don’t see that working). Gay men are just men in my eyes. Whether you have sex with girls or guys is irrelevant. I’ve met straight and gay people I can’t stand, but only for how they act, not for what gender they’re attracted to.
Purity balls don’t make people gay but they make people scared of things they shouldn’t be scared of to be sincere.
I also think the Kinsey scale has something to it. I’m pretty much straight, but I also recognize that I’d be willing to do the deed with a guy or two I’ve met.
I think it’s society’s view of “the way things should be” that gives people the perception of “gay” and “straight” being the only two options (I’ve even met people who don’t believe in bisexuals). I really think it’s a lot more complicated than that. It’s just that society forces people to make the choice, as it were, of whether you’re one or the other.
So here’s a different question for you.
A male has the following thought in his head around gay sex: “i wouldn’t like to be on the receiving end, but might be able to be on the giving end” being mainly heterosexual.
is the guy bi?
If you’re thinking about sexing up guys, and you’re a “straight” guy, you’re probably bi. Giving/receiving has nothing to do with it.
Agreed. You’d be neither a 1 nor a 6 on the Kinsey scale, is all. There’s plenty of room in between.
Most people are born either right-handed or left-handed; it is determined by genetics. However, a person who experiences a life-changing event (like losing their dominant limb) or who is trained from an early age to deny their natural hand-dominance can learn to live as a person of the opposite hand-dominance, albeit usually with some difficulty. People can also adopt or naturally exhibit different hand-dominance for different, specific tasks or contexts. And, of course, a small number of people have no natural hand-dominance, and are equally skilled with both hands in nearly all contexts. This has been a metaphor.
Wow. I’m pretty sure Leslie and I are the same person…
Dirty penis demon? Mara?
NAME — Get a Gravatar
NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
©2005-2013 David Willis | Powered by WordPress with ComicPress
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑