# Women, would you date a bisexual guy?



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

There are two parts to this thread and I'm mostly interested in female views although applicable to any mixed-orientation relationship:

1. Would you date a bisexual guy?
2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?​
I'm steadily coming out to friends since I'd like them to meet my boyfriend (I've already met a couple of his); suffice to say, it's slow moving. This is how the conversation went yesterday afternoon with a female friend, it is as close to verbatim as I can recall:

Her: So what are you going to do when you date women again? Are you going to tell them you've been with a guy? I can't see many women being comfortable with it.

Me: There's no need to tell them anything about that, all they need to know is that I'm attracted to women too - or specifically, them.

Her: Yeah, but it's unlikely any woman is going to be able to guess you're into guys too. That's something I'd want to know before dating someone - their sexual orientation. I'd think many people would. You're not bothering to put yourself in their shoes. Most women do not think their partners are into men at all, you really think they wouldn't care to know that?

Me: Why does it matter then if they're not even suspecting it? I wouldn't actively make an effort to keep it from them; I wouldn't lie if asked directly either. If it's important to them, they will ask. Either way, it's irrelevant when I'm dating someone; at that point, we're exclusive to each other. That is all that matters. My sexual orientation doesn't change anything about the nature of our relationship or my commitment to them in anyway.​
She got quite heated about this.

I still don't think it is necessary to state one's sexual orientation; the only relevant aspect of this is the clear sexual attraction to the gender you're investing into a relationship with.

I'm not easily offended, write as you will. I'm trying to figure my mind out.


----------



## Amaryllis (Mar 14, 2014)

*1. Would you date a bisexual guy?*

Yes. I already have, it didn't bother me in the slightest.

*2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?*

I don't think it is, no. I mean, you don't have to start explaining every little aspect of your personality on the first date, or unfold most of your secrets, that comes later when there's already a good amount of trust involved.

I would suggest however, that you try to mention bisexuality in a conversation, in an innocent way (as smooth as you can manage depending on your skills in the conversing domain) and see what she thinks of it. Not necessarily on the first date, but before things start getting emotionally serious. If her reaction seems too negative, she may not be the right person for you.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

Well, I think I would want to know if a woman I was dating was bi, but I think it'd come up eventually anyway. It seems hard to completely evade the topic if you're dating. I mean if you are asking about just early stages of dating then it's not really relevant yet; I'm referring to "dating" as in a relationship w/ sexual involvement.


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

I'm too lazy to read your post but, I believe telling her you are bisexual makes you more interesting to most women.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

ReachForPeach said:


> I'm too lazy to read your post but, I believe telling her you are bisexual makes you more interesting to most women.


Interesting in which way? I know plenty of women who wouldn't mind a gay/bi male friend, to avoid sexual tension, get advice from a male point of view, or to share common interests, but dating is another matter entirely. Just look how they react when a husband/boyfriend comes out...


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Interesting in which way? I know plenty of women who wouldn't mind a gay/bi male friend, to avoid sexual tension, get advice from a male point of view, or to share common interests, but dating is another matter entirely. Just look how they react when a husband/boyfriend comes out...


Interesting in the way you are both interested in males.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

ReachForPeach said:


> Interesting in the way you are both interested in males.


It doesn't seem to be a turn-on for most straight women :/ At best, many are willing to tolerate it (with plenty of restrictions). Things are slowly changing, but the stigma against bisexual men is still strong.


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> It doesn't seem to be a turn-on for most straight women :/


Really? Well, why bother with women who aren't open minded.



> At best, many are willing to tolerate it (with plenty of restrictions). Things are slowly changing, but the stigma against bisexual men is still strong.


Good thing it is changing towards a better place. However, I couldn't care less if ppl were against bisexuality. They are allowed to have idiotic opinions.

Are you male or female or an Orc Vampire named Thrall?


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

ReachForPeach said:


> Really? Well, why bother with women who aren't open minded.
> 
> Good thing it is changing towards a better place. However, I couldn't care less if ppl were against bisexuality. They are allowed to have idiotic opinions.
> 
> Are you male or female or an Orc Vampire named Thrall?


This isn't about my preferences, but limiting yourself to a small minority isn't something all bisexuals are willing to do. You could either seek out fellow bisexuals or open-minded straight women, specifically, or meet who you'd like, and not assume anything.


----------



## huhh (Apr 15, 2015)

lol at the question


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> This isn't about my preferences, but limiting yourself to a small minority isn't something all bisexuals are willing to do.


What kind of minority are bisexuals limiting them selves to? Besides, every person on earth probably has to "limit" themselves to a minority they can truly love, do you know what I mean?



> You could either seek out fellow bisexuals or open-minded straight women, specifically, or meet who you'd like, and not assume anything.


Bisexuals has the widest selection of mates. If one start to get liking of a straight women, who seem to be not so open minded, one just have to form a friendship and later tell that person about the bisexuality. It will most likely be respected in any case, if you are friends.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Some limit themselves to fellow sexual minorities (bisexuals, pansexuals, queers, etc.), although not all are open-minded, either. It's the "safe" option, and I rather like the idea of someone not having all these misconceptions, since they share the same struggles. They're also more likely to share the same, or similar, circle of friends, interests, concerns.

Unfortunately, bisexual men are still stigmatized as closeted gay men, HIV carriers, and effeminate, among other things. It's a vicious cycle that keeps these men in the closet, only feeding into said stereotypes. I'm not sure it will ever have the same effect that bisexuality in women has in straight men, but that's part of what I like about it (the taboo).

Do you have experience dating straight women? I've had one girlfriend and another friend who seemed accepting, but later turned out to be homophobic.


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Some limit themselves to fellow sexual minorities (bisexuals, pansexuals, queers, etc.), although not all are open-minded, either. It's the "safe" option, and I rather like the idea of someone not having all these misconceptions, since they share the same struggles. They're also more likely to share the same, or similar, circle of friends, interests, concerns.


That's actually kinda weird. Most heterosexuals don't share the same interests, etc. Some are just obsessed with different sexual preferences I guess xD



> Unfortunately, bisexual men are still stigmatized as closeted gay men, HIV carriers, and effeminate, among other things. It's a vicious cycle that keeps these men in the closet, only feeding into said stereotypes. I'm not sure it will ever have the same effect that bisexuality in women has in straight men, but that's part of what I like about it (the taboo).


One just have to man up/(Woman up, mind you) and don't care about what the majority say about sexuality. That's how everything would turn out fine, I guess. 

I thought most people didn't care about peoples sexual preference. It's a pretty personal thing. I think it isn't a bad thing to limit oneself, if you know what is best for you.



> Do you have experience dating straight women? I've had one girlfriend and another friend who seemed accepting, but later turned out to be homophobic.


Hm, that sounds too bad.

I've had many "straight" people appreciating my facial structure, I would say  But I have not much experience in _further dating_, as I tend to distance myself from most of them.


----------



## Hiraeth (Jan 2, 2015)

No, I wouldn't date a bisexual guy. And I think it would be fair to mention sexual orientation before commercing a new relationship.


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

Hiraeth said:


> No, I wouldn't date a bisexual guy. And I think it would be fair to mention sexual orientation before commercing a new relationship.


Why?

What would happen if you were in love with a guy, that later on told you he was bisexual?


----------



## Gwen March (Jul 5, 2016)

1. Yes, I would. 

2. No, any more than it's wrong to start dating someone without first announcing every previous partner you've ever had. It's something you're going to need to share eventually if you have a relationship with someone, but I don't think it's something you have to "confess" up front.


----------



## Hiraeth (Jan 2, 2015)

ReachForPeach said:


> Why?
> 
> What would happen if you were in love with a guy, that later on told you he was bisexual?


It's mostly because it would make me feel insecure. Dating/ being in a relationship with a guy that is bisexual would make me think about the fact that I am only a woman and can not offer my partner what a man could. This would lead to feeling unsafe in our relationship. I want to avoid the scenario where one day my partner eventually comes to the conclusion that he would rather be with a male. Also, I am straight and I do not feel attraction for women at all, not even a bit, so I do need an equal in order to feel that things are right in my relationship. And I like men who fuck just women, to be honest. It's a preference. 

I usually have to be friends with someone in order to fall in love. It's hard to imagine that I would fall in love, and later on I would discover he's bisexual. If we weren't in a relationship already, I would probably try to move on. If we were in a relationship, I would feel like our trust was broken, and if I can't trust my partner, then I can't have a healthy relationship with him. Complete trust is necessary for me in a relationship.


----------



## Stockholmaren (May 25, 2016)

Hiraeth said:


> It's mostly because it would make me feel insecure. Dating/ being in a relationship with a guy that is bisexual would make me think about the fact that I am only a woman and can not offer my partner what a man could. This would lead to feeling unsafe in our relationship. I want to avoid the scenario where one day my partner eventually comes to the conclusion that he would rather be with a male. Also, I am straight and I do not feel attraction for women at all, not even a bit, so I do need an equal in order to feel that things are right in my relationship. And I like men who fuck just women, to be honest. It's a preference.
> 
> I usually have to be friends with someone in order to fall in love. It's hard to imagine that I would fall in love, and later on I would discover he's bisexual. If we weren't in a relationship already, I would probably try to move on. If we were in a relationship, I would feel like our trust was broken, and if I can't trust my partner, then I can't have a healthy relationship with him. Complete trust is necessary for me in a relationship.


Fine ^^

The only thing I'll mention is don't let your insecurity rule your decisions...


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

I'm bisexual, and I'd be totally down. It would be hypocritical of me if I wasn't. We would explore together most likely, and we would have so much fun sharing our attraction to other people. I wouldn't have been able to say this a few years ago, I think you need to feel secure enough to be able to handle a dynamic like that. 

I can see why people would feel insecure, but as a bisexual woman, whenever I am in a heterosexual relationship, I don't sit there and wonder 'Hm, would being with a woman make me happier?'. I am just as fulfilled. Just because I'm attracted to both doesn't mean I'm constantly longing to experience the other.


----------



## Derange At 170 (Nov 26, 2013)

"Women, would you date a guy who is attracted to both Asians and white women?"

I think most of the women I have dated were bi or pansexual. Even some generally prefering women over men.



kaleidoscope said:


> I'm bisexual, and I'd be totally down. It would be hypocritical of me if I wasn't. We would explore together most likely, and we would have so much fun sharing our attraction to other people.


Pfft, I'm technically heterosexual (I label myself just "sexual" cuz I consider the spectrum kind of dumb, but I cannot have sex with a biological male) and I've dated a straight girl before. And we'd both drool over both male and female actors we thought were hot on TV.


----------



## Flaming Bassoon (Feb 15, 2013)

I wouldn't mind at all, since I'm also bisexual. I do know a person who stated that while bisexual women exist, that bisexual men don't. I don't like arguing, but I _really _argued with her on that one.


----------



## Asity (May 12, 2014)

I wouldn't mind.

I also don't think you necessarily have to divulge your sexual orientation, although wouldn't you want to be with someone who accepts you for everything you are?


----------



## Crimson Ash (May 16, 2012)

kaleidoscope said:


> I can see why people would feel insecure, but as a bisexual woman, whenever I am in a heterosexual relationship, I don't sit there and wonder 'Hm, would being with a woman make me happier?'. *I am just as fulfilled. Just because I'm attracted to both doesn't mean I'm constantly longing to experience the other.*


Exactly. Far few unfortunately understand this.



[HR][/HR]

As sad as it is to admit I find it far easier to get along with and date other bisexuals.

That massive barrier of insecurities does not exist because of the mutual understanding of attraction and fulfillment in a relationship. Unfortunately this just narrows the pool of people that I could enjoy a relationship with quite significantly.


----------



## Aya the Abysswalker (Mar 23, 2012)

> 1. Would you date a bisexual guy?


Doing it.



> 2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?


No.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Wtf™ @ not _knowing_ the sexuality of your own _boyfriend / girlfriend_ (e.g., commenced relationship). Such a relatioshipn would not even had commenced without such information. Not *THIS fish*.

I would need to know *::* -->

(1)

Sexuality // Mental illness + malfunctions // Past + present relationship [problematics + reasoning] - number of sexual partner(s) / relationship(s) + number of friend(s) // associates before formal relationship _officialness / commencement_.

To calculate the sufficient time/s that (X) datee' should have expressed + answered such question(s) before formal chaining 

1-5 month(s) --> 2+ [formal] dates should have occurred - between such time-span (10-12) _personal_ phone calls + external contact should have been _exchanged_ between 5-10 month(s) all vital + personalized information(s) (via) the former(s) should have been exchanged -->

:: Includes sexuality / mental illnesses / physical defects - mental defects + boundaries + preferences for (X, Y, Z) should have been asserted.

Without such notion(s) / information there has been 0 progression + effort(s) to ''connect,'' - thus, (X) relationship would be too ambiguous for myself (i.e., withholding personalized + valuable self-data) to make a proper judgment + analysis (&) thus, will not occur for myself. Such (X) participant be caught 'lying' later on about sexuality + any of the given information requested - relationship will be *terminated* immediately (&) exposed for unethical mistreatment(s).


[HR][/HR]

Com.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Some limit themselves to fellow sexual minorities (bisexuals, pansexuals, queers, etc.), although not all are open-minded, either. It's the "safe" option, and I rather like the idea of someone not having all these misconceptions, since they share the same struggles. They're also more likely to share the same, or similar, circle of friends, interests, concerns.
> 
> Unfortunately, bisexual men are still stigmatized as closeted gay men, HIV carriers, and effeminate, among other things. It's a vicious cycle that keeps these men in the closet, only feeding into said stereotypes. I'm not sure it will ever have the same effect that bisexuality in women has in straight men, but that's part of what I like about it (the taboo).
> 
> Do you have experience dating straight women? I've had one girlfriend and another friend who seemed accepting, but later turned out to be homophobic.


I don't have any experience in person with the LGBT community - I don't particularly like that phrase either, there are far too many assumptions made about these particular 'interests and concerns'. The only LGBT person I speak to is my partner who also lacks any LGBT friends lol. I do agree that bisexual men seem to be subject to the stigmas at a level the women are not but from what I see online, we seem to be less open to talking about it too.

Your question seemed general, so I'll answer. I've only dated/been with straight women up until this partner (I hadn't accepted it prior to now), all this is hypothetical since I'm invested in this relationship. I merely enjoy questioning my views for coherency and truth.



Gwen March said:


> 1. Yes, I would.
> 
> 2. No, any more than it's wrong to start dating someone without first announcing every previous partner you've ever had. It's something you're going to need to share eventually if you have a relationship with someone, but I don't think it's something you have to "confess" up front.


That's the thing, why the assumed 'need to'? I don't know if this is me still suppressing the reality of my sexual orientation, however I don't see why it would be relevant. Perhaps I would share this with a partner as a means for bonding rather than a need to; maybe my views are coloured by the fact I've been attracted to a handful of guys in comparison to the abundance of women I find attractive physically. Bisexuality isn't exactly divided right through the middle between genders. I don't know what the etiquette is or if I even care for it, I'm trying to figure out what makes sense.
@Hiraeth

Do heterosexual people not give up sex with other men/women when they commit to the one person? Is it the unknown details of his attraction to the same sex that's a problem? One may physically enjoy something but leave it in favour of something of more value, we do it all the time with food and concepts; the majority of both sexes commit to a singular rather than the plural already. How is this betraying trust exactly? It's an aspect of someone, it's not even direct lying for underhanded reasons either.

You say it would be hard to imagine going without discovering your partner is bisexual yet the reality is that it does happen, if online accounts are any basis to go on because a lot of men have thought it was irrelevant for whatever purpose. I would imagine it to be fine where this was an informed decision, not based on suppressing their desires for same sex relations and the turmoil that comes with that. What exactly is different with a guy who has had sex with both genders before and chosen to be with a person of the one gender compared to the above for heterosexuals? I don't understand it.

Being bisexual isn't always transitioning into becoming gay either; neither do all of us experience a back and forth where we're biromantic and our attraction goes beyond physicality. The fact is some of us will always remain bisexual and the decision for us isn't a negative one where we feel a loss; it is a *positive* one that arises from fulfilment being with the person we've chosen over everyone else we could possibly have pursued. I say this as someone who wouldn't be comfortable dating outside of a monogamous relationship where it is serious, so no changing boundaries to accommodate my sexuality.

Maybe there are several assumptions made on presenting as a bisexual, I don't know, I'm hoping I have addressed some of these.
@Catwalk

I wouldn't think to ask someone about their sexual orientation, is all, Catwalk. It registers very low on my list of priorities when it comes to partners, I'm picky indeed and how good the sex is has no direct correlation with sexual orientation for me - I can enjoy both very well. I like fantasies and dirty talk as much as the next person though, thus it would probably only come up via that or overt displays of attraction out of heterosexuality for me to notice and I can't even think of how exactly without sharing something specific.

You make a good point about previous relationships, however.


----------



## ninjahitsawall (Feb 1, 2013)

kaleidoscope said:


> I can see why people would feel insecure, but as a bisexual woman, whenever I am in a heterosexual relationship, I don't sit there and wonder 'Hm, would being with a woman make me happier?'. I am just as fulfilled. Just because I'm attracted to both doesn't mean I'm constantly longing to experience the other.


I guess this is the equivalent of insecurity in a hetero relationship that you're looking at/wanting to be with others of the opposite sex. Because really the only difference is the possibility you're looking at members of the same sex as well.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

1. Absolutely, I would date a bisexual guy.

2. No, I wouldn't expect someone to announce their orientation unnecessarily. I would expect that information to come at the same time as we would be talking about our previous partners and sexual history. Maybe a few weeks or so in. 



kaleidoscope said:


> I can see why people would feel insecure, but as a bisexual woman, whenever I am in a heterosexual relationship, I don't sit there and wonder 'Hm, would being with a woman make me happier?'. I am just as fulfilled. Just because I'm attracted to both doesn't mean I'm constantly longing to experience the other.


Right? I mean, isn't that true with every other attribute? When your partner has blue eyes you don't sit around mooning about how you're missing out on green eyes. I mean - hopefully you don't - or else you should get a different partner. If your partner is slender, you don't sit around mooning about missing out on muscles. Just because you're open to more than one possibility doesn't mean you want to have everything. What's fulfilling when you're monogamous is having one wonderful limited person who loves you.


----------



## Gwen March (Jul 5, 2016)

Nyle said:


> Perhaps I would share this with a partner as a means for bonding rather than a need to


That's what I meant, because of the intimacy in a serious relationship. I used the word "need" because to me, sharing that kind of personal information seems like a requirement, an indicator of how deep the relationship is—like, if you're not willing to share that with someone, you must not be very close to them.


----------



## Hiraeth (Jan 2, 2015)

@Nyle

I understand what you're saying. However, I feel the same about being in a relationship with a bisexual person. I need certain things in a relationship, in order to feel safe, and one of my requirements is for the other person to be heterosexual. It's how I prefer it and it's what makes me feel comfortable and secure, and also sexually equal to my partner. 

I come from a country where people are mostly straight, I'd say. I've always assumed, and I bet that most women here do the same, that if a guy shows romantic interest in you, then he is heterosexual. So if a guy was bisexual and did not tell me from the start, but later on after we're in a relationship, I would feel like I couldn't trust him anymore. It's a big thing here to be bisexual and not to mention it. It's a big thing for me also, especially since I specifically want relationships with straight men.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Nyle said:


> @Catwalk
> 
> I wouldn't think to ask someone about their sexual orientation, is all, Catwalk. It registers very low on my list of priorities when it comes to partners, I'm picky indeed and how good the sex is has no direct correlation with sexual orientation for me - I can enjoy both very well. I like fantasies and dirty talk as much as the next person though, thus it would probably only come up via that or overt displays of attraction out of heterosexuality for me to notice and I can't even think of how exactly without sharing something specific.
> 
> You make a good point about previous relationships, however.


The malfunction(s) I acquire are (X, Y, Z) individual [refraining] from - or ''withholding,'' said valuable self-data beforehand of a 'relationship'. 

That is, (2) years or (2) month(s) into an official relationship (X) individual randomly blurts + expresses they share an_ attraction _toward(s) men - or are [bisexual] - the withholding of such information, at this point, must have been *purposeful*.

_Reasoning _said *::*



To calculate from my earlier post(s) --> 



* *




_1-5 month(s) --> 2+ [formal] dates should have occurred.

- between such time-span (10-12) personal phone calls + external contact should have been exchanged.

Between 5-10 month(s) all vital + personalized information(s) (via) the former(s) should have been exchanged 
_

This sexual preferences + orientation should have; (&) usually should have been exclaimed.





[HR][/HR]



Thus, it is simplistic to put two and two together - 


* *




*(1)* - Individual withhold(s) sexual orientation out subconscious / conscious fear(s) of ''turning,'' another off [making them less interest], thus, rather ''trap them,'' in _emotional + psychological_ connection(s) (via) specific chemical bonding - 


With *(1) *- this makes it 

(A) - More difficult for (X) individual to make a coherent + rational judgment of the entire-self of the other.

(B) - More difficult for (X) individual to leave / undecide - and thus, easier for the individual that ''withheld,'' such data to guilt-trip them into 'staying,'. 

[Conscious] withholding can be interpreted as a selfish + insecure act to ''secure the other individual,'' ...

Ex; (1) -->

*But if you love him, why would you leave? 
*

:ssad:

Scream(s) purposeful ''intent,'' of unethical [trapping] + purposeful non-disclousure of personal information before 'relationship' commencement. Insecure bisexuals / LBGT - [remain in the closet] to the public fine - however, I am skeptical of the motivation(s) behind this with other individual(s) (via) relationship end(s).




[HR][/HR]


* *




I, too, withheld my bisexuality from straight men - but I realized; many straight individual(s) - need to, and prefer to know, the know the sexual orientation of (X) individual they are involved with beforehand - as it part of personalized self-data / disclouse, other cultural-based differentiations.


As a bisexual woman - I would; indeed - not* long-term relationship *a bi-curious woman. I also have preference that (X) individual should disclose their sexuality to me; that is - if they are Demisexual - since I am not interested in dating Demisexuals and especially if they are Asexual, as I do not have an interest long-term relationshipping [Asexuals] these individual(s) either - I feel the same way about transsexualism; as I am not pansexual, either.

Now, I have been in a relationship with a demisexual woman (&) this is _only_ because she was 'sexually insecure / unsure' of her sexuality (&) thus, did not 'figure it out,' until halfway within our relationship. 

---->


I digress, - it is *dishonest *to pin such a thing on ''heterosexuals,'' - in my experience with dating around in the LGBT community.

''Lesbians,'' that prefer other lesbians - and no bisexual / bi-curious women [for both good reasons || and irrational] ones.

There are indeed, 'gay males,' that prefer to exclusively date gay men (&) and not bi-curious / bisexual. [for both good reasons || and irrational] ones.

This also has 0 affiliation with ''sex / sexual acts / coitus,'' - not sure why sex mentioned; as this is wholly unrelated.




Note *::* I am speaking within 'general' sense.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> Wtf™ @ not _knowing_ the sexuality of your own _boyfriend / girlfriend_ (e.g., commenced relationship). Such a relatioshipn would not even had commenced without such information. Not *THIS fish*.
> 
> I would need to know *::* -->
> 
> ...


I agree with this. I would never be in a situation where I didn't know basic information such as this about someone. Most people get in a relationship and then get to know their partners properly. I get to know someone, fall in love with them and _then_ begin a relationship with them.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

I don't see much of a problem with just letting most people assume whatever they think. But when the relationship feels like it's heading towards maybe serious town, and the question of ex's comes up, that's probably a good time to mention some of them had a penis. Either that or after you left her for her hotter brother.

I am somewhat surprised you've experienced the problem with people you were interested in though. For me I've found that this is more of a problem with the people I am not, its sucks when an old time buddy who used to have a cold beer with you and make jokes about sucking dick doesn't feel comfortable because he thinks it isn't a joke for you (When in fact it was just funnier from your end).


----------



## AlphaLeonis (Jun 13, 2014)

(I'm sorry I did not went through all the pages and may not be up t odate to the current evolution of the thread, I just meant to reply to the first questions and give my point of view !) 

*1. Would you date a bisexual guy?*
I would. I am a woman, and I am currently with a young woman, too. I'm not firm on my sexual orientation (it fluctuates), but I'm most often romantically attracted to women. I don't think I'm being totally clear with anyone close to me about it, even with my significant other. I know how it is important to navigate through certain groups, and sometimes having a statement about who you are helps you place yourself more easily within groups. Some people do need to know where you stand, but it's not a general rule. When it comes to dating someone I'm into, I'd rather know whether or not there's a possibility that that person may or may not be attracted or develop feelings for me, simply because I do find unrequited love or desire rather emotionally shattering. I don't need to know how people _define _their sexuality with a label to actually date them. A label is one way of estimating the potential, but there are many other possibilities to have an estimate. I wouldn't discriminate on a '_label_' basis, but rather on a feeling about the chances of high compatibility or potential for growth).

*2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?*
As I stated before, some people need to know where you stand, and, justifiably, it makes them feel safe, as if stating your personal sexual orientation '_secures_' the future relationship (If you're saying you're bisexual, then there's a risk for you to leave... for another guy ? I mean, c'me on. That actually isn't more likely than leaving for another girl.) I do not mean to offend, but your friend seems to overgeneralize about what women _want _or _need _to know about their potential dates; in relationships, it's about two individuals negociating their ways through life. No two people, no two women, no two men need the exact same thing, at the same time of their life, considering how we are always influenced and always changing our personalities. 
It can be '_wrong_' (as in, some people may be offended); it can also be 'wrong' as in, it can have a negative impact on your image depending whom you're adressing (Some people may feel a guy being bisexual is a turn off, and that's to your disadvantage if you would like to date that person). Some people will find it respectful if you tell them in advance, and others will feel you're oversharing if you don't keep a certain degree of secrecy between you two. 
My best advice would be to evaluate the degree at which the person you're coming out to is sharing personal information, as well as the amount of information you feel like sharing at any given time with your significant other.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Thank you for the replies, I've figured out how to approach this. 
@Hiraeth

I see, thank you for elaborating.
@Catwalk



Catwalk said:


> Note *::* I am speaking within 'general' sense.


Generally speaking, I am usually very slow moving - my parameters rarely match up to other people. I will disclose a lot of information regarding the way my mind works and everything pertaining to that but very little on specifics I tend to find irrelevant, or have overlooked, until asked. Thus other people may share X, Y, Z by the third date yet it's highly unlikely that I have or will ever aim to unless I see that their method is superior; even then, there are marked differences between people and I've never been interested in a girl who wanted to lay it all out straightaway. Heh I've only seriously cared for an ENTP and ENFP before.

I currently have no soundboard for this, hence the thread. I need to figure what I'm thinking out. Your input in this post, for example, is along the lines of what I was thinking I'd have to tackle - the psychology behind why I'm thinking like this. It wasn't all too long ago I was struggling with bicuriosity and questioning it. Even then, I never regarded other sexual orientations with aversion; it was more about not understanding my sexual attraction to the same sex, what this means and all of the usual questions.


* *






Catwalk said:


> Thus, it is simplistic to put two and two together -
> 
> *(1)* - Individual withhold(s) sexual orientation out subconscious / conscious fear(s) of ''turning,'' another off [making them less interest], thus, rather ''trap them,'' in _emotional + psychological_ connection(s) (via) specific chemical bonding -
> 
> ...





I would look for a purpose too if it was a fact of withholding one's sexual orientation, emotional manipulation is not the objective in this case but a lack of comprehension as to the relevance. Like I said in my previous post, when you're having great sex with someone, it goes without saying that the person is attracted to YOU (and your gender, in general); that is them sharing their sexual orientation with you. I've been emotionally attached to exactly three people; I am the last, ALWAYS, to develop any feelings for someone. I don't need to trap anyone into being with me.

I might be expecting too much rationality from people. Bisexuality is a very small aspect of who I am. Ok, you can argue knowing the 'entire self' that comprises who one is, I understand that. I still don't think that is ever feasible and have learnt so to my own detriment with matters that are FAR more important to me than who a person can have sex with.


* *






Catwalk said:


> I, too, withheld my bisexuality from straight men - but I realized; many straight individual(s) - need to, and prefer to know, the know the sexual orientation of (X) individual they are involved with beforehand - as it part of personalized self-data / disclouse, other cultural-based differentiations.
> 
> 
> As a bisexual woman - I would; indeed - not* long-term relationship *a bi-curious woman. I also have preference that (X) individual should disclose their sexuality to me; that is - if they are Demisexual - since I am not interested in dating Demisexuals and especially if they are Asexual, as I do not have an interest long-term relationshipping [Asexuals] these individual(s) either - I feel the same way about transsexualism; as I am not pansexual, either.
> ...





The thing about demisexuality and asexuality is that it become obvious. I am a sexual person, chances are I will initiate a few dates in if we're moving slowly, the fact that I initiate gives it all away. Person X responding is disclosure from them too. Any further sexual encounters with this person and the inevitable conversations on health or lead ups to it give away intent for more sexual contact. That is, in my mind, all that is of importance when it comes to sexuality - building up a great sexual rapport with very apparent sexual interest in each other.

@ the underlined:

Well, yes, you have more experience there. If that's what you've noticed, I'll take that on board. 

The remarks on sexual intercourse were to illustrate the point that someone having sex with Person X and enjoying every second of it means that being attracted to your gender is part of their sexuality. I used that as a distinguishing point for me accepting my bisexuality. You reach that point and there is no denying it, at all. If you were denying it to yourself at that point, it is THAT which gives away possibility of a psychological break from the reality of what occurred; repression, etc. that leads to many other questions on why that is the case.
@AlphaLeonis

Yes, I didn't mind her generalising to make her point - some generalisations are needed when making decisions. It was more the fact that I didn't think her argument necessarily made sense. I agree with the underlined, I guess it's a case of allowing the person you're interested in to make an informed choice.

Having thought about this some more, I realise where I went wrong - it's not an important issue to me but it maybe to someone else, however illogical I find that. Understandable, I am prone to this oversight. You're right to advise this may change my opinion of whoever it is I previously held in esteem, although there would have to be clear, unalterable, distaste shown towards me for that to occur since that displays a closed mind, which is something I disdain myself.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

It's a turn-off to me if a man finds other men sexually attractive. It sort of feminizes him to me. He just immediately becomes unattractive. 

There is also the concern that bi is just the gateway to gay, meaning later on in the relationship they totally come out and leave you for a man. Having seen that happen to other people, I would want to avoid that pain and humiliation.

I also probably have a very different worldview and concept of spirituality and morality, so withholding that info wouldn't be too wise. Honesty is the best policy in these areas at it touches on some pretty sensitive issues that amount to deal-breakers for many people. You mind up end up violating someone else's feelings and personal standards for themself by not being open about who you are and what you do in life.


----------



## TheProphetLaLa (Aug 18, 2014)

1. Yes, I would date a bisexual guy.

2. This question is a little bit more difficult. I do think this is something you should mention eventually. How soon, I'm not really sure. I don't think you should force it but its bound to come out sometime in casual conversation, unless you're actively trying to avoid it. I, personally, would want to know.


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

Awesome thread idea. I think there have been threads along this line before, but it's a touchy subject and one that people are seldom honest about.

The thing I just want women who would be bothered by this to keep in mind is how not every bi man (or woman) is the same. For instance...is gay sex just something he tried once? At all? Does he prefer women to men? Does he have a high need for sex generally?

I guess I can understand why you might fear a man being in a bi "phase", and "going gay" later (statistically this tends to be true only for men who haven't had many relationships with women though) but you have to look at things objectively and try to see if this is something he would even be likely to do.

This doesn't mean a man who prefers men (by a bit) would make a bad partner though; if the guy has had long term relationships with women before, and they went well (at least for a for a while), then there is reason to believe your relationship will also not fall apart for this reason. It's all about context.

Bottom line...I can respect it just being personal preference, or matter of morality (say, if your religion disapproves of it) but some of the stated reasons just...don't make sense? When there is literally no difference between your man before he came out to you and after, except that you lose interest in him...well, it kind of _does_ seem like there is prejudice there.

And that is why some bi men lie about it...which I would say _ creates_ a lot of the stereotypes of "down low" guys...insecure in their sexuality, more likely to cheat, etc. Not that that justifies the lying. Or the cheating, if for whatever reason (not related to his orientation, most likely) he_ does_ actually cheat. But it does create a viscous circle which hurts everyone in different ways.


----------



## Velcorn (Feb 15, 2016)

I don't see how sexual orientation is an important thing to know. It will probably come up before entering a relationship anyway. If it doesn't, all that counts should be your partner's attraction to you, should it not?

Then again, we're living in a world were people, who do not know you, care about what you do, want to do or what they assume about you doing or wanting to do in the bedroom.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Nyle said:


> Like I said in my previous post, when you're having great sex with someone, it goes without saying that the person is attracted to YOU (and your gender, in general); that is them sharing their sexual orientation with you. I've been emotionally attached to exactly three people; I am the last, ALWAYS, to develop any feelings for someone.


I _disagree_ - below I expound.

The flux of your reasoning appear(s) _flawed_ / inconsistent - 

Ex; -->

_
Let (X) = Straight woman 

Let (Y) = Gay male_

(X) participates in sexual coitus (via) gay male - (X) engages in long-term _high-functioning_ emotional + psychological relationship mutualism with [closeted] gay-male. 

All sexual coitus is ''marvelous + enjoyed,'' (Y) + (X) become (1) in marital enslavement.

Thus, sexual orientation of gay male is proximal / temporarily [for the time being] *irrelevant *... (??) That is, _until_ (Y) is comfortable in sharing - and thus, can extend - or be 'withheld' [it must be] - until ''official'' relationship commencement. :1892:


*For this reasoning* *:: *


Ex; ---> (1) 

Personalized-self data was purposefully 'withheld' until (X) straight woman made a formal '['deal,'' with (Y) - to be monogamously _bond_ + enslaved - without knowing the 'full-length' of the *contract.*... :ssad: 

(Y)'s excuse ... ''I developed feeling(s) late .. (?)'' ..

[HR][/HR]






> Bisexuality is a very small aspect of who I am. Ok, you can argue knowing the 'entire self' that comprises who one is, I understand that.


We are discussing [sexual orientation] disclosure- not mere ''bisexuality,'' ... I fail to see the relevance (via) bisexuality is a 'small aspect of self,' - any self-''attribute,'' is a small aspect of self - the attribute(s) - come together, to make a more coherent + judgment.

(A) It appear(s) you are [narrowing] 'sexual orientation' to mere 'bisexuality' to justify said reasoning for ''withholding'' said [bisexual] information (specifically) rather than mere 'sexual orientation' -- my example demonstrates said argument lack(s) consistency (&) is merely based on one-sided preferential excuse without consideration of (X) participating partie(s) that would or may feel a differential [subjective / personalized] 'feeling' ... :ssad:




> I still don't think that is ever feasible and have learnt so to my own detriment with matters that are FAR more important to me than who a person can have sex with.


See; (A) - 

Sexual orientation disclosure - is not merely; about ''who you have sex with,'' - nor past sexual encourter(s) + experiences; however, if I would demand any such information(s) long before making a 'commitment' (e.g., monogamous deal) with (X) individual - (&) thus, sexual coitus + past sex partner(s) would need to be disclosed before participating in sexual coitus with (X) individual.

*(Z)* specimen(s) sexual orientation can (&) does 'manifest' in form(s) of [sexual partner / sexual past] disclose. 


Ex; (2) --> 

I had sex with 50+ female(s), but this is the ''first male,'' I ever date ... in order to 'withhold' sexual orientation - this information must be ''withheld,'' until a monogamous 'deal' (i.e., commitment) is made;


My only rationalized reasoning for being 'okay' with such an deal is if (X) commmitment was formally arranged (&) thus [already had my consent] (Via) all information disclosed (e.g., I was aware of said [ambiguity] + lack- of vital information(s)) before 'signing the contract.'


It appear(s), your only excuse is ... ''It's just not important to me,'' .. it appear(s) such a specimen is purposefully withholding sexual orientation to get (X) individual(s) to ''agree'' to said deal [generalizing from your discomforts / previous assertion(s) of ''at my detriment''] - and thus, get (X) individual to ''fall in love,'' first - (&) then disclose information(s) for psychological manipulative mean(s) + unethical enslavement + deal-making. Can be interpreted as [purposeful withholding of important data to scam signatures] (via) purposeful [self-closetting] until I ''like them,'' enough - however, said individual could be in deep emotional-judo / mualistic chemical bonding(s) --> (i.e., emotionally attached) long before said 'personal' feeling(s) arise - thus, could be interpreted as being 'lead-on / mislead,'.




> The remarks on sexual intercourse were to illustrate the point that someone having sex with Person X and enjoying every second of it means that being attracted to your gender is part of their sexuality.



And; I could enjoy having sexual coitus with a _homosexual male_ his [physical] responses (i.e., erection / ejaculation) do not indicate ''attraction'' _demonstrably_; many homosexual(s) engaging with _opposite sex_ + having more than (1) oppposite sex partner is not 'uncommon' || nor is marital enslavement. I fail to see your point - nor how this is a 'concrete' demontrastion.





> I used that as a distinguishing point for me accepting my bisexuality. You reach that point and there is no denying it, at all. If you were denying it to yourself at that point, it is THAT which gives away possibility of a psychological break from the reality of what occurred; repression, etc. that leads to many other questions on why that is the case.



You are 'repressing' your sexual orientation [not bisexuality] until a deal (via) consent / commitment is made; by both parties - for what reasoning .. (?) Your assertion was merely because ''that is not all I am,'' - which appear(s) faux / weak contra-argument.


It appear(s) one has ''insecurities'' (via) participating parties that (P) specimen may ''judge too hard / reject / disagree' or only see [bisexuality] + sexual orientation; while disclosing other 'personal ddata' at whilm - while implying it is ''unimportant,'' || his appear(s) inconsistent / withholding specific data while sharing 'equally' less-important data ---> [purposefully / intentional data-withholding + parts of self]. 


Purposeful / Intentional withholding can infer a degree of ''_psychological manipulation_,'' thus, can be interpreted as 'offensive,' / or [wrong] based off subjective preferential data. 

Thus; a ''compromise,'' would need to be made

--> Disclosure of [sexual orientation] but none disclourse of [sexual partners / sexual related acts]. 


Failure to compromise --> can be interpreted as selfishness / purposefully infliction of psychological harm on defenseless agent(s).


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

Yes. No. If people can't accept you for who you are, move on. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

@Catwalk

Yes, you're correct. I failed to realise I'm exceptionalising myself from the general pathology of emotional manipulation, exactly because I don't identify with the intent or fear of rejection. On my part, it's irrelevant to me, I can't empathise with it and I can't see myself wanting to 'tie' someone down either via such methods; I'm pro independence and autonomy.

Questioning my premise would make sense had I not already stated stipulations but yeah it builds off the above. Full disclosure early is logical for most people, I agree, what you've stated would be the easiest way to get away from romantic entanglement on both parts. I don't know, it's not about me in the end and yet it would still serve me better were circumstances to take a deviation.


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

I would and no it doesn't matter if he tells me he's bisexual or not 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mange (Jan 9, 2011)

Just based on conversations with my straight, adult older sister... I think some women might just be uncomfortable with the idea that your dick was in someone else's ass? (Or that you had a dick in yours) She's kind of old fashioned, I guess. :idunno:


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

@White_Flag

Yes, that's essentially what it comes down to - liking male sex at all because my dick has been in a woman's ass too and I can't see that being a problem lol. Your frankness is amusing. :X I didn't want to meander down this end of discussion but anyway, I top; sometimes I'm versatile. I'm all for doing whatever is enjoyable in bed; restrictions in general bore me.

@OrangeAppled

I appreciate it's a preference, I don't understand the logic of attributes such as 'feminine' being assigned however. I see two components to the categorisation:

1. Appreciation of the male body is only for women, therefore a man doing so makes him feminine.

Why is it that men compliment each other's physique at gyms then? That always made me uncomfortable. Some of it is in appreciation of discipline and genetics; for others, it is an appreciation of the male form. Taking that a fee steps further is what sexual attraction is; appreciating the male form to the point of arousal, which happens to include a desire to excite erogenous zones in turn.

Not all homosexuals are into anal sex, I'm addressing it for the sake of this argument.

2. It is only women who are to be penetrated, men being penetrated makes them feminine.

I could summarise the argument pro this considering a history of gender stipulated relationship dynamics myself. There's an assumption that the receiving partner in male x male sexual intercourse is submissive by rule, denoting the expected dynamics of a heterosexual relationship, however it's not a given at all. Ever hear of power bottoms? If not, think of women who like to command and yet are still penetrated. Not all men into male x male sex even engage in anal - that's another assumption that is made.

There are other arguments I've already heard such as non-heterosexual males looking 'gay' or exhibiting homosexual mannerisms. These ones amuse me. That INFP thread on the annoyances with being assumed to be homosexual details these ambiguities; it's a stereotype associated with certain behaviours that are not true for the remainder of the non-F personality types (and in general, people differ much). If you've ever looked on Reddit, there are a number of INTJ gays for example. It's unlikely they'd present the same way. These are better ways of gauging someone's sexual orientation.

So what exactly is it then? :/ It's difficult to empathise when I don't understand a lot of social customs or views that are rife in society and accepted as they are; that's something that has always been confusing to me unless it serves an overall purpose. If it's religion, I see but I don't appreciate religious rules (as a whole) being an agnostic. I don't understand a lack of desire to question everything.


----------



## sweatersinc (Jul 7, 2016)

Ugh.
People are so obsessed with sex and sexuality. Telling someone what your sexuality is would, in an ideal world, be as insignificant as telling them what your favorite flavour of ice cream is. But we don't live an ideal world, and that being said, your sexuality is your business and your right.
I can't believe your friend argued that you weren't putting yourself in those women's shoes. If a woman won't date you because your bi, she clearly hasn't tried to put on your shoes because if she did, she'd realize they were the shoes of a whole, complex, complete human being.
So maybe tell women straight up to weed out the pricks?


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

White_Flag said:


> Just based on conversations with my straight, adult older sister... I think some women might just be uncomfortable with the idea that your dick was in someone else's ass? (Or that you had a dick in yours) She's kind of old fashioned, I guess. :idunno:


That's not what bisexuality entails, tho :/ And I'd have to wonder if she'd feel the same if it involved another woman?


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Nyle said:


> 1. Would you date a bisexual guy?
> 2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?


Yes I would.

While not wrong per sé, I would find it weird if it hadn't come up at some point before the relationship went anywhere. You discuss all kinds of stuff before you really get into it, and previous experiences are just good to know. Just in a very general 'I've had relationships before, and one of those was with a guy' sense. I personally prefer to get to know the person I'm in a relationship with before we enter that relationship.



sweatersinc said:


> Ugh.
> People are so obsessed with sex and sexuality. Telling someone what your sexuality is would, in an ideal world, be as insignificant as telling them what your favorite flavour of ice cream is. But we don't live an ideal world, and that being said, your sexuality is your business and your right.
> I can't believe your friend argued that you weren't putting yourself in those women's shoes. If a woman won't date you because your bi, she clearly hasn't tried to put on your shoes because if she did, she'd realize they were the shoes of a whole, complex, complete human being.
> So maybe tell women straight up to weed out the pricks?


But that ice-cream flavour info is_ also_ useful information. It isn't world-changing, but it's this kinds of little things that help us understand each other better - and it gives her an opportunity to surprise you with a tub of your favourite icecream if you are going through a rough patch.


----------



## SummerHaze (May 18, 2016)

nope 'cause i will jealous him even to boys, it's too much headache


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Nyle said:


> @*OrangeAppled*
> 
> I appreciate it's a preference, I don't understand the logic of attributes such as 'feminine' being assigned however. I see two components to the categorisation:
> 
> ...


Aesthetic appreciation and sexual desire aren't the same thing. Neither is arousal and desire. People get aroused by stuff they don't really desire. It can just be a physical response, and it can be more complicated than it appears (ie not about attraction to the actual thing/person but some other association it triggers).

Feminine and masculine are different energies... all individuals have varying degrees of it. There is often a draw to people who seem to complement our individual energy. Some _degree_ of feminine energy is fine to me, but there can be too much.

I think desiring men sexually adds a feminine energy, so much so, that it is repellent to me and not magnetic. It doesn't matter how the person presents otherwise. 

There are exceptions to this in which it reads as rejection of feminine energy (also unattractive). 

It is also no secret that people have differing moral views on sexuality, often tied to their spirituality. If someone doesn't respect certain behaviors as a moral choice or sees it as some spiritual violation, then it's probably best to know that upfront, isn't it?
Wouldn't you want to KNOW that they respect and accept YOUR behaviors and choices?



> Not all homosexuals are into anal sex, I'm addressing it for the sake of this argument.
> 
> 2. It is only women who are to be penetrated, men being penetrated makes them feminine.
> 
> I could summarise the argument pro this considering a history of gender stipulated relationship dynamics myself. There's an assumption that the receiving partner in male x male sexual intercourse is submissive by rule, denoting the expected dynamics of a heterosexual relationship, however it's not a given at all. Ever hear of power bottoms? If not, think of women who like to command and yet are still penetrated. Not all men into male x male sex even engage in anal - that's another assumption that is made.


It has nothing to do with penetration. A man wanting to be sexual with another man is not attractive to me. It's more of the desire and such than any act itself. For example, if a man had, say, experimented in youth and then decided it was totally not for him, and as such, honestly lost all desire, then it _may not_ be an issue to me. I recognize that people aren't static.



> There are other arguments I've already heard such as non-heterosexual males looking 'gay' or exhibiting homosexual mannerisms. These ones amuse me. That INFP thread on the annoyances with being assumed to be homosexual details these ambiguities; it's a stereotype associated with certain behaviours that are not true for the remainder of the non-F personality types (and in general, people differ much). If you've ever looked on Reddit, there are a number of INTJ gays for example. It's unlikely they'd present the same way. These are better ways of gauging someone's sexual orientation.


In this case, people are talking about being effeminate, and yes, it is true that not all effeminate men are gay and vice versa. 
I am not talking about _effeminate mannerisms_, although that can be a turn-off to me also, if there is too much of it.

I have dated and been attracted to NF and 4 men who prefer, say, fashion to sports and who were more emotional than me. I didn't consider them effeminate nor to have feminine energy (or not "too much").

But I was not talking about being _effeminate_, which is not the same as _feminine energy_.

Effeminate mannerisms are more THERE. There is not much to disclose. But energy can change as we become more familiar with who someone is, how they feel, what they do, etc.



> So what exactly is it then? :/ It's difficult to empathise when I don't understand a lot of social customs or views that are rife in society and accepted as they are; that's something that has always been confusing to me unless it serves an overall purpose. If it's religion, I see but I don't appreciate religious rules (as a whole) being an agnostic. I don't understand a lack of desire to question everything.


Well, that's why it's better to be upfront...because you don't understand everyone else either. You aren't really willing to accept the reality of their worldview, their feelings, their experiences, etc, either. And ultimately, you aren't compatible. So make it known who you are and what you do and then you can know upfront where you stand with someone.

I will be honest...I suspect some bi-men don't want to disclose their preferences because they KNOW hetero women will be turned-off, and they imagine they can charm her and establish a connection to the point where she may no longer care once she finds out. But that is deception and it rarely works out well for anyone involved. If it wouldn't bother someone, then it probably wouldn't bother them from the get-go either, so why not determine that?

For clarity, I am referring to openness with potential romantic partners. Every random person doesn't need to know your business, no.


----------



## mhysa (Nov 27, 2014)

Nyle said:


> 1. Would you date a bisexual guy?


yeah, absolutely. i'm bisexual too, so it would be cool to date someone who likes what i like. 



> 2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?


this is interesting because it brings up a lot of biphobic sentiments that we all have to deal with at one point or another. personally, i don't think it's wrong. i agree with you that the only thing that really matters (in a "this directly affects my partner" way) is that you are attracted to that individual. 

i've had people i was talking to not want anything to do with me romantically when i told them i was bi, because for some reason people have this idea that being bi = being fervently attracted to every person you come across and wanting to fuck everything. totally untrue. that's the only reason i can think of for someone freaking out if you don't immediately disclose that you're bi, and it's a shitty mentality that people should be aware is shitty. missing out on a potential relationship because the other person is pissed about you not being "open" with your sexuality (or simply not being okay with your sexuality) is not really a loss, it's a serious bullet-dodge.

when straight people say that we (and by that i mean any member of the LGBT+ community) should HAVE to disclose our sexuality, it comes from a place of total ignorance, similar to the people who say that transgender folks should HAVE to disclose the fact that they are transgender. they're allowed to say things like that because they don't know what it feels like to be endangered or have your life threatened because you've been open about your sexuality. as a straight-passing bi woman, i haven't had to face that danger, but it's very real and it's a great reason not to comply with anyone who says that you should let everyone you date know immediately that you're bi.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

It doesn't matter how you spin it: refusing to date someone simply for being bisexual, or assigning them negative traits like diseased, untrustworthy, or feminine for their orientation, is biphobic. You're free to date and fuck who you'd like, but let's at least try to be honest. In a perfect world, everyone would be treated as individuals, and I'd be more surprised if bisexuality were a non-factor for people.

I see a lot of talk about being upfront about one's sexuality, but little to combat the prejudices that pressure one into toning it down in the first place. The way I see it, the man is interested in you. End of story. I don't see why it should be any different from a fellow heterosexual cheating down the road, or doing something equally terrible, and causing a breakup. Why give them the benefit of a doubt, but not others?

And I'm not just upset because it's caused problems for me, personally, but because it's tied to other shit like assuming men are superior to women, sex/relationships with a man is more valid, or that only women can be bisexual (meaning, straight but willing to indulge their boyfriend's threesome fantasies). It's rather disappointing that bisexuals are more-or-less invisible, passing for either gay or straight, in a world that only sees black and white (most people's sexuality exists on a spectrum, and not only on two opposing sides). 

A huge thanks to the bisexual and open-minded heterosexual women who commented  You restore my faith in humanity.


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

@WamphyriThrall

You're absolutely right, it is not any different. You're taking a risk either way by dating someone, regardless of their sexual orientation or their gender. Everyone can be shitty, cheat on you or neglect you. I'm upset at the stereotypes that the bisexual community has to endure. That it's just a phase, that you can't be monogamous, that you're in denial about being gay.. It's so unfair. I know I am 'lucky' (quotation marks because eh) to have my bisexuality be more socially acceptable, but it's only because it's so sexualized endlessly by porn and the media overall. Because two pairs of boobs are better than one. 

Our society is very dichotomous, yes, but things are slowly changing. People are adopting labels that encompass more nuances within sexuality. It's an exciting time. I'm hopeful. 

PS: A guy I was dating told me a fantasy of his was to have a MMF threesome at some point. It didn't phase me one bit, I didn't even question his sexuality, but I knew other people in my position would not react to that well, and would make all kinds of assumptions; whereas if I suggested a FFM threesome, it would likely be a turn on. Bleh.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Disclaimer: I find labels vacuous, so I agree with the above posts there but I'd much rather figure out exactly what the person is thinking and take it from there. 



sweatersinc said:


> I can't believe your friend argued that you weren't putting yourself in those women's shoes. If a woman won't date you because your bi, she clearly hasn't tried to put on your shoes because if she did, she'd realize they were the shoes of a whole, complex, complete human being.
> So maybe tell women straight up to weed out the pricks?


I have no problem with my friends disagreeing with me and being frank about it. It didn't hurt my feelings, it did give me food for thought however. If she were to show distaste or change the nature of our friendship, well I find it relatively easy to cut people off. It seems bi/homosexuals, etc. acquire experience in this at some stage anyhow. I already expect some backlash; it's life and it makes no sense to me but that's what holding onto certain beliefs does. I'm more concerned about my family's reaction and not letting it interfere with work, not that it will change my views.



Stultum said:


> But that ice-cream flavour info is_ also_ useful information. It isn't world-changing, but it's this kinds of little things that help us understand each other better - and it gives her an opportunity to surprise you with a tub of your favourite icecream if you are going through a rough patch.


Aaand everyone misconstrued that. :laughing:



OrangeAppled said:


> Aesthetic appreciation and sexual desire aren't the same thing. Neither is arousal and desire. People get aroused by stuff they don't really desire. It can just be a physical response, and it can be more complicated than it appears (ie not about attraction to the actual thing/person but some other association it triggers).


That is true, the aim was to make a clear distinction between aesthetic appreciation and arousal; that the latter is taking that further, sure it can be more complicated but, this is what it can be distilled down to.



OrangeAppled said:


> It has nothing to do with penetration. A man wanting to be sexual with another man is not attractive to me. It's more of the desire and such than any act itself. For example, if a man had, say, experimented in youth and then decided it was totally not for him, and as such, honestly lost all desire, then it _may not_ be an issue to me. I recognize that people aren't static.


This is confusing, 'experimented' to the point he likely did more than just touch another guy's dick. The best scenario you have there is he got his dick sucked by another guy, lovely. That has several connotations too but why not? Rejection is a must to retain that masculine energy then.



OrangeAppled said:


> But I was not talking about being _effeminate_, which is not the same as _feminine energy_.
> 
> Effeminate mannerisms are more THERE. There is not much to disclose. But energy can change as we become more familiar with who someone is, how they feel, what they do, etc.


We seem in agreement on what is perceived as 'effeminate' behaviour not being exclusive to non-heterosexuals.


* *




The rest of your explanation is entirely subjective based upon personal impressions formed, you have not stated one objective measure, and yes I realise you have already mentioned it is a preference for you - I appreciate you expounding at all.

What you're essentially saying is that as soon as you learn a guy is into other guys, his energy changes for you; it becomes more feminine. I'm accustomed to the mention of energies and auras, even from my INFP partner - it's something I've noticed all xNFPs seem to use but have little basis for other than the general meaning of 'impressions' that are formed on meeting someone and can be explained scientifically, if we were to digress even further. Everything else seems fanciful uses of Ne-Fi/Fi-Ne that an NT would explain with clear specifics, but then I am biased being an NT and having this conversation over and over... thus I will leave it mostly unaddressed.

Except to wonder: How is this reliable if you can meet a bisexual guy and find that your attraction is great right until... 'I'm into guys too'? You may say impressions are fluid however how can one ignore the fact that this had a HUGE effect right there? Does anything else weigh as heavily at one end of the scales?






OrangeAppled said:


> I will be honest...I suspect some bi-men don't want to disclose their preferences because they KNOW hetero women will be turned-off, and they imagine they can charm her and establish a connection to the point where she may no longer care once she finds out. But that is deception and it rarely works out well for anyone involved. If it wouldn't bother someone, then it probably wouldn't bother them from the get-go either, so why not determine that?
> 
> For clarity, I am referring to openness with potential romantic partners. Every random person doesn't need to know your business, no.


There are many assumptions made here with the above argument anyway.

The bisexual in question:

1. Can't attract women based on his appearance and personality to begin with that he needs to trap women. 
2. Is already enamoured with the woman and thus trying to persuade her into being with him.
3. Is lazy and can't be bothered to seek a woman into bisexual men (as limited a group as that seems to be portrayed to be, it probably is but whatever). 
4. Has ill intent in general.
5. Is ashamed of being attracted to men and is repressing his sexuality.
6. Thinks it is relevant at all.

I'm being facetious, I know, but none of that applies to me bar 6 and I find the underlying themes comical. I haven't tried hooking up with women since figuring it all out though, maybe I'll take that back; somehow, I doubt it. The point of this thread, for me anyway, was to figure out if perhaps 5 did apply to me and I was unaware of it. I find that it's not true; if it did, I wouldn't be embracing it all like I am.

I have already addressed the other points above on gleaning that yes, it's for the best - disclosing my sexual orientation at some point early on makes most sense. It's not just about how I view it or what makes most sense, but what is more practical when taking in the reality that this seems to be a big issue for many women.

@mhysa

I'm glad I figured this out now in my twenties. As independent as I was as a teenager, I would be an idiot to think I would not have been affected by this negatively if I had 'come out' then. The amount of crap homosexuals put up with is more than absurd, it is disgusting.

All my closest friends in person are male, I have never fancied any of them. Are heterosexual men attracted to all females? Or vice versa. The assumptions are unfounded, particularly the following one. People cheat all the time, I've never cheated on anyone and neither do I see myself ever crossing that line - I'd rather break up with them. I have been cheated on by a ENTP female. Are all ENTP females more likely to cheat? What is it, their open playful extrovert nature? Surely that means they have a wider group of people they can choose from/attract; that much more opportunity to cheat.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Nyle said:


> @Catwalk
> 
> Yes, you're correct. I failed to realise I'm exceptionalising myself from the general pathology of emotional manipulation, exactly because I don't identify with the intent or fear of rejection. On my part, it's irrelevant to me, I can't empathise with it and I can't see myself wanting to 'tie' someone down either via such methods; I'm pro independence and autonomy.



Well; it is *simplistic* - apply your argument to the following (via)_ consistency_ --->

Does this also apply to *biromantic homosexual* males making 'monogamous' [deals] (without) full disclosure + withholding sexual orientation(s) from (X) heterosexual woman in question (&) other _sexualities_ _*harm*_ the participants (&) relationship(s) between the agents involved .. (?) No ''deep thought'' necessary.

Do you still; have malfunction(s)_ empathizing_ .. (?)If so; I am perhap(s) your ''problem,'' is rooted _elsewhere_ (&) thus, a whole differential thread - although, generalizing from recent assertion(s) - you do not appear to lack empathy [understanding].

I do appreciate (Post #1) being open to _differential _perspective(s), however. As for the ''rejection,'' bit - I do not give much a hoot about rejection/s either - however, one does not necessarily need to ''relate,'' to_ empathize_.

You have already demonstrated your 'empathization' (Via) previous post(s) - thus my contribution appear(s) completed.

[HR][/HR]

Complied.


----------



## MonieJ (Nov 22, 2010)

*1. Would you date a bisexual guy?*
Sure why not
*
2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?*
That's 5th date info seeing as how you'd be kinda serious or I assume you'd be serious at that point.

I don't think they need to know first date, but being Bi is who I am so if we go on a 5th or if the person asks to be exclusive I say "I need to be honest with you and myself,Ive dated both guys and gals hopefully that's not an issue" 
That way it's out there and if they don't like it then seeya.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

Nyle said:


> This is confusing, 'experimented' to the point he likely did more than just touch another guy's dick. The best scenario you have there is he got his dick sucked by another guy, lovely. That has several connotations too but why not? Rejection is a must to retain that masculine energy then.


There are endless scenarios regarding "experimentation"... I am not interested in hypothetically considering every one and guessing how I might feel about it. 

I don't know about the word "rejection", as that suggests some kind of repression. I am thinking someone has a greater certainty of what is right for them.

I don't know if it is common for young men, but it's not _that_ unusual for young women to experiment with the same-sex and then decide it totally is not for them. There is perhaps social pressure to experiment also, a pressure which seems to be increasing.

I have never had any experimental phase or question/confusion with sexuality, but some people do. It's not _that_ rare. 

I think there have been some stats which suggests that as people get older, there are less who identify as bi because they start to identify as just straight or gay. There could be many reasons for this, but one may be that people have a better sense of who they are and how they feel and what they want as they age.



> The rest of your explanation is entirely subjective based upon personal impressions formed, you have not stated one objective measure, and yes I realise you have already mentioned it is a preference for you - I appreciate you expounding at all.
> 
> What you're essentially saying is that as soon as you learn a guy is into other guys, his energy changes for you; it becomes more feminine. I'm accustomed to the mention of energies and auras, even from my INFP partner - it's something I've noticed all xNFPs seem to use but have little basis for other than the general meaning of 'impressions' that are formed on meeting someone and can be explained scientifically, if we were to digress even further. Everything else seems fanciful uses of Ne-Fi/Fi-Ne that an NT would explain with clear specifics, but then I am biased being an NT and having this conversation over and over... thus I will leave it mostly unaddressed.
> 
> Except to wonder: How is this reliable if you can meet a bisexual guy and find that your attraction is great right until... 'I'm into guys too'? You may say impressions are fluid however how can one ignore the fact that this had a HUGE effect right there? Does anything else weigh as heavily at one end of the scales?


hahahaha! :laughing:
How is my subjective impression and feelings reliable criteria? Because THAT is what relationships are about!
You don't "objectively" determine how you feel about someone romantically. You just FEEl it. Why do you need science to validate your personal experience and what meets your personal needs & makes you happy? So maybe science cannot define what these energies and vibes are; and maybe they are just emotional responses. That is kind of the point though - it is not a static thing and it very much is about dynamic, interaction and how you mutually affect one another. 

To suggest there is some objective measurement is like saying you could only be attracted to someone who is "objectively good-looking" (and let's be real - there are very much objective standards out there), yet most people really only care how they personally feel about a partner, not how other people feel. If they do put stock in other's opinions there, then that has little to do with sheer romantic attraction and is more about the appeal of status (meeting a different kind of need via the relationship). There aren't clear lines with this stuff, but for many people, what matters is how _they_ feel about it since it will be _their_ experience. Often people do try and justify the feeling, but maybe us NFPs realize it is not necessary.

Someone can meet a laundry list of criteria, but the dynamic between you tends to trump that. I suspect this is WHY you think it is not relevant information to begin with (how they FEEL about you personally will trump the factual info that you are bisexual)... but that discounts that people can become very aware of patterns in their responses, aka, how things affect how they feel. Of course NFPs would tend to be highly aware of this . 

Of course we all have _practical criteria_, and some may make arguments in that vein as to why they wouldn't (or would) be into a bi-guy. I can make those arguments, but I choose to bypass that and go to the heart which is just that "I'm not feeling it". Because I know that is really what it is for me. Do feelings just change in an instant? Sometimes, depending on the weight of what just happened or what you just learned, etc. It also depends on how invested you are, yes, and other things which affect the overall dynamic.

So to sum up - the energy thing is about dynamic... and that is why it can shift as new things are revealed, and sometimes that shift is seismic and other times it is subtle. This is true of any quality about a person...often everything shifts things one way or another, to varying degrees. What I am saying is, for me, it is too BIG a negative shift to get past. If I was already very invested because a LOT of time had passed, then the negative shift may be caused more by the feeling of being _deceived_. Deception can kill a positive dynamic fast because it throws into question all the preceding feelings, because now it all seems based on a lie.




> There are many assumptions made here with the above argument anyway.
> 
> The bisexual in question:
> 
> 1. Can't attract women based on his appearance and personality to begin with that he needs to trap women.


I was thinking quite the opposite. The person is so confident of their charm that they think the info will be irrelevant once the other person gets to know them, whereas if revealed upfront, it may cause a bias that prevents someone from giving them a chance.
I'm saying if someone doesn't want to give you a chance based on that info, then they aren't really compatible anyway.



> 2. Is already enamoured with the woman and thus trying to persuade her into being with him.


No, perhaps there is a fear not very many women will be into him if they knew upfront he is bi. See "selection pool" below.



> 3. Is lazy and can't be bothered to seek a woman into bisexual men (as limited a group as that seems to be portrayed to be, it probably is but whatever).


No...but if unsure of a woman's stance, then why not disclose it? 
And yes, maybe a person fears limiting their selection pool too much (and it WILL do that - but weeding out is better for everyone, IMO; who wants to be one-size-fits-most anyway?).



> 4. Has ill intent in general.


No...but maybe he has insecurity.



> 5. Is ashamed of being attracted to men and is repressing his sexuality.


In some cases, yes, but not in all. 
This also reminds of how some women may worry that they are/will be just a "beard" for such a man... less common nowadays, but I have heard horror stories first-hand.



> 6. Thinks it is relevant at all.


Possibly...but this is very naive. Of course sexuality is relevant to a romantic relationship that does/will include sex. 
People who have very specific kinks that many others would not be into may have to go out of their way to find someone compatible too.



> I have already addressed the other points above on gleaning that yes, it's for the best - disclosing my sexual orientation at some point early on makes most sense. It's not just about how I view it or what makes most sense, but what is more practical when taking in the reality that this seems to be a big issue for many women.


It's just being considerate of other people's feelings, yes. And it protects your interests too - why waste time/energy on someone who ultimately won't be into you?*Save**Save*​


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

WamphyriThrall said:


> It doesn't matter how you spin it: refusing to date someone simply for being bisexual, or assigning them negative traits like diseased, untrustworthy, or feminine for their orientation, is biphobic. You're free to date and fuck who you'd like, but let's at least try to be honest. In a perfect world, everyone would be treated as individuals, and I'd be more surprised if bisexuality were a non-factor for people.


Sounds like YOUR perfect world....a world where no one is an individual because they all subscribe to your tastes and standards.

I truly find this whole sentiment bigoted. And how is "feminine" a negative trait? 
Having preferences as to what you find attractive or knowing what you don't find attractive is not "phobic". 
It has nothing to do with fear. If someone prefers blonds and won't date brunettes because their attraction is that specific, then is that person brunette-phobic? Are they saying being brunette has universal negative value? No.

I find this reasoning irrational (everything stems from phobia!), and it does nothing to build any sympathy for bi people. It comes down to name-calling, perhaps to try and socially shame people into feeling the same way you do. Not cool to me. Looks like "phobia of people who are different from me and how I feel and see reality".


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

@OrangeAppled A lot of what you are saying makes sense (from a psychological point of view), but has every bi men you've ever met honestly _given off_ a feminine energy? I get that it is more than mannerisms, or interests. I am more wondering whether what you are describing changes just by finding out information.

I used to consider myself a good people-reader, I still think I pick up on a lot of things others don't, but I've been surprised way too many times to think we are infallible at this kind of thing. I know I'm just one person, and that perhaps you are more intuitive in this way than me. But I don't think anyone_ can_ say they would never date a bi man by _accident_, which would presumably mean it'd be possible for them to be attracted to one.

I mean...do you find this aura is universally strong in men who are attracted to men? How strong does it need to be for you to notice? To be a turn off?

I get that this is at least partly motivated by your religious beliefs though, and I do respect that, even if I don't agree with them.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> Sounds like YOUR perfect world....a world where no one is an individual because they all subscribe to your tastes and standards.
> 
> I truly find this whole sentiment bigoted. And how is "feminine" a negative trait?
> Having preferences as to what you find attractive or knowing what you don't find attractive is not "phobic".
> ...


I never said feminine was a negative trait (hell, I prefer feminine traits in men), but for many straight women, yeah, it is, either because they feel threatened by it, aren't sure how to adapt, or whatever. I'll say it again: along with other stereotypes thrown at bisexual men (closeted gay men, HIV positive, greedy), "feminine" comes up a lot. Some will flat out say they don't see him as much of a man after finding out he's bisexual, slept with men, etc. Others stereotype bi/gay men as flaming queens. Either way, it's wrong.

And are you an expert on LGBT sexuality? Yeah, I'd love it if everyone could be accepting of my bisexuality, but at the same time, like how those who are turned on or intrigued by it are such a breath of fresh air (more so when many are fellow queers, like me). When I see the type of relationships my straight friends are in, I'm glad I have the options to break boundaries that others take for granted. The bisexual community might be small, but we're probably more diverse in our preferences, experiences, and expressions.

Do you know what prejudice is? It's assigning a member of one group traits without evidence or reason. I don't blame you: I'm wary of dating some bisexuals, too, but don't have the luxury to write them off and only date heterosexuals. Plus, I know better than to put millions of folk under the same check box. Sure, it helps that I'm friends and have dated a few. They're not some walking television trope or porn genre.

If you think my post is bigoted... you need to find some other first world problem. I'm not telling you who to date, but if you're going to post your preferences in public, expect others reading to react.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

nevermore said:


> @*OrangeAppled* A lot of what you are saying makes sense (from a psychological point of view), but has every bi men you've ever met honestly _given off_ a feminine energy? I get that it is more than mannerisms, or interests. I am more wondering whether what you are describing changes just by finding out information.
> 
> I used to consider myself a good people-reader, I still think I pick up on a lot of things others don't, but I've been surprised way too many times to think we are infallible at this kind of thing. I know I'm just one person, and that perhaps you are more intuitive in this way than me. But I don't think anyone_ can_ say they would never date a bi man by _accident_, which would presumably mean it'd be possible for them to be attracted to one.
> 
> ...


I haven't had an issue where I dated someone or was interested in someone and they disclosed a bi preference and I became turned-off. I am not super concerned about that happening either, but I'll entertain some hypothetical situations for the sake of discussion. I also think that rarely would one need to reveal something like that _directly_ rather than discuss _related topics_ and see how someone feels about stuff like that _in general_. The same could be said of many preferences. I've had people become VERY chilly and turned-off to me once they learned some of MY preferences, especially regarding less-than-mainstream spiritual/religious ideas. It was naive of me to think that could be overlooked.

Anyhow, I have found a couple men somewhat attractive (from a distance...like, from my TV set or in passing at a retail shop) and then sudden awareness that they are (also) into men killed it. 

The information is a factual thing, not a vibe. It's not like I "sense" someone is bi. 

This is a bad example...but it's the best I can think of offhand that is _somewhat_ neutral. I am tallish (maybe 5'8 right out of bed), and I have had guys seem into me when I am seated...and then I stand up with heels on and I am taller than them! Instant attraction killer (for them...I've dated very short men before). I see their face totally change. Did my overall vibe change? Not really, but their response to it did, based on something pretty harmless. It's not unusual for a man to read a taller women as "masculine". It doesn't mean we are masculine, but we seem that way _in relation_ to them and from their _particular perspective_. Not all of them will feel that way though, so no biggie.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

WamphyriThrall said:


> I never said feminine was a negative trait (hell, I prefer feminine traits in men), but for many straight women, yeah, it is, either because they feel threatened by it, aren't sure how to adapt, or whatever. I'll say it again: along with other stereotypes thrown at bisexual men (closeted gay men, HIV positive, greedy), "feminine" comes up a lot. Some will flat out say they don't see him as much of a man after finding out he's bisexual, slept with men, etc. Others stereotype bi/gay men as flaming queens. Either way, it's wrong.
> 
> And are you an expert on LGBT sexuality? Yeah, I'd love it if everyone could be accepting of my bisexuality, but at the same time, like how those who are turned on or intrigued by it are such a breath of fresh air (more so when many are fellow queers, like me). When I see the type of relationships my straight friends are in, I'm glad I have the options to break boundaries that others take for granted. The bisexual community might be small, but we're probably more diverse in our preferences, experiences, and expressions.
> 
> ...


Their attractions are wrong, but yours aren't? Interesting.
You seem to make a lot of negative assumptions about how someone IS based merely on their attraction preferences too...they must be "threatened" to not find something attractive? Are people who have a hair color preference "threatened" by those who don't fit their preference? You conveniently ignored that illustration.

I find this too faulty in reasoning to even address fully. It's like a pot calling a kettle black. 

FYI, I am not the outraged one here or the one trying to shame others into feeling the same as I do. I should ask you if YOU know what prejudice is.


----------



## septic tank (Jul 21, 2013)

As a straight woman, I would date a bisexual. Doesn't matter jack to me, and I'd expect him to tell me about it anyways while we're establishing boundaries and talking about sex. I think someone so fixated and insecure over sexual preferences to not tell me wouldn't be dateable in the first place. I'm someone who wants become close to you before I date you... if there's still a lot of insecurities then we'd probably not work out.

Honestly, it could be fun. I'd probably ask him at some point if we could do a threesome with another man... he might not like that though... which is fine. *shrug*


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> Their attractions are wrong, but yours aren't? Interesting.
> You seem to make a lot of negative assumptions about how someone IS based merely on their attraction preferences too...they must be "threatened" to not find something attractive? Are people who have a hair color preference "threatened" by those who don't fit their preference? You conveniently ignored that illustration.
> 
> I find this too faulty in reasoning to even address fully. It's like a pot calling a kettle black.
> ...


Go ahead, ask. It's the same as if someone were to say, "I can't/won't date black men. They're loud, violent, promiscuous" and getting upset when someone says, "That's bullshit." I'd have a similar reaction if someone were to say, "Bisexuals are all naturally this or that positive trait". 

This is less about attraction itself, and more about the ideas (often unfounded) that surround the stigma surrounding bisexuality. It's bad enough we're trying to fight these harmful stereotypes. Everything people know regarding bisexuals doesn't even come from bisexuals themselves! It's other people who go around saying were this or that. Do we assume all straight men are filthy oafs? 

Why should someone be assumed to be more "feminine" simply for being bisexual? You brought up your height and being seen as masculine. Again, wrong, as many famous models and actresses are above my height. If I sound outraged, it's because I'm sick of seeing these things being thrown around whenever the question is brought up. Should we expect change by sitting back and doing nothing? 

YES, straight women themselves have told me they're threatened if their partner is "more feminine" or "takes better care of their appearance". These are not my words. It speaks of low self-esteem and pigeonholing, to me.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Go ahead, ask. It's the same as if someone were to say, "I can't/won't date black men. They're loud, violent, promiscuous" and getting upset when someone says, "That's bullshit." I'd have a similar reaction if someone were to say, "Bisexuals are all naturally this or that positive trait".
> 
> This is less about attraction itself, and more about the ideas (often unfounded) that surround the stigma surrounding bisexuality. It's bad enough we're trying to fight these harmful stereotypes. Everything people know regarding bisexuals doesn't even come from bisexuals themselves! It's other people who go around saying were this or that. Do we assume all straight men are filthy oafs?
> 
> ...


But the first paragraph is really what you are doing in the last paragraph..._some_ women expressed a particular reason for a preference, and now _all_ women who have that preference _must_ feel that way?

How do you know it is less about attraction than stigma? Why do you get to stereotype people & assume things, but when other people do they are prejudice or pigeon-holing?
Again - pot, meet kettle.

I also don't interpret those women's feelings as "low self-esteem" or whatever. They may not use very precise language, but it seems they may be saying that it doesn't create a dynamic which makes them feel feminine, and that is a dynamic they seek. Since they suddenly feel more masculine, it shifts the energy and makes the other person seem more feminine. Feminine is how they want to feel, and that doesn't make them insecure. People have different needs, and relationships are a lot about how we feel, after all.

People assume many things about straight men, tall women, etc. Everyone faces some stereotyping. The point here is not whether or not something is true because it is not objective fact at all. As I took much care to explain (to people far more reasonable), energy is about dynamic. It is RELATIVE.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

f-ckin-a. does every single f-ing thread on this forum have to turn into some racist shit talking?
okay, now that i've said that, i 'd say it depends on the person whether i'd date them if they were bisexual or not. like if the first thing that popped out of some guys mouth was, "i'm bisexual" then i would worry that is like their main focus in life and that they would be actively practicing their bisexuality while with me so it would be a "not interested" i think. if i got to know them first and liked them as people and connected on a mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical level and then they told me, then it wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker. if the person is just someone looking for casual dating it would be a no as i'd be worried about the risk of disease, and if it was for a long-term relationship i would be asking for monogamy so their bisexual status really wouldn't matter.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

OrangeAppled said:


> But the first paragraph is really what you are doing in the last paragraph..._some_ women expressed a particular reason for a preference, and now _all_ women who have that preference _must_ feel that way?
> 
> How do you know it is less about attraction than stigma? Why do you get to stereotype people & assume things, but when other people do they are prejudice or pigeon-holing?
> Again - pot, meet kettle.
> ...


When did I say "all" women felt that way? I'm only going by what I've seen and heard. To assume that a man is feminine, less than a man, etc. simply because of his sexuality is bs, yet so many people assume bisexuality means enjoying specific acts. The fact that many feminine straight women are involved with bisexual men (sometimes unknowingly) sort of disproves that stereotype, don't you think? I know better than to assume straight men are masculine, straight women are feminine, gay men are feminine, and gay women are masculine, solely due to their attractions (according to some, you're automatically one or the other simply because of who you like).

And that's my point: they have no reason to "suddenly" feel masculine. So much of this isn't even "natural" but shaped by our environment. Plenty of women admit to having had reservations, but after dating a bi man, changed their line of thinking. That alone proves to me that it isn't something hardwired in every case. If someone telling you they're bisexual is something that automatically ruins their image for you, it's your issue, not theirs. I don't expect everyone to come rushing towards bi men, but why should these things only be discussed in academic and queer circles? 

How many straight people are rejected simply for being straight? How many are deemed faulty by the majority for something that's not true?


----------



## nevermore (Oct 1, 2010)

OrangeAppled said:


> I haven't had an issue where I dated someone or was interested in someone and they disclosed a bi preference and I became turned-off. I am not super concerned about that happening either, but I'll entertain some hypothetical situations for the sake of discussion. I also think that rarely would one need to reveal something like that _directly_ rather than discuss _related topics_ and see how someone feels about stuff like that _in general_. The same could be said of many preferences. I've had people become VERY chilly and turned-off to me once they learned some of MY preferences, especially regarding less-than-mainstream spiritual/religious ideas. It was naive of me to think that could be overlooked.
> 
> Anyhow, I have found a couple men somewhat attractive (from a distance...like, from my TV set or in passing at a retail shop) and then sudden awareness that they are (also) into men killed it.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply.

I used the word "information" because I thought you were primarily talking about the feminine vibe some bi men give off being a turn off for you (as opposed to finding out explicitly), and was offering a situation where that wasn't the case; say, where you just found out during a conversation with your partner. "Factually", like you said. Maybe you never mentioned any "vibe"; I thought you had referred to something like this earlier.

I actually get the example you used of a woman standing up; it makes sense. (Not in terms of masculinity or femininity, but in terms of attraction, definitely.) But given that you seem to be talking just about _knowing_ a guy is into other guys, being _aware_ of his orientation, can I assume it's the "upset" of the masculinity/femininity balance that you dislike? Where you would prefer to be on the feminine end...and that his sexuality messes with that balance?


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Small tangent: It's funny, I just found out _last night_ that the guy I am currently talking to is bisexual. Yay! 

Carry on.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

OrangeAppled said:


> hahahaha! :laughing:
> *How is my subjective impression and feelings reliable criteria? Because THAT is what relationships are about!*
> You don't "objectively" determine how you feel about someone romantically. You just FEEl it. Why do you need science to validate your personal experience and what meets your personal needs & makes you happy? So maybe science cannot define what these energies and vibes are; and maybe they are just emotional responses. That is kind of the point though - it is not a static thing and it very much is about dynamic, interaction and how you mutually affect one another.


I don't need science to validate my personal experience, it's simply the way I think - without it, think tunnel vision; there is a necessity for objectivity and coherency and there always has been. That's the reality of existing in a world with 7.4 billion people. If we all lived exactly according to our own personal experience, then yeah... that would be interesting. I certainly prefer the world I envision in my head yet it would be a whole lot less nuanced due to human inability to comprehend the subtleties that exist in all of us.

Your clarifications make it clear to me there is nothing truly 'biphobic' about your preference at all bar the one statement you're sticking to. The lack of even causational argument in your perception of feminine energy surrounding men attracted to men seems more a belief you're sticking to based upon some sort of assumed extrasensory perception or precognition. That you've not made any real arguments for it, even countered my suggested ones (where, yeah, there'sat least some internal logic) is perplexing. I made the mistake of assuming you'd point out some more details, but where you have done so with other points (and quite clearly), that one point lacks the same discernment. Still, it's your feelings and you've made it clear it's about you and not something you're saying is objectively true.

For curiosity's sake, I wonder what energy you'd read with bisexual men who weren't always attracted to men or never noticed they were; in such cases the term 'bisexual' is used as a reference to attraction 'up until now', where 'now' is obviously in summary of their attraction to both genders over the years. They exist and had you known them when they were only attracted to women, I wonder if you'd still have read feminine energy from them in those years (many, for some) or it really is a case of, 'OrangeAppled, I like men too,' and a flush of visualising/detecting feminine energy.

Is there a way of this feminine energy receding considering it is dynamic? What about the ration of preference, some bisexuals score 1 on the Kinsey Scale and others score 5.

It's very convoluted.



kaleidoscope said:


> Small tangent: It's funny, I just found out _last night_ that the guy I am currently talking to is bisexual. Yay!
> 
> Carry on.


That's the best, isn't it? :laughing:


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

Sorry but as a bisexual person, if you refuse to date someone because they are bisexual then you are a judgmental and ignorant piece of ....you know what!

And if someone is going to judge you for being bi...well, see above statement ^


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

Saying you're not going to date someone because they are bisexual to me is the same as saying you're not going to date them because they're black, or some other unchangeable characteristic.

Being bisexual is not a choice any more than being straight or gay is. Being bisexual does not mean you are "confused". It does not mean you need "both a man and a woman to be satisfied". It does not mean a bisexual is going to leave you for the other gender. Being bisexual does not make you some sort of hypersexual joke (thanks Tila Tequila..ugh). Being bisexual does not mean "Oh she is just into girls for male attention."

Being bisexual does not mean anything at all other than that you like both men and women in a sexual or romantic way, and that's all I have to say about that! If you think otherwise please feel free to let me know so I can put you on Perma-ignore.


----------



## CaboBayCaptain1297 (Mar 19, 2016)

I'm male, and I'd date a bisexual female for one reason; *three-somes*


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

SlyCooper97 said:


> I'm male, and I'd date a bisexual female for one reason; *three-somes*


Ennnghhh dude. That is another HUGE no-no when it comes to interacting with bisexual people. Do I personally love threesomes? Yes. But just because someone is bisexual does NOT mean they want to have a threesome! And to be honest it is rather offensive to make that assumption. 

Just fyi. I'm sure you meant no harm, but I feel like there is a lot of misinformation about us bisexual people out there, so I try to correct it when possible!


----------



## Miskatonic81 (Apr 4, 2015)

Judging from this thread, I'd say being bisexual means being whiny and judgmental about straight people not wanting to fuck them. You'd probably get laid by straight people more if you stopped being so pretentious and full of yourselves.


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

Miskatonic81 said:


> Judging from this thread, I'd say being bisexual means being whiny and judgmental about straight people not wanting to fuck them. You'd probably get laid by straight people more if you stopped being so pretentious and full of yourselves.


Lol wtf? Someone's butthurt bout something


----------



## Miskatonic81 (Apr 4, 2015)

NewMango said:


> Lol wtf? Someone's butthurt bout something


Just trying to help you woo the elusive "straight person". You clearly need some tips. Telling them they are judgmental and ignorant will not get you laid.


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

miskatonic81 said:


> newmango said:
> 
> 
> > lol wtf? Someone's butthurt bout something
> ...


lol


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Miskatonic81 said:


> Judging from this thread, I'd say being bisexual means being whiny and judgmental about straight people not wanting to fuck them. You'd probably get laid by straight people more if you stopped being so pretentious and full of yourselves.


What an odd conclusion to come to for someone with your enneagram lol, very ignorant indeed.

1. Some bisexuals have dated women all their lives and continue to date only women; with full disclosure too ha.
2. Some bisexuals have been with many more women than perhaps you have been with yourself.
3. I can't even be bothered to get started on how you must see life with the rest of the connotations of your statement. I'd wager you barely read through anything except VampyriThrall's post and he has stated at points that he was sharing his anecdotal findings and his feelings on that; just like the heterosexual women who were against dating bisexuals. 

In summary, not everyone gives a shit about dating straight women despite success with it or not; I could easily have dated a couple of attractive women I later found had NO problem with my bisexuality. Some of us are quite happily dating men because that's what bisexuality can be for us, the natural preference for both types where everything appeals to us enough to date to them to begin with.

I don't know about other bisexuals in general but I'm finding I utterly enjoy taking advantage of this fact because it is completely natural to me; I may have scored a 2 recently on the Kinsey Scale but with the right person, I can fully enjoy every aspect about them. Sexuality is a small component of what makes up the individual - that is clearly the essence of the point being argued. There is NO judgement on heterosexuals, the point was to become familiar with the reasoning of anyone who wishes to share their perspective. *Your* feelings giving rise to knee-jerk offence say nothing objectively on the topic of discussing it.

It's time to get over yourself or contribute directly to the discussion at hand.


----------



## Miskatonic81 (Apr 4, 2015)

Nyle said:


> What an odd conclusion to come to for someone with your enneagram lol, very ignorant indeed.
> 
> 1. Some bisexuals have dated women all their lives and continue to date only women; with full disclosure too ha.
> 2. Some bisexuals have been with many more women than perhaps you have been with yourself.
> ...


I think you're completely missing the point. Seeking to dictate the preferences of every straight person is absurd. The question you should be asking is not why won't some straight people date bisexuals, but why you wish every straight person be willing to date bisexuals.

It's this complete lack of self-awareness that made me comment as I did.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

NewMango said:


> Lol wtf? Someone's butthurt bout something


I actually agree with @Miskatonic81

I don't think we are entitled to other's "open mindedness" when it comes to their sexual and romantic choices, If someone doesn't want to date any of us because we are bi, it's a completely legitimate choice.

I am not even sure it's fair to judge them as close minded for that decision alone. Maybe they get easily jealous and don't want the anxiety of having to worry about both genders, they can have a gay sibling that becomes competitive with them whenever a bisexual person is involved, they could even be very liberal themselves but have that as part of their "opposites attract" aspect and prefer someone more conservative then they are (Which someone bisexual might be less likely to be). Sure it's possible that they are just bigots who think we all worship Lucifer in our spare time, but there could be dozens of perfectly reasonable circumstances to make that choice.


----------



## MolaMola (Jul 28, 2012)

RLtropes said:


> I actually agree with @Miskatonic81
> 
> I don't think we are entitled to other's "open mindedness" when it comes to their sexual and romantic choices, If someone doesn't want to date any of us because we are bi, it's a completely legitimate choice.
> 
> I am not even sure it's fair to judge them as close minded for that decision alone. Maybe they get easily jealous and don't want the anxiety of having to worry about both genders, they can have a gay sibling that becomes competitive with them whenever a bisexual person is involved, they could even be very liberal themselves but have that as part of their "opposites attract" aspect and prefer someone more conservative then they are (Which someone bisexual might be less likely to be). Sure it's possible that they are just bigots who think we all worship Lucifer in our spare time, but there could be dozens of perfectly reasonable circumstances to make that choice.


Well, there's always that test. Replace bisexual with "short people". or "Arab people". Or some other unchangeable characteristic. Does that still sound okay to you? Doesn't sound okay to me...


----------



## Aridela (Mar 14, 2015)

I have. 

As long as there's agreement on the nature of the relationship (monogamous/open etc) I see no issue with it. 

Why would it make any difference to me?


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Miskatonic81 said:


> I think you're completely missing the point. Seeking to dictate the preferences of every straight person is absurd. The question you should be asking is not why won't some straight people date bisexuals, but why you wish every straight person be willing to date bisexuals.
> 
> It's this complete lack of self-awareness that made me comment as I did.


My lack of awareness? Your inference is incorrect. If 'your' is a general address to bisexuals, I can't answer that for you since I do not want anything of the sort but can point out that you maybe incorrect in your assumptions here.

I don't care what sexual orientation people are, I am bisexual not pansexual therefore my own sexual orientation is limited or exclusive if you prefer. It is the reasoning that is in discussion, that is all. People can feel whatever they feel, attraction is a complicated mixture of neurochemical influence and upraising; the later is most definitely up for debate and questioning. We do it throughout life, divorcing ourselves from maladaptive reasoning in all matters of the social sphere. No one expects someone to change their attraction but we can have a discussion on whether it makes any sense to make the judgements we do and whether these judgements are based on any congruent arguments. It's all good stating, 'This is how I feel,' it is another matter all together to present an illogical argument and expect this not to reek of bigotry to people.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

NewMango said:


> Well, there's always that test. Replace bisexual with "short people". or "Arab people". Or some other unchangeable characteristic. Does that still sound okay to you? Doesn't sound okay to me...


It sounds silly, but not dating entire groups of people is considered normal. I don't date women. I just don't fall in love with them. Makes me that a misogynist? Of course not, I can't control my feelings! If someone notices that they are turned of by people of certain races, with certain hobbies, or with certain sexualities, _that is just the way it is._ You can judge them all you want, but it won't change their feelings. This is just about dating. Not the other, more rational parts of life.

Are you interested in dating people who are not into you? Do you think people should date people they aren't into, because that's 'fair'?


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

NewMango said:


> Well, there's always that test. Replace bisexual with "short people". or "Arab people". Or some other unchangeable characteristic. Does that still sound okay to you?


...Yes it does. It isn't like the choice to hire someone, vote for someone or befriend someone. Plenty of people have preferences and even deal breakers regarding height, skin color, hair color, facial features, body structures, various personality characteristics and beliefs that might be somewhere between difficult to impossible to change, and from what I gather here, even specific typologies. Sexual preference is never a fair treatment, and yet it's a choice we make with every lover.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

RLtropes said:


> ...Yes it does. It isn't like the choice to hire someone, vote for someone or befriend someone. Plenty of people have preferences and even deal breakers regarding height, skin color, hair color, facial features, body structures, various personality characteristics and beliefs that might be somewhere between difficult to impossible to change, and from what I gather here, even specific typologies. Sexual preference is never a fair treatment, and yet it's a choice we make with every lover.


Yeah I've made this argument before where people take exception to favouring certain physical features that can be directly related to ethnicity as being racist.

It's not the preference that is of issue, that is difficult to change indeed and expecting that to happen can be extremely naive, it is the reasoning that is problematic - particularly preached as reflective of reality or logical.


----------



## Miskatonic81 (Apr 4, 2015)

Nyle said:


> My lack of awareness? Your inference is incorrect. If 'your' is a general address to bisexuals, I can't answer that for you since I do not want anything of the sort but can point out that you maybe incorrect in your assumptions here.
> 
> I don't care what sexual orientation people are, I am bisexual not pansexual therefore my own sexual orientation is limited or exclusive if you prefer. It is the reasoning that is in discussion, that is all. People can feel whatever they feel, attraction is a complicated mixture of neurochemical influence and upraising; the later is most definitely up for debate and questioning. We do it throughout life, divorcing ourselves from maladaptive reasoning in all matters of the social sphere. No one expects someone to change their attraction but we can have a discussion on whether it makes any sense to make the judgements we do and whether these judgements are based on any congruent arguments. It's all good stating, 'This is how I feel,' it is another matter all together to present an illogical argument and expect this not to reek of bigotry to people.


To be more specific, 'your' was directed to the thread in general and the sense I was getting from it, not necessarily you in particular. Of course discussion of any topic is fine. My input was to comment on the smugness I was seeing, and the tendency I saw to equate preference with bigotry.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

@Stultum hits the nail right on the head: Who you are attracted too is not something you can easily control or change, so how do you judge that on the grounds of not discriminating against things you can not control or change?


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Stultum said:


> It sounds silly, but not dating entire groups of people is considered normal. I don't date women. I just don't fall in love with them. Makes me that a misogynist? Of course not, I can't control my feelings! If someone notices that they are turned of by people of certain races, with certain hobbies, or with certain sexualities, _that is just the way it is._ You can judge them all you want, but it won't change their feelings. This is just about dating. Not the other, more rational parts of life.
> 
> Are you interested in dating people who are not into you? Do you think people should date people they aren't into, because that's 'fair'?


That's not really comparable. You're heterosexual. You're attracted to men. I don't think many lesbians would take it personally that most straight women don't date women  Bisexuals are into men and women, so a relationship with one isn't simply theoretical. The attraction, or lack of, on the part of many monosexuals, is rooted in stereotypes that imply a non-bisexual partner is somehow "better".


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

RLtropes said:


> ...Yes it does. It isn't like the choice to hire someone, vote for someone or befriend someone. Plenty of people have preferences and even deal breakers regarding height, skin color, hair color, facial features, body structures, various personality characteristics and beliefs that might be somewhere between difficult to impossible to change, and from what I gather here, even specific typologies. Sexual preference is never a fair treatment, and yet it's a choice we make with every lover.


So because something is widespread, it should be ignored, encouraged, or tolerated? If they had no implications for the treatment of bisexual people, then sure, it wouldn't matter much. Except, we're talking about relationships, and they're going to affect others, regardless. I don't believe all "preferences" are natural, exist in a vacuum, or are benign.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

WamphyriThrall said:


> That's not really comparable. You're heterosexual. You're attracted to men. I don't think many lesbians would take it personally that most straight women don't date women  Bisexuals are into men and women, so a relationship with one isn't simply theoretical. The attraction, or lack of, on the part of many monosexuals, is rooted in stereotypes that imply a non-bisexual partner is somehow "better".


That's certainly possible. But I think that it's very comparable to someone who gets to know someone over the internet, falls in love, then meets them in person, and notices that the other person has a mannerism that they didn't know about which is a turnoff - people have very weird dealbreakers. I myself know that some men won't enter a relationship with me just because I don't shave my legs, because I make jokes, or because they don't like women who have not much in the butt department. I don't blame them. I don't try to change their minds. It's a feeling.

Yes, the idea that monosexuals are better than bisexuals is stupid. But some people can be legitimately turned off by the idea that their partner likes both sexes. Is that automatically bigotry? There's probably some bigotry involved. Some think that bisexuals are more likely to cheat, but statistics don't support that. Some is simple homophobia. But there's also just random human like and dislike.

But well... even as a heterosexual, homophobia would be a major turn off for me.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> So because something is widespread, it should be ignored or tolerated?


What is the alternative, arguing with them until you convince them to be attracted to you? And are you going to argue with absolutely everyone, or just the ones you find attractive? How are going to filter and eliminate the ones you do not find attractive? Is your libido so pure an enlightened that you can honestly say all your turn on's and turn off's are exclusive to things that are malleable?


----------



## HermioneG (Jul 1, 2015)

Nyle said:


> 1. Would you date a bisexual guy?
> 2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?[/INDENT]


1. yes
2. Maybe not immediately but I personally like to have those kinds of conversations before doing it. If she wants to know your history, she should ask. And if she asks, you should be honest. Could be a deal breaker, but good to know that right away before everyone starts falling in love.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

RLtropes said:


> What is the alternative, arguing with them until you convince them to be attracted to you? And are you going to argue with absolutely everyone, or just the ones you find attractive? How are going to filter and eliminate the ones you do not find attractive? Is your libido so pure an enlightened that you can honestly say all your turn on's and turn off's are exclusive to things that are malleable?


Presenting them with alternative information (someone who has only known of bisexuals through horror stories, for example) and questioning their preferences? I can't force someone to be attracted to me, but that's not what this is about. I'm not all bisexual (men). This isn't so I can get laid (ironic how bisexuals are assumed to have it twice as good as either straight or gay people, when they have to dodge so many landmines). 

Enlightened? Well, being bi/pan, I seem to have less hard and fixed boundaries than many, but even I'm open to learning. There are few dealbeakers that involve things like age, race, height, or what have you. They don't tell about a person's character or beliefs. And I'm not so haughty to assume I'm without my own prejudices. 

I don't think it's coincidence that many who had positive answers in the thread were bisexual, themselves.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Presenting them with alternative information (someone who has only known of bisexuals through horror stories, for example) and questioning their preferences?


I would argue with you, but I am way too amused by the idea that we have horror stories.

**Sits on WamphyriThrall's lap**
_Would you tell us the story of the wicked bisexual?_


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

People with blonde hair: would you ever date somebody who likes blondes *and* redheads?


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

RLtropes said:


> I would argue with you, but I am way too amused by the idea that we have horror stories.
> 
> **Sits on WamphyriThrall's lap**
> _Would you tell us the story of the wicked bisexual?_


----------



## Jamaia (Dec 17, 2014)

Simpson17866 said:


> People with blonde hair: would you ever date somebody who likes blondes *and* redheads?


No, I'd be forever insecure . Would not be able to relax when ever they go out with their redhead friends, "just friends", sure...


----------



## The CW (Mar 23, 2016)

I wouldn't mind at all :wink:


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

And to completely ignore my own logic, I will see your:



WamphyriThrall said:


>


And raise you:










To the argument part: I do see your point, people conservative enough to take issue with the general taboo of "sexual deviancy" might throw us in the same bin they use to burn fantasy novels and Rocky Horror DVDs (Or is that my own prejudice against them?). It is possible that there are more of that population then I would give them credit for, recent political realities have certainly demonstrated that the anti-liberal cultural backlash is all too easy to underestimate. My own inclination is to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that's a small minority, but I don't know the actual numbers. Are there any survey findings asking one out of how many Americans think bisexual people worship the devil whenever there's spare time between orgies and goat molestation?


----------



## heroindisguise (May 6, 2014)

After reading this thread, I feel like there're a lot of unfair accusations and assumptions made about people who don't wish to date bisexuals. It almost reads as if "if you reject dating someone because of their sexuality, you're a close minded bigoted person who deserves to be demonised. At the same time, we should all ignore the meaning of personal preference because personal preferences are something that should hurt no one, ever." Indeed, if I enjoy healthy thin people instead of obese people I should be labelled as fatphobic. Sentiments like "it's an uphill battle for bisexuals" and writing off people's opinions by asking questions like "are you part of the LGBT community" honestly smells like butt hurt feelings and hate for anyone who rejects bisexuality, regardless of their reasons. There is no consideration on the end of the "victim" yet they asked to be considered. There is a whiff of self entitlement and hypocrisy here. Even if most of these "straight people" are indeed bigoted or prejudiced, whatever you'd like to call it, assigning NEGATIVE sentiments and attributes to anyone who does not wish to date bisexuals is an act of prejudice itself, since it does not consider said straight person as an individual at all. 

On the same note, the conversation mentioned in the OP only goes to show how the importance of one's sexual orientation is a personal opinion. While OP might think their sexual orientation is not of importance, the other person clearly thinks so. Imo there isn't a right or wrong. However, by society's standards majority of people will assume someone is straight by default, and will likely continue to make that assumption if there is no disclosure. In other words, most people are likely to feel deceived after finding out that the sexual orientation of their partner is not as initially thought - especially if their partner did not make an effort to clarify even when they had the opportunity to and continued to mislead them. Disclosing one's sexual orientation, especially when it deviates from the norm, will be convenient for saving all the hurt feelings when the former situation arises. It also weeds out all the people who aren't interested because of whatever reason they have. Isn't this the reason why dating profiles have stuff like sexual preferences and personal interests anyway?


----------



## Crimson Ash (May 16, 2012)

The objective of this thread was to try and understand the reasoning behind I dare say many women saying they do not wish to date bisexual men or upon finding out a man is bisexual suddenly lose interest.

The arguments I stumbled across both here and in my own experiences revolve around some heavy insecurities that do not seem to be able to be reasoned out properly.

We all have our specifics when it comes to physical attraction and attraction. I myself find certain groups of people unattractive and find others more attractive. But these specifics are based around physical characteristics.

Why many here are asking the question from those women who state they do not wish to date bisexuals is because it is not an inherent physical trait. 

I can quite easily pass as a straight male and in fact quite a few of my male friends consider me more manly than themselves.

So while the argument of "people are allowed to have their preferences" holds water when it comes to physical traits because attraction is a complex mix of very many things, I have yet to find a solid reasoning behind why some blatantly refuse to even entertain the thought of a bisexual male.


The whole masculine/feminine energy argument is ridiculous in my opinion. People come in all shades and characteristics and one aspect is not exclusive to one gender in particular.


----------



## Hei (Jul 8, 2014)

A lot of Gay men do not even want anything to do with other guys that identify as Bisexual. Coming from a community of people which know of discrimination and should be more accepting. I cannot really imagine the average Heterosexual woman being very accepting.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

heroindisguise said:


> After reading this thread, I feel like there're a lot of unfair accusations and assumptions made about people who don't wish to date bisexuals. It almost reads as if "if you reject dating someone because of their sexuality, you're a close minded bigoted person who deserves to be demonised.


 Is there any other reason why someone would reject someone else for their orientation?

I'm an aromantic white guy. If I was heteroromantic and I spat in the face of a black woman who asked me out, would it really make anything better for me to say "I'm not rejecting you because you're black, I'm rejecting you because I know you're going to cheat on me because blacks can't be trusted not to cheat on their partners" ? Or perhaps "I just don't feel comfortable being with somebody who'd been with a black guy before me" ?

I really don't see how any of this could be mistaken for reasonable ways of treating human beings.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Crimson Ash said:


> The objective of this thread was to try and understand the reasoning behind I dare say many women saying they do not wish to date bisexual men or upon finding out a man is bisexual suddenly lose interest.
> 
> The arguments I stumbled across both here and in my own experiences revolve around some heavy insecurities that do not seem to be able to be reasoned out properly.
> 
> ...


Isn't personality at least as important as physical traits though? Nobody I've dated ever came with a list like:
By the way, I:
- Always watch football on Saturday night.
- Don't participate in silly activities.
- Like to be with with you whenever you do something even if I don't like the activity.
- Have a lot of trouble accepting help.
- Like so-bad-it's-good movies.
- Sometimes brush my teeth while in the shower.
- Believe in God.
- Am afraid of chickens.

But you find that out while you are dating. _Before_ you enter into a relationship. Same with sexual orientation.

I think 'Like both men and women' fits on there as well. For many people, it's a plus, for others, it's a deal-breaker, for most, it doesn't matter. (Depending on where you live in the bisexual case: There certainly is some prejudice there.)


----------



## Hei (Jul 8, 2014)

The fact that a potential significant other can find themselves attracted to people regardless of gender should _NOT_ be an inherent turn-off or deal breaker.

If all areas of compatibility between two people are satisfied (personalities, interests, passions, appearance), the only reason for one person being hung up is personal insecurity. The issue is _NOT_ Bisexuality. 

Bisexuality is: not a personality, not a habit, not a vice, not femininity or masculinity. *No Bisexuals* is _NOT_ a personal preference, it _IS_ discrimination. If one cannot see that for themselves substitute Race. Straight / Gay guys or girls only stems from personal insecurity.

Fear of competition, fear of cheating... even with the Bisexual individual at hand having nothing in their history to warrant such suspicions of them. That is personal insecurity. Wether an insecure person owns up to themselves and others about it, or instead attempts to veil harboured discrimination as "just personal preference" is up to them.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Simpson17866 said:


> Is there any other reason why someone would reject someone else for their orientation?
> 
> I really don't see how any of this could be mistaken for reasonable ways of treating human beings.


Are you suggesting that female(s) that are not turned on / attracted to - male on male pornography are ''bigots,'' (i.e., and/or mistreating them).. (?) 

:ssad:


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Stultum said:


> Isn't personality at least as important as physical traits though? Nobody I've dated ever came with a list like:
> By the way, I:
> - Always watch football on Saturday night.
> - Don't participate in silly activities.
> ...


Bisexuality doesn't tell you anything about a person's personality, though :/ I'm sure if the majority of men (or even a sizable portion) started writing straight women off for being straight, there'd be some grumbling, and rightly so (a few might start calling themselves something else)! The closest example might be how some western men are spurning western women and dating Asians from overseas. Already, from casual bloggers to feminists, there are less-than-positive reactions from women back home. The difference is these men blame women for "changing" and becoming "manly", rather than some genetic trait. 

I don't see wanting to be seen and treated as an individual as "entitlement" and "butthurt". Think about it: how many straight members have been rejected for... being straight? If it were commonplace, yeah, there would be some unhappy feelings. People take their experiences for granted. So really, it's no surprise that the majority of bisexuals aren't out, and especially if they're in an opposite sex relationship.

Perhaps this is why I found Brokeback such a fascinating movie? The two main characters didn't see themselves as bi or gay men, although they'd be labeled as such today. Because of circumstances, they had to hide that part of themselves from the public eye. In the end, it wasn't sustainable, and they lost everything.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> Are you suggesting that female(s) that are not turned on / attracted to - male on male pornography are ''bigots,'' (i.e., and/or mistreating them).. (?)
> 
> :ssad:


 What does that have to do with a woman rejecting a biromantic man who is interested in *her* instead of in some other man/woman?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Crimson Ash said:


> The objective of this thread was to try and understand the reasoning behind I dare say many women saying they do not wish to date bisexual men or upon finding out a man is bisexual suddenly lose interest.
> 
> The arguments I stumbled across both here and in my own experiences revolve around some heavy insecurities that do not seem to be able to be reasoned out properly.
> 
> ...


I think most straight(s) / other female(s) that will not date bisexual male(s) are referring to sexual arousal + attraction (&) thus, 'engaging in physical act(s),' + coitus with another male - this can be unattractive to some - their reasoning is not _flawed_.

Bottom male(s) also take on the sexual role of female in the sac; which - innately; some female(s) are not drawn to.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Bisexuality doesn't tell you anything about a person's personality, though :/ I'm sure if the majority of men (or even a sizable portion) started writing straight women off for being straight, there'd be some grumbling, and rightly so (a few might start calling themselves something else)! The closest example might be how some western men are spurning western women and dating Asians from overseas. Already, from casual bloggers to feminists, there are less-than-positive reactions from women back home. The difference is these men blame women for "changing" and becoming "manly", rather than some genetic trait.
> 
> I don't see wanting to be seen and treated as an individual as "entitlement" and "butthurt". Think about it: how many straight members have been rejected for... being straight? If it were commonplace, yeah, there would be some unhappy feelings. People take their experiences for granted. So really, it's no surprise that the majority of bisexuals aren't out, and especially if they're in an opposite sex relationship.
> 
> Perhaps this is why I found Brokeback such a fascinating movie? The two main characters didn't see themselves as bi or gay men, although they'd be labeled as such today. Because of circumstances, they had to hide that part of themselves from the public eye. In the end, it wasn't sustainable, and they lost everything.


I know you aren't replying to my post for most of your post, but I'd like to say that identity is very much part of your personality as I see it. There's one thing all bisexuals have in common: They like both men and women. If that preference is not a personality trait, then I don't know what is. It's one of many.

I wouldn't want to date a man who doesn't like the way western women are. I'm shaped by western culture and feel comfortable in it. If he likes eastern culture more, he's free to date eastern women. If he does it because he is a sexist ass, I _really_ don't want to date him. I like to date people who like me.

There is a difference between 'Your feelings are based on air' and 'Your feelings are wrong'.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

The London Watch said:


> A lot of Gay men do not even want anything to do with other guys that identify as Bisexual. Coming from a community of people which know of discrimination and should be more accepting. I cannot really imagine the average Heterosexual woman being very accepting.


The difference seems to be that a lot of gay men are at least willing to fuck a bi guy (some even prefer them - something about being perceived as more masculine/straight...), but draw the line when it comes to serious relationships. Some fear they'll want an "easier life" with a woman, but at the same time, more-or-less see them as gay guys in-denial...



Catwalk said:


> I think most straight(s) / other female(s) that will not date bisexual male(s) are referring to sexual arousal + attraction (&) thus, 'engaging in physical act(s),' + coitus with another male - this can be unattractive to some - their reasoning is not _flawed_.


No, but viewing male-male sex as being dirty, unusual, or somehow having an effect on one's manhood is...


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Simpson17866 said:


> What does that have to do with a woman rejecting a biromantic man who is interested in *her* instead of in some other man/woman?


(Post #1) is addressing Bisexuality; not Biromanticism - bisexuality is physical attribute(s) - demonstrably; in order for a bisexual to ''bi,''-sexual he must engage in physical act(s) of coitus / other physical-arousal(s) with other males.

(X, Y, Z) individual can reject said sexuality out of lack of attraction.

Although; to address ''Biromanticism,'' I have yet to see a strong_ contra_-argument (via) my proposal of* Biromantic homosexual(s)* making _monogamous _deal(s) with ''heterosexuals,'' (via) sexual orientation disclosure.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

WamphyriThrall said:


> No, but viewing male-male sex as being dirty, unusual, or somehow having an effect on one's manhood is...


You claimed; ('socialized / cultural-view(s) of 'manhood,') are flawed ---> ''Nothing to do with feminine / masculine,'' - however, claimed (X, Y, Z) individual acquire(s) manhood [masculinized] trait(s) anyways. 

You argument appear(s) inconsistent [hypocritical] (i.e., _critiqued_ to your _subjective / personalized_ narrative of ''manhood,''). 

As for the following assertion(s) of ''dirty / unusual,'' none of this was implied - although, it is not uncommon for certain individual(s) to be turned off at thought(s) of (X) partner engaging in physical act(s) with certain being(s) / aspect(s).

Ex; (1) --> specimen(s) admit(s) to have sexual attraction(s) / coitus with animal(s). 

''Unusual / dirty,'' - are meaningless (via) the discourse.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> (Post #1) is addressing Bisexuality; not Biromanticism - bisexuality is physical attribute(s) - demonstrably; in order for a bisexual to ''bi,''-sexual he must engage in physical act(s) of coitus / other physical-arousal(s) with other males.
> 
> (X, Y, Z) individual can reject said sexuality out of lack of attraction.
> 
> Although; to address ''Biromanticism,'' I have yet to see a strong_ contra_-argument (via) my proposal of* Biromantic homosexual(s)* making _monogamous _deal(s) with ''heterosexuals,'' (via) sexual orientation disclosure.


 Very well then, if we are talking primarily about sexual orientation rather than romantic orientation:

Should a heterosexual woman reasonably be expected to turn down a heterosexual man simply because she's not sexually turned on by the other women that he's been with before her?


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Simpson17866 said:


> What does that have to do with a woman rejecting a biromantic man who is interested in *her* instead of in some other man/woman?



That's essentially it. He's interested in you, wants to be with you in all the ways a straight guy would be into you.
@Stultum

Yes, personality is definitely important. That's not the point since personality is a filter that can be applied to everyone, the discussion is on how attraction changes. If it wasn't, no one would have mentioned the flaws in thinking bisexuals are more prone to cheating, etc. since this is another attribute of character and personality. 

We can discuss the idea of bisexuality affecting personality (this one makes me laugh at the absurdity) but go ahead: tell me how my bisexuality has affected my personality.

Bear in mind I don't think I was bisexual throughout my life. If I had to pinpoint when I started noticing bicuriosity at all, I'd say about hmm 5/6 years ago and by that stage I was no longer a teenager. So go on, I'm very curious about how I've missed the effect it's had on my personality.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Simpson17866 said:


> Very well then, if we are talking primarily about sexual orientation rather than romantic orientation:
> 
> Should a heterosexual woman reasonably be expected to turn down a heterosexual man simply because she's not sexually turned on by the other women that he's been with before her?


There are people who only want a relationship with a virgin.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Nyle said:


> @Stultum
> 
> Yes, personality is definitely important. That's not the point since personality is a filter that can be applied to everyone, the discussion is on how attraction changes. If it wasn't, no one would have mentioned the flaws in thinking bisexuals are more prone to cheating, etc. since this is another attribute of character and personality.
> 
> ...


I'll bet you anything that your bisexuality has caused you to like both men and women.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Simpson17866 said:


> Should a heterosexual woman reasonably be expected to turn down a heterosexual man simply because she's not sexually turned on by the other women that he's been with before her?


The malfunction(s) are that ''heterosexual(s),'' are attracted in the opposition(s) - (X) straight female can refuse to date a bisexual / homosexual male for lack-of attraction(s) to certain personality / character attribute(s) pertaining specifically to bisexual male(s) -- [*traits*]

_Ex; -->
_
Sexual arousal / attraction(s) to other male(s) - she may find said act(s) or traits displeasing / disgusting / or a ''turn-off,'' - similarily to individual(s) not attracted to transsexual(s).


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Nyle said:


> In general, when it comes to sex you are potentially sleeping with all the sexual partners your sexual partner has had. This is precisely why I have no problem with this discussion at all. What I think lacks sense is the idea that seems to be suggested underneath all the tangents we are taking - the individual you meet is more likely to be responsible if they're heterosexual.


Responsible meaning they used condoms?

Condoms don't (full proof) protect you from several STD's, in reality. And, as you brought up, condoms often break.

Also, as was brought up before, where the individual falls on the spectrum would matter to me. If the person has had a lot of relationships with men, they're less likely to have been using condoms at some point, since condom sex sucks and you generally stop using them within committed (so far as you know) relationships.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Veggie said:


> Why are asexuals and virgins being so condescending [about heterosexuals] in this thread?
> 
> This is probably an issue that would more so affect people actually out there having sex and actively dating and what not, right?


 Probably the same reason heterosexuals are being so condescending about bisexuals.


----------



## FourLeafCloafer (Aug 5, 2014)

Veggie said:


> Why are asexuals and virgins being so condescending in this thread?
> 
> This is probably an issue that would more so affect people actually out there having sex and actively dating and what not, right?


Yup. But I hadn't even considered that for many people, it isn't natural to have sexual conversation to come up in conversation long before they get into a relationship, simply because they take less time before they commit themselves to it.


----------



## Communal Soap (Jul 6, 2014)

Veggie said:


> Again, stigma doesn't magically create statistics.


It does actually. Science has constantly been used to promote oppression, eg scientific rascism, scientific sexism etc.


koalaroo said:


> Having sexual partners from a high risk group makes you a higher risk by association, sadly.
> 
> A gay or bisexual guy who has had sex with only two gays guys is higher risk than a straight guy who has had sex with only two straight women.


What kind of sex? What kind of protection was used? What if they're lying? What if they're sex ed was shoddy? Who did the women sleep with before him?


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Simpson17866 said:


> Probably the same reason heterosexuals are being so condescending about bisexuals.


That isn't really a direct correlation. I'm saying I think about these things because I'm out there doing this stuff and so I have my methodologies when it comes to assessing risk factors and determining what is and isn't worth investment. (And, if you recall (which you probably don't, because, ironically, as much as you seem to be for the rights of the "individual" it's pretty obvious that I'm merely a projection to you of whatever you've, like, decided "bigot" to be) I've never said that I would write a bisexual dude off completely or that I wouldn't take him into consideration).

So yea, I'm not being condescending... (also, fyi, stating statistics isn't condescension either).

Meanwhile, you're kind of saying I know you are but what am I or something.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Stultum said:


> Yup. But I hadn't even considered that for many people, it isn't natural to have sexual conversation to come up in conversation long before they get into a relationship, simply because they take less time before they commit themselves to it.


Sexual conversations DO come up long before relationships for me. I do tend to take long time before I commit myself to a relationship.

Which is why I'm less likely to "care" about a person in that initial conversation.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Nyle said:


> Moving on. @*koalaroo*, you mention only dating Caucasians and Asian or Middle-Eastern men. I can understand your logic on the latter races, in that there is a culture of monogamy and virginity in certain countries that definitely doesn't exist in the UK or US for example, yet it only takes one sexual encounter to get HIV or an STI.
> 
> 
> * *
> ...


Please stop making shit up and making arguments for me that I'm not even making (or even remotely talking about.)

Men of descent of these populations in the US that I tend to date are at lower risk as a group and as a group are a lower risk pool of sexual partners. There aren't hard-and-fast CDC statistics for men of Middle Eastern descent as they tend to be lumped in with the White/Caucasian group. In the CDC statistical conglomerates, the white population is used as a baseline. The only racial group in the US that has less incidence of most STIs is the Asian group. 

Black? Latino? Pacific Islander? Indigenous populations? 

They all had at least 2x the risk of having certain bacterial STIs as their white counterparts. Just perusing the 2013 incidence and prevalence reports, you can find information like black men, for instance, having 8x the incidence of chlamydia as white men do. That's scary shit. For actual foreign-born men residing in the US? I'd be quite careful. Certain Eastern European countries have horrible rates of STIs. Certain Asian countries have horrible rates of STIs. There's often not enough data about Middle Eastern countries to tell anything.

Now that we've cleared that up, I'm moving right along.

If you're someone who had past sexual activity in a high risk group, you are at higher risk for having one of these infections just by the fact that you've been sexually active within that group. I had the quadravelent HPV vaccine for what it's worth, which reduces my risk of contracting high risk HPV infections that are most often found circulating in white populations. The reason there have been subsequent changes to said HPV vaccine (there's now one that's 9-valent) is because the original quadravelent vaccine didn't include the HPV strains circulating most commonly in black, Hispanic or Asian populations.

You're going to think I'm really racist for saying this, but I'm unlikely to date and then become sexually active with a man from my preferred group who has had and likes black women as sexual partners. Want to know why? It has nothing to do with "ew black pussy is gross! I can't believe he once stuck his dick there" (vagina is a vagina whatever the race, so ...); it has everything to do with the fact that almost 1/2 of black women in the US have genital herpes. Furthermore, I'm not vaccinated against the strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer in the black community!

I don't want to date or have sex with someone who has in the past or may again in the future have sex with high risk groups, because their affiliation as a sex partner with that group makes them hypothetically a high risk sex partner by association with that group alone. I would like to hope that my partner is monogamous with me, I'm not naive enough to believe that even a person I view as supremely upright at present won't stray in the future.



Communal Soap said:


> What kind of sex? What kind of protection was used? What if they're lying? What if they're sex ed was shoddy? Who did the women sleep with before him?


These would all be the kinds of things that I would actually discuss with a potential sexual partner. And again, condoms are not protective against several STIs (herpes, syphilis and HPV come to mind). That said, me almost automatically eliminating several groups of people makes it easier to have these conversations openly and honestly without accusations of "boo homophobe" or "boo racist" when I bring up the statistics in a candid conversation.

Anyone who's going to lie to me as their partner about their sexual history is a reprehensible person, so if I found out they'd lied about their sexual past, they'd be out of my life in a heartbeat because it's obvious they have little concern for my health. Anyone who's going to scream "boo homophobe" at me for bringing up the high rates of STIs in MSM populations is not the kind of person I would be able to have stimulating intellectual discussions with.

And no, my precautions aren't going to make it so that I don't contract an STI, but having sexual partners from lower risk populations means I am reducing my risks.


----------



## Spiren (May 12, 2016)

Let me summarise my viewpoint, I can't be bothered getting into everyone's clauses for every sentence expressed; particularly where it's going around in circles.

1. There is potential anyone you engage in sexual relations has a STI, whether there has been condom use or not. (If I recall correctly, it was already addressed several posts back that condoms don't protect against everything, it's with this in mind that the discussion (on my part anyway) has continued).

2. Regular sexual health checks are important, lack of knowledge isn't an excuse but something to prepare for.

3. Address this before sexual encounters; your protocols are applicable to all.

4. There is nothing wrong with requesting proof, etc. beforehand. (In some places, it is regular practice and I'm not referring to the LGBT community here either. Certain countries demand pre-marital health checks, for example in the UAE.) Tests taken are a factor of this conversation and something for you to determine.

5. A higher risk maybe present for certain backgrounds - that doesn't mean that the odds won't align against you if you were to go out and have sex with some random person, and we're back to #1-4.

* I've not denied the stats once but the application of these stats.

Anything beyond that is your personal choice to do whatever the fuck you want to lol, I have no interest in discussing that.

I think what a lot of people seem to be assuming, particularly you @Veggie, is that there is some agenda.

Well nahh, I wanted a good discussion on things I may have missed. I realise this can be an emotional topic for some. Having a good discussion on something doesn't mean there's an agenda though; stop prioritising feelings to the extent there is insinuation others are motivated by this.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Veggie said:


> Sexual conversations DO come up long before relationships for me. I do tend to take long time before I commit myself to a relationship.
> 
> Which is why I'm less likely to "care" about a person in that initial conversation.


That to me is one of the many screening conversations.


----------



## Tazzie (Jun 5, 2016)

*There are two parts to this thread:

1. Would you date a bisexual guy?
2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?*

1) Sure.
2) To answer the question, to me no, do it when and if you want. But honestly I would like to know if he bi or not. He can bring it up if he wants to and/or feels comfterable. I might be able to tell anyway and if I really want to know then I'll ask.


----------



## jade09 (May 5, 2016)

*1. Would you date a bisexual guy?*

Yeah, why not. As long as I like him and he likes me, what does it matter?


*2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?*

I guess it would be nice to bring it up, since I'd think most of straight girls won't expect their partner to be bisexual. I think I would be a lot more surprised to find out later on in the relationship. I think the only thing I would be stressing about is that I would have to look out for both hot men and women to keep him away from... On the other hand, I would be pretty flattered that he was attracted to me out of all men and women!


----------



## heroindisguise (May 6, 2014)

ai.tran.75 said:


> Would you say it's fair then if I were to find a guy to be attractive but then stop dating him the moment I found out he's biracial ?
> 
> with the case of sexual orientation- it's more along the line as "I really like you , but I won't date you bc I found out you like more than one gender "
> I'm straight - I don't think I've ever told any of my partner
> ...


I find that there're a lot of underlying assumptions on why someone wouldn't date a bisexual. Surely there could be a deeper reason besides 'because you are attracted to more than 1 gender?'. Even when this is the common excuse given, it's hardly the reason WHY someone would not choose to date a bisexual. It can be for biphobic reasons, but there're other reasons that could be related to health, religion, even compatibility due to different worldviews. I honestly can't conceive how ALL of the reason must be irrational, bigoted or immediately invalidated, even if they are the majority. This almost feels like crucifying someone if they choose not to date a bisexual, except with the word bigot. 

I might not immediately drop the idea of dating someone who is biracial, but I would if I find that due to our racial backgrounds we are deeply incompatible and it's just too much trouble to see each other. It's the equivalent of me seeking to date someone that is of the same race and culture as me because there isn't such a large gap for me to bridge. I'm also not about to pretend that I'm not a product of my environment. Just to clarify, I'm not saying there can't be exceptions but really, "exceptions" are called that for a reason. They just don't occur often enough.

Like I've said, most of us tend to assume someone else is straight unless we ourselves are otherwise - which is why we don't bring up the subject.


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

heroindisguise said:


> I find that there're a lot of underlying assumptions on why someone wouldn't date a bisexual. Surely there could be a deeper reason besides 'because you are attracted to more than 1 gender?'. Even when this is the common excuse given, it's hardly the reason WHY someone would not choose to date a bisexual. It can be for biphobic reasons, but there're other reasons that could be related to health, religion, even compatibility due to different worldviews. I honestly can't conceive how ALL of the reason must be irrational, bigoted or immediately invalidated, even if they are the majority. This almost feels like crucifying someone if they choose not to date a bisexual, except with the word bigot.
> 
> I might not immediately drop the idea of dating someone who is biracial, but I would if I find that due to our racial backgrounds we are deeply incompatible and it's just too much trouble to see each other. It's the equivalent of me seeking to date someone that is of the same race and culture as me because there isn't such a large gap for me to bridge. I'm also not about to pretend that I'm not a product of my environment. Just to clarify, I'm not saying there can't be exceptions but really, "exceptions" are called that for a reason. They just don't occur often enough.
> 
> Like I've said, most of us tend to assume someone else is straight unless we ourselves are otherwise - which is why we don't bring up the subject.


Fair to say one personality can change or create discomfort in a relationship - but if the matter is sexual orientation or race then why would it matter ? I could never enter a relationship with somebody who's extremely sexist but you see I am bias against that trait ... Same goes for those who refuse to date somebody bisexual- it's an assumption that being in a bisexual relationship would be different than one that a straight individual could provide . I'm not comparing those who won't date a bisexual to somebody who is over the top biphobic but they are bias towards the kind to a certain degree 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

koalaroo said:


> Having sexual partners from a high risk group makes you a higher risk by association, sadly.
> 
> A gay or bisexual guy who has had sex with only two gays guys is higher risk than a straight guy who has had sex with only two straight women.


You are a comedian, aren't you? 

Let's say a bisexual guy has had sex with two guys in his entire life, both of whom were virgins before that.
Or a bisexual guy who has had sex with two guys who weren't virgins but they always used a condom.
Then there's a straight guy who has had sex 8 straight girls, both of whom were not virgins and had had sex without a condom before having sex with this straight guy 

Which one do you think is going to give you an STD? 

Maybe remind yourself every once in a while that a person is an _individual_ with their own_ individual_ situation, they are not the 'collective' that they belong to.

Also make sure to never be friends with black people if you don't want to die because we all know the gun crime /homicide rates in their community. xo


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

heroindisguise said:


> It can be for biphobic reasons, but there're other reasons that could be related to health, religion, even compatibility due to different worldviews.


No... it cannot be for other reasons.

1, Health - These people who are saying they would not date a bisexual are saying that they wouldn't date a bisexual at all, even if this bisexual guy was a conservative virgin who planned to be monogamous all his life. The 'health concern' is an excuse for people's homophobia / biphobia.
2, Religion - If you are opposed to bisexuality / homosexuality / have negative feelings or prejudices on people of those orientations based on your religious beliefs then you are homophobic. That's literally the definition of homophobia and the most common cause of it in the world. It's no different from someone saying 'My parents are Nazis so they raised me to be a Nazi so it's okay for me not to date Jewish people because my beliefs say it's wrong'. 
3, Worldviews - How does sexual orientation have anything to do with 'worldviews'? Gays / bisexuals are not a political ideology, they just like the same sex. 

If you choose to not date someone based on the sole fact that they are a bisexual, you _are_ a bigot, even if this is hard for you to believe. Maybe gain some self awareness instead of living in denial.

I also don't see how there is a 'large gap' between you and someone who is biracial. There is not going to be a large gap between you and your half-black friend who lives down the street and went to the same school as you. You probably don't realize this but you _are_ a racist or perhaps incredibly ignorant and misinformed if you seriously think there is a 'large gap' between you and someone else just because they are biracial.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> Responsible meaning they used condoms?
> 
> Condoms don't (full proof) protect you from several STD's, in reality. And, as you brought up, condoms often break.


Exactly, so you should never have sex _at all_. 











Keep up with the bullshitting and the transparent, nitpicky excuses though! You and that _endangered_ koala chick in this thread are definitely going to become politicians someday.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Exactly, so you should never have sex _at all_.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I was considering joining a nunnery at a point, lol. I believe I said that I was abstinent by choice for a while.

I'm not bullshitting either. It's funny how transparent _you _are. You're just looking to start sh*t and get riled up about something and entertain your inner Cheerio. I'm actually sitting here laughing imagining you marching with your LGBT pride flag protesting, what, exactly? My vagina? 

I remember you trolling for a fight the other night on an unrelated thread too. 

I'll add for the millionth time that I've never said that I wouldn't date a bisexual dude. But if I'm not even allowed to admit that these concerns act as factors in my willingness or not to do so, then decision made I guess. No way would I date a person who thought that then, because _they're_ the bigot.


big·ot.


[ˈbiɡət]







NOUN



1.a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions: 

I thought maybe the @Nyle was legitimately interested in why there may be cause for concern or what it is exactly that would make a woman reluctant about his situation. So. You know, maybe it's this? But if it's really just to tell her how wrong she is, then I'd imagine that he probably has a hard time with women period, regardless of his sexual orientation.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> You're just looking to start sh*t and get riled up about something and entertain your inner Cheerio. I'm actually sitting here laughing imagining you marching with your LGBT pride flag protesting, what, exactly? My vagina?












Make sure to get a psychiatry appointment along with your STD appointments.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> 1, Health - These people who are saying they would not date a bisexual are saying that they wouldn't date a bisexual at all, even if this bisexual guy was a conservative virgin who planned to be monogamous all his life. The 'health concern' is an excuse for people's homophobia / biphobia


I've never once said that I wouldn't date a bisexual at all.

Go back and check :shocked:

Sounds like you're lumping me into a group you feel intolerant towards. Like a bigot operating on stereotypes would do :shocked:


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Exactly, so you should never have sex _at all_.


 That's what I've been saying :laughing:


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Make sure to get a psychiatry appointment along with your STD appointments.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> I've never once said that I wouldn't date a bisexual at all.
> 
> Go back and check :shocked:
> 
> Sounds like you're lumping me into a group you feel intolerant towards. Like a bigot operating on stereotypes would do :shocked:


I'm sure you're feeling really smart right now but I was not talking / thinking about you at all when I wrote that paragraph. In fact, at that point, I had completely forgotten that you even existed. I didn't remember you were in this thread until I went further back and read that previous post of yours which I quoted.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> I'm sure you're feeling really smart right now but I was not talking / thinking about you at all when I wrote that paragraph. In fact, at that point, I had completely forgotten that you even existed. I didn't remember you were in this thread until I went further back and read that previous post of yours which I quoted.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Nyle said:


> 1. There is potential anyone you engage in sexual relations has a STI, whether there has been condom use or not. (If I recall correctly, it was already addressed several posts back that condoms don't protect against everything, it's with this in mind that the discussion (on my part anyway) has continued).


Nobody has argued otherwise. So you have to make those judgments in deciding how likely they are to have one. Unless you exchange paperwork... 



Nyle said:


> 3. Address this before sexual encounters; your protocols are applicable to all.


Protocols depend on dynamic. That's my Fe opinion to counter your Te one. And those talks can be awkward af and kill potential.

The last I had was a lot of fun. Pretty much turned into "Ohhhh, you're a feminissssst!" (<extra s's because I was being hissed at). "Ohhhhh, you're a male whore who projects his shadow onto women!"

...and no sex was had and we'll never see each other again though we actually got along. (Just a regular straight dude. Heterosexual doesn't mean: all clear! ...just so you know. A lot of people wanna get in my pants it seems. It's not Woodstock in there. My vagina has bouncers).

I will say too that most (just about all?) people I know are not having these in depth talks about sexual history before getting it on. Most people do what I've admitted to doing. They make those quick judgments when it comes to risk.



Nyle said:


> 4. There is nothing wrong with requesting proof, etc. beforehand. (In some places, it is regular practice and I'm not referring to the LGBT community here either. Certain countries demand pre-marital health checks, for example in the UAE.) Tests taken are a factor of this conversation and something for you to determine.


There's nothing wrong with not wanting to do this and finding it ridiculously clinical, mood killing, and "OMG I'd rather be a nun!" worthy too. It's 2016. People have sex with marriage multiple steps away. As a prerequisite to deciding if they even want the relationship. That's a lot of work up front when you're not sure if you even want to see the person again and there's no commitment yet.

So I guess some people just aren't compatible when it comes to how they believe this should go down.



Nyle said:


> 5. A higher risk maybe present for certain backgrounds - that doesn't mean that the odds won't align against you if you were to go out and have sex with some random person, and we're back to #1-4.


Most people don't have sex with "random" people. They have their criteria and their standards when it comes to whether or not the person is worth investment on some level. And investing in someone isn't a guarantee that you can trust them.



Nyle said:


> I think what a lot of people seem to be assuming, particularly you @Veggie, is that there is some agenda.


Yea. I thought at first that you were more so interested in relationship advice, but this thread kinda feels like a LGBT platform.



Nyle said:


> Well nahh, I wanted a good discussion on things I may have missed. I realise this can be an emotional topic for some. Having a good discussion on something doesn't mean there's an agenda though; stop prioritising feelings to the extent there is insinuation others are motivated by this.


Not really emotional about this at all. I mean, it's never fun to be called a homophobe, but I don't even really care anymore, because it says a lot more about the person throwing that word around that it does about me, given the topic of this thread.

Ironic side note, a bisexual dude messaged me on a dating site last night. Never actually had an openly bi dude approach me like that before whilst single. Synchronicity. I was like - is this where I date him just to, like, prove something? But he's cross country so I don't know why he even messaged me to begin with...


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

OP, your friend sounds stupid and ignorant imo, just like one of my close bisexual friends.

I'm pansexual. I couldn't care less if my partner is into dudes too. The fact is, if we're dating, that shows me they want to be with me now. I have a bi friend, female, who is very uncomfortable with the idea of dating a bi male. To the point where she says, strictly for her own piece of mind, that she will not date them out of fear. 

This fear stems from the idea that they will wake up one day and come to the conclusion they're actually just gay, not bi and will leave her for a man, leaving her embarrassed and publically humiliated. She says the humiliation is worse if said male leaves her for another male rather than a female because of the social stigma.

In addition to that, she fears that in the bedroom they will be more likely to adopt a submissive role and therefore will be unwilling to be the 'man' that she wants in her life. As someone who is bi, I told her she should know better than to judge an entire group of people and not date them as such. Fear is what keeps her from being able to date a bisexual man. I don't care however, because I judge people on an individual basis. That being said, if I found a bi man who wanted to date me who then slowly began showing more interest in men than myself, I would probably be the one to end it. Because I'm not about to be someone's second best, it doesn't matter to who, male or female, I'm just not putting up with it.

Also, the very last male to pursue me recently was bi, though I guess, closeted still. He didn't want people to know and seemed to be drawn to me even more when he realised it didn't turn me off. However, I didn't want to be around him, because he is a shit human being, not because he's bisexual.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

The next time I go on a date with a knowingly homophobic/biphobic straight woman:


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

WamphyriThrall said:


> The next time I go on a date with a homophobic/biphobic straight woman:


Why would a homophobic-biphobic woman agree to a date with you?


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

lavendersnow said:


> I'm pansexual. I couldn't care less if my partner is into dudes too. The fact is, if we're dating, that shows me they want to be with me now.


Why? People date people they don't really want to be with all the time.

For sex, company, social standing, yada, yada.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Veggie said:


> Why would a homophobic-biphobic woman agree to a date with you?


Why not?  I've been told I'm cute, and even if it isn't a priority, am not totally against meeting new people...


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

Veggie said:


> Why? People date people they don't really want to be with all the time.
> 
> For sex, company, social standing, yada, yada.


And how does that apply to me? Anyone who dates me is going to know from the get-go I won't be tolerating anything other than monogamy on both sides. So why what?


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

lavendersnow said:


> And how does that apply to me? Anyone who dates me is going to know from the get-go I won't be tolerating anything other than monogamy on both sides. *So why what?*


She is still on the irrelevant nitpicking train.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Why not?  I've been told I'm cute, and even if it isn't a priority, am not totally against meeting new people...


Because if they were _actually_ homophobic-biphobic they'd go Westboro Church on your a$$? Lol.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Veggie said:


> Because if they were _actually_ homophobic-biphobic they'd go Westboro Church on your a$$? Lol.


You act like someone's orientation can be told from... what? Their appearance? Hobbies? Personality?

And that's like saying the only _actual_ racist people are those who burn crosses on black people's lawns.


----------



## Communal Soap (Jul 6, 2014)

Veggie said:


> Because if they were _actually_ homophobic-biphobic they'd go Westboro Church on your a$$? Lol.


I think you're assuming that all homophobia is overt. What we are trying to reveal is much more insidious.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

lavendersnow said:


> And how does that apply to me? Anyone who dates me is going to know from the get-go I won't be tolerating anything other than monogamy on both sides. So why what?


Monogamy doesn't mean that the person "really wants to be with you" though.

Again. Sex, company, social standing, yada, yada.

(Cue tearful nights ... I hate my life! ... Fantasies ... and such).

That's not irrelevant.

K-Ci and JoJo know what's up.

Tell me it's real. TELL ME IT'S REAL.


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

ziggy stardust x said:


> She is still on the irrelevant nitpicking train.


I just noticed, yawn. Irrelevant? Both significantly and strangely.


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

Veggie said:


> Monogamy doesn't mean that the person "really wants to be with you" though.
> 
> Again. Sex, company, social standing, yada, yada.
> 
> ...


I didn't say it did. Are you bored? You seem bored. You're bored. Okay Veggie.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

WamphyriThrall said:


> You act like someone's orientation can be told from... what? Their appearance? Hobbies? Personality?
> 
> And that's like saying the only _actual_ racist people are those who burn crosses on black people's lawns.


I act like you've admitted to being bisexual and I know this and you're talking about going on a date with people who are biphobic.

Are you not admitting to that upfront? That's what this convo was supposed to be about. Whether or not that's wrong, why people might think so, and what their concerns might be.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Communal Soap said:


> I think you're assuming that all homophobia is overt. What we are trying to reveal is much more insidious.


What you're "trying to reveal" LOFL.

You don't even know me. You made a snap judgment about me (but these are so wrong!) and assumed that there must be something "insidious" to reveal.

How creepy :/


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

lavendersnow said:


> I didn't say it did. Are you bored? You seem bored. You're bored. Okay Veggie.


You ask if I'm bored, you assume that I'm bored, and then you land on that I must be bored?? I didn't even answer your question!!

The presumption!


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

Veggie said:


> You ask if I'm bored, you assume that I'm bored, and then you land on that I must be bored?? I didn't even answer your question!!
> 
> The presumption!


I kindly did it for you. It's either that or something more sinister, or just annoying.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> You ask if I'm bored, you assume that I'm bored, and then you land on that I must be bored?? I didn't even answer your question!!
> 
> The presumption!


It's downright comical that you would tell others they are being presumptuous when two seconds ago you were going off on me for being 'bigoted' towards you in a post where I wasn't even talking about you. Lawl.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

Veggie said:


> I act like you've admitted to being bisexual and I know this and you're talking about going on a date with people who are biphobic.
> 
> Are you not admitting to that upfront? That's what this convo was supposed to be about. Whether or not that's wrong, why people might think so, and what their concerns might be.


I reveal whenever I feel comfortable. For some relationships, for example, with someone I know to be LGB themselves or an ally, probably much sooner. For others, I might assess the situation, dropping "hints" to see if they'd react positively, first. It's not like I'm going to tell every person I meet, "Oh, and I'm bisexual. You're probably better off with that straight hunk across the room. He'll probably make you feel like more of a lady, and you won't have to worry about him switching teams!" 

Certainly wouldn't want to spend weeks, or months, not telling someone. Generally, those are the ones who don't have much of an option, so once you're past a certain stage, you go, "I'm too old for this shit." Unfortunately, you can't always gauge someone's prejudices right away. You might even live with someone for years and not know about them.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> What you're "trying to reveal" LOFL.
> 
> You don't even know me. You made a snap judgment about me (but these are so wrong!) and assumed that there must be something "insidious" to reveal.
> 
> How creepy :/


I don't know how well you speak English, but he was not referring to you when he said that. It didn't even remotely come off that way either so you are really lost right now.


----------



## Communal Soap (Jul 6, 2014)

Veggie said:


> What you're "trying to reveal" LOFL.
> 
> You don't even know me. You made a snap judgment about me (but these are so wrong!) and assumed that there must be something "insidious" to reveal.
> 
> How creepy :/


I believe that being unaware of your own homophobia would qualify it as insidious.

EDIT: Said homophobia is systemic, as in widespread an defending it makes you part of the problem


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Communal Soap said:


> I believe that being unaware of your own homophobia would qualify it as insidious.


But being insidious would imply that they are doing it _deliberately _. :tongue: I don't think they are doing it deliberately, there are lots of people who are racist / homophobic / whatever else and they are in complete denial of it since 'I have black friends', 'I don't want to kill gays', etc. And then they try to justify themselves with nonsense excuses all the while looking at x person as the group they belong to instead of an individual.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

lavendersnow said:


> I kindly did it for you. It's either that or something more sinister, or just annoying.


You just jumped to conclusions. How hypocritical! I don't respect hypocrites, so I just wanted to point that out  I don't care what their sexual orientation is either.

I am bored though, good guess.

(I make good guesses about people sometimes too! We all do probably. Only arrogant POS's would think otherwise).



ziggy stardust x said:


> It's downright comical that you would tell others they are being presumptuous when two seconds ago you were going off on me for being 'bigoted' towards you in a post where I wasn't even talking about you. Lawl.


I mean, I wasn't really sure. You HAD post quoted me immediately afterwards. And you were referring to "these people" so I was assuming.... within the thread? Because that's what would be relevant to the conversation at hand, right?

You know, like a social person might do in trying to break down what someone might be talking about.



WamphyriThrall said:


> I reveal whenever I feel comfortable. For some relationships, for example, with someone I know to be LGB themselves or an ally, probably much sooner. For others, I might assess the situation, dropping "hints" to see if they'd react positively, first. It's not like I'm going to tell every person I meet, "Oh, and I'm bisexual. You're probably better off with that straight hunk across the room. He'll probably make you feel like more of a lady, and you won't have to worry about him switching teams!"


So you admit that fears like not feeling like a lady and worrying that a dude might switch teams are relevant concerns?



ziggy stardust x said:


> I don't know how well you speak English, but he was not referring to you when he said that. It didn't even remotely come off that way either so you are really lost right now.


He post quoted me...

I'm not sure how observant you are and how much your head is stuck up your ass, but you seem really lost too...

If you report me for this then whatevs. I didn't report you for your bs. But people like you are just foaming for the report I feel like. You're trying to make it happen. 



Communal Soap said:


> I believe that being unaware of your own homophobia would qualify it as insidious.
> 
> EDIT: Said homophobia is systemic, as in widespread an defending it makes you part of the problem


I'm not homophobic. I'm very concerned when it comes to STD's, because I think that sex is a prerequisite to commitment, and I've therefore done research on high risk groups.



ziggy stardust x said:


> But being insidious would imply that they are doing it _deliberately _. :tongue: I don't think they are doing it deliberately, there are lots of people who are racist / homophobic / whatever else and they are in complete denial of it since 'I have black friends', 'I don't want to kill gays', etc. And then they try to justify themselves with nonsense excuses all the while looking at x person as the group they belong to instead of an individual.


I don't hate people. It's pretty obvious who "hates" people on this thread given real snap judgments, how unable people are to listen to someone's side, where likes are going, etc.

Look into Jung and the shadow. Might change your life.


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

Veggie said:


> You just jumped to conclusions. How hypocritical! I don't respect hypocrites, so I just wanted to point that out  I don't care what their sexual orientation is either.
> 
> I am bored though, good guess.
> 
> ...


Did I say jumping to conclusions was a bad thing? I don't believe I did, because I didn't. Therefore I can't be a hypocrite  I'm not sure you're reading everyone's posts accurately, that or you're choosing not to.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> I mean, I wasn't really sure. You HAD post quoted me immediately afterwards. And you were referring to "these people" so I was assuming.... within the thread? Because that's what would be relevant to the conversation at hand, right?
> 
> You know, like a social person might do in trying to break down what someone might be talking about.
> 
> If you report me for this then whatevs. But people like you are just foaming for the report I feel like. You're trying to make it happen.


Look at all the irrelevant presumptions again. 










Look, I am not here to listen to your emotional breakdown so you can just keep it to yourself if you don't have anything factual to say.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

lavendersnow said:


> Did I say jumping to conclusions was a bad thing? I don't believe I did, because I didn't. Therefore I can't be a hypocrite  I'm not sure you're reading everyone's posts accurately, that or you're choosing not to.


My reading comprehension is spot on, thanks 



lavendersnow said:


> This fear stems from the idea that they will wake up one day and come to the *conclusion* they're actually just gay, not bi and will leave her for a man, leaving her embarrassed and publically humiliated. She says the humiliation is worse if said male leaves her for another male rather than a female because of the social stigma.
> 
> ...I told her she should know better than to judge an entire group of people and not date them as such. Fear is what keeps her from being able to date a bisexual man.


So only....fear? ....makes us draw conclusions about people?

And this isn't even "one day" ...you've known me for what, like, a couple posts before you started jumping on me, deciding I must belong to an "entire group of people" and thanking insulting posts?

Ew.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> My reading comprehension is spot on, thanks


Evidently, it is not.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Look at all the irrelevant presumptions again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You just keep getting me so good gurl.

I'm pretty sure a CDC breakdown of HIV statistics in the US is considered "factual" so...

My feely gifs have kinda been in response to yours too.

Project your feels though. Go right on ahead. I'm the kind of person that cowards will do that to, I realize this, because I'm actually trying to create a bridge, and you don't fear me for it, so you just take it all out.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Seems like she has completely lost it.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Veggie said:


> I'm pretty sure a CDC breakdown of HIV statistics in the US is considered "factual" so...


 Only if you're not talking about an individual.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Simpson17866 said:


> Only if you're not talking about an individual.


Dude. Tell me more about the individual. Then tell me what a homophobic bigot I am, refuse to listen to anything I say, have no interest in learning more about my personal situation and why I might be saying these things (you already know after all! Right? I remind you of that person...), and so forth...


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Seems like she has completely lost it.


Not adding my own gif in an attempt to maybe bond humorously with you on some level this time.

I've obviously lost it because I made more sense than you did, you lost the argument, you can't admit to it, and so you jump to the bullying techniques of a 13 year old try hard. 

You're just creating a larger divide. If people actually care about this issue they'll see that. 

Why don't you go gossip to someone about how ratchet someone else is or something.


----------



## puzzled (Mar 15, 2016)

Any woman who says no is lying. Every woman's wet dream is to date their gay friend(s). This is as close as they can get.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

puzzled said:


> Any woman who says no is lying. Every woman's wet dream is to date their gay friend(s). This is as close as they can get.


Where does that leave lesbians?


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

puzzled said:


> Any woman who says no is lying. Every woman's wet dream is to date their gay friend(s). This is as close as they can get.


This is true.

Every woman is a masochist attracted to people who aren't attracted to her...

Probably because of daddy.

#Progression.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> I've obviously lost it because I made more sense than you did, you lost the argument, you can't admit to it, and so you jump to the bullying techniques of a 13 year old try hard.


Really? It seems like we all missed out on that event, except you.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Really? It seems like we all missed out on that event, except you.


The people who have their heads shoved up their asses are missing out on most events


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> The people who have their heads shoved up their asses are missing out on most events


And that is why you and our precious little endangered koala are still oblivious to what we're all saying to you so many pages down the line.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> You are a comedian, aren't you?
> 
> Let's say a bisexual guy has had sex with two guys in his entire life, both of whom were virgins before that.
> Or a bisexual guy who has had sex with two guys who weren't virgins but they always used a condom.
> ...


Please be more intellectually honest with yourself and with the rest of the forum in the future by avoiding strawman arguments, red herrings, and ad hominem attacks. You're completely misstating what I've said in an attempt to paint me in a poor light. What I stated within this thread is in no way related to the way you're restating my position, to the point that discussion with you derails the thread. I understand if my position is incomprehensible to you based upon the lenses of worldview, but if we wanted to have a candid discussion here with regards to why some women may or may not date bisexual men? Your responses to me and @Veggie actually interfere with honest discourse.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

koalaroo said:


> You're completely misstating what I've said in an attempt to paint me in a poor light.


No, I stated exactly what you said. _You_ are painting _yourself_ in a poor light.

I like how you wrote an entire paragraph about nothing though.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

ziggy stardust x said:


> And that is why you and our precious little endangered koala are still oblivious to what we're all saying to you so many pages down the line.


1. Make a hypocritical argument
2. Post a patronizing gif

I got it


----------



## puzzled (Mar 15, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Where does that leave lesbians?


The 'lesbians' most men fantasize about are not real--they exist only on PornHub and in movies. The gay men that girls are into actually _exist_ and are of fairly large quantity. Bi-men are one step down from the gay best friend the girl dreams about fuking.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

Veggie said:


> 1. Make a hypocritical argument
> 2. Post a patronizing gif
> 
> I got it


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

puzzled said:


> The 'lesbians' most men fantasize about are not real--they exist only on PornHub and in movies. The gay men that girls are into actually _exist_ and are of fairly large quantity. Bi-men are one step down from the gay best friend the girl dreams about fuking.


Is this a specific type of gay man, or any gay man that has female friends? Do all bi men fit into the GBF category? And is it only those who are "out" and "about"? How about regarding preferences? Some are turned on by women, others want nothing to do with them, sexually. A few are even misogynist/hostile.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

puzzled said:


> The 'lesbians' most men fantasize about are not real--they exist only on PornHub and in movies. The gay men that girls are into actually _exist_ and are of fairly large quantity. Bi-men are one step down from the gay best friend the girl dreams about fuking.


You must be living in a parallel universe then.

So what are real lesbians like? I already know that you don't actually know many of them otherwise you wouldn't make comments like this.

FYI, women do not want to fuck their 'gay best friends'. Most women are not into the sissy types and the reason women get along with gay men so well is because they are non-threatening, they don't have to worry about their gay best friend wanting to fuck them etc.


----------



## Simpson17866 (Dec 3, 2014)

Veggie said:


> *Dude. Tell me more about the individual.* Then tell me what a homophobic bigot I am, refuse to listen to anything I say, have no interest in learning more about my personal situation and why I might be saying these things (you already know after all! Right? I remind you of that person...), and so forth...


 The individual bisexual man who for our purposes could be a virgin, but whom you would shun as a danger to your health because the average gay/bi man is more likely to be contagious than is the average straight man.


----------



## puzzled (Mar 15, 2016)

ziggy stardust x said:


> You must be living in a parallel universe then.
> 
> So what are real lesbians like? I already know that you don't actually know many of them otherwise you wouldn't make comments like this.
> 
> FYI, women do not want to fuck their 'gay best friends'. Most women are not into the sissy types and the reason women get along with gay men so well is because they are non-threatening, they don't have to worry about their gay best friend wanting to fuck them etc.


I think it is best to inform you that my posts in this thread are of a joking manner.


----------



## puzzled (Mar 15, 2016)

WamphyriThrall said:


> Is this a specific type of gay man, or any gay man that has female friends? Do all bi men fit into the GBF category? And is it only those who are "out" and "about"? How about regarding preferences? Some are turned on by women, others want nothing to do with them, sexually. A few are even misogynist/hostile.


I am talking about the gay best friend who is a tad effeminate, dresses nice, and mostly hangs out with women. He's the gay best friend who is good friends with your girlfriend. Then he comes out as bi and fuks your girl like a boss. This is the bi man I am referring to.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

puzzled said:


> I think it is best to inform you that my posts in this thread are of a joking manner.


Well, this isn't a joke thread so if you are going to be making gay jokes, maybe take it elsewhere instead of derailing the thread and making this about 'lesbians' with fake nails in porn


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

puzzled said:


> I am talking about the gay best friend who is a tad effeminate, dresses nice, and mostly hangs out with women. He's the gay best friend who is good friends with your girlfriend. Then he comes out as bi and fuks your girl like a boss. This is the bi man I am referring to.


This is about as prevalent in the real world as lesbians with fake nails.


----------



## puzzled (Mar 15, 2016)

ziggy stardust x said:


> Well, this isn't a joke thread so if you are going to be making gay jokes, maybe take it elsewhere instead of derailing the thread and making this about 'lesbians' with fake nails in porn


Don't strain your fingers any longer, you pathetic sanctimonious peasant. I gave you an out to end the conversation. I will give you one more. Take it.


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

puzzled said:


> I am talking about the gay best friend who is a tad effeminate, dresses nice, and hangs out with mostly woman. He's the gay best friend who is good friends with your girlfriend. Then he comes out as bi and fuks your girl like a boss. This is the bi man I am referring to.


Haha, considering many of the women I'm attracted to are on the bisexual and androgynous/tomboy/butch side, they're more likely to be political allies than anything else. I honestly think your average lesbian/bisexual woman can kick your average gay man's ass (and straight men, for that matter), so maybe "best friend" should think twice before overstepping his boundaries?

And yes, there are many men within the gay community who admit to being attracted to the *rare* woman, or being open to the idea of being in a relationship with one. Some come from marriages or long-term relationships with women, but for the sake of convenience, simply call themselves "gay" versus gay-leaning bisexual, Kinsey 5, or whatever.

Not all gay men are turned off by vaginas (some are curious, or even turned on by them). We could get into an argument over semantics and what makes a person "truly" gay or straight, but it's such a subjective minefield that we'd end up going in circles and agreeing to disagree, most likely. It's a recent concept, and I don't believe seven million people can be easily fit into two narrow categories.


----------



## Aladdin Sane (May 10, 2016)

puzzled said:


> Don't strain your fingers any longer, you pathetic sanctimonious peasant. I gave you an out to end the conversation. I will give you one more. Take it.


So much emotional drama and elevated blood pressure in this thread. Bisexual men bring out the worst in straight people.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Simpson17866 said:


> The individual bisexual man who for our purposes could be a virgin, but whom you would shun as a danger to your health because the average gay/bi man is more likely to be contagious than is the average straight man.


Of course he could be a virgin. He could be a hologram. Who knows??

I never said I shunned anyone.

Just that I have options and I don't have the time to entertain them all.


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

puzzled said:


> I am talking about the gay best friend who is a tad effeminate, dresses nice, and mostly hangs out with women. He's the gay best friend who is good friends with your girlfriend. Then he comes out as bi and fuks your girl like a boss. This is the bi man I am referring to.


Honestly, as a strictly dickly lass (that's allowed, right? If queer is just allowed to be queer?)

That's not even remotely attractive to me.

I remember there was this dude in high school. He was good looking, smelled good, dressed well, was funny, danced well... and yet I danced with him once and I just felt so turned off.

He came out later and I was like. Oh. Okay.

I am not attracted to people who aren't attracted to me.

There has to be a connection.


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

Veggie said:


> My reading comprehension is spot on, thanks
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Evidently, it isn't. 

Again, your comprehension skills are painfully poor. Which is why so many people have pointed that out. I didn't say fear was the only thing that made people draw conclusions, where exactly did I say that in my post? Nowhere. What are you reading? It seems more like a fantasy you have concocted than reality. 

And my first post wasn't directed at you, it was answering OP's question. Either you're looking for a fight, or you're incredibly bad at reading and understanding what you've read, or both. In which case, you should probably stop quoting people. There's a reason no-one enjoys your posts, a trend, one you seem to keep trying to ignore. You are not a victim.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Oct 26, 2010)

Nyle said:


> 1. Would you date a bisexual guy?
> 2. Is it wrong to forgo stating your sexual orientation prior to commencing a new relationship?[/INDENT]


1. Yes. I have in the past. Kevin was upfront about it right from the start, which I appreciated. Didn't bother me at all. 

Funny story, though...one night we went out with one of my gay co-workers, and met up with some of his gay friends...a few months later, Kevin and I broke up, and the co-worker decided that was a good time to tell me that Kevin had had a brief fling with one of the guys we were out with (before he dated me). :laughing: He said that the friend was really uncomfortable the whole night because 1) it was awkward to see Kevin and 2) he wasn't sure if I knew Kevin also liked men. 

I share this story as a cautionary tale...imagine if Kevin had NOT been honest with me about being bisexual! I would have heard it from someone else post-breakup. 

2. I think my response to this is obvious: tell the person right away.


----------



## pillowpo (Jul 19, 2016)

I date a bisexual guy! And... I couldn't care less. :concern:


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

I identify as a bisexual guy


----------



## Veggie (May 22, 2011)

Noctis said:


> I identify as a bisexual guy


You're also a virgin.

And @ai.tran.75 - who thanked your post - has apparently been married to a dude she feels safe with for like a decade.

I guess I know these things because I'm not the kind of person who would pay attention to the individual 

Can you not see how your contributions could be seen as annoying?

This sort of thing doesn't exist in the realm of the hypothetical trying to win Oprah points for some of us.


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> It's a turn-off to me if a man finds other men sexually attractive. It sort of feminizes him to me. He just immediately becomes unattractive.
> 
> There is also the concern that bi is just the gateway to gay, meaning later on in the relationship they totally come out and leave you for a man. Having seen that happen to other people, I would want to avoid that pain and humiliation.
> 
> I also probably have a very different worldview and concept of spirituality and morality, so withholding that info wouldn't be too wise. Honesty is the best policy in these areas at it touches on some pretty sensitive issues that amount to deal-breakers for many people. You mind up end up violating someone else's feelings and personal standards for themself by not being open about who you are and what you do in life.


Feminizes him how? Aren't you sorta attacking your own femininity by saying that?


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Veggie said:


> You're also a virgin.
> 
> And @*ai.tran.75* - who thanked your post - has apparently been married to a dude she feels safe with for like a decade.
> 
> ...


Seriously? I have seen you do this many times already. You dig up information, _personal_ things that have nothing to do with the topic at hand to discredit people. Why can't you just have a discussion without making things extremely personal? 

Can't asexual people, virgins, or people in long-term relationships discuss dating bisexuals then? I don't get it.


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

Veggie said:


> You're also a virgin.
> 
> And @*ai.tran.75* - who thanked your post - has apparently been married to a dude she feels safe with for like a decade.
> 
> ...


Please kindly fuck off, Veggie.


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Veggie said:


> You're also a virgin.
> 
> And @ai.tran.75 - who thanked your post - has apparently been married to a dude she feels safe with for like a decade.
> 
> ...


It's nothing about winning Oprah points / that's your assumption which is false .my first replied to this thread was I couldn't care less about somebody's sexual orientation . And my second response was to a person who compared sexual orientation to physical preference which I find irrelevant bc the attraction part is already accomplished after agreeing to date a bisexual guy . Also I'm quite baffled upon the subject of how refusing to date somebody bc they're bisexual isn't bias . 
I mentioned it once and I'll do so once again- I have never stated to anyone that I've been in a relationship with that I am straight upon meeting them unless the subject is brought up or asked.


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

OrangeAppled said:


> Sounds like YOUR perfect world....a world where no one is an individual because they all subscribe to your tastes and standards.
> 
> I truly find this whole sentiment bigoted. And how is "feminine" a negative trait?
> Having preferences as to what you find attractive or knowing what you don't find attractive is not "phobic".
> ...


Didn't you yourself say something along the lines of bisexuality "feminizing" men?


----------



## hal0hal0 (Sep 1, 2012)

*Thread Warning

Cool it with the personal punches please (in all sorts of wonderful directions). Disregard this and suffer my caffeine-deprived, cranky, over-studied ass.

I am temp-closing this thread (>24h) for y'all to cool off, go outside, get a sandwich, go for a walk, get some blood circulation going, prevent DVTs, whatever. Just cool it with the verbal sniping.

Thanks, I think.*


Thread has been reopened.​


----------

