Sexual Fluidity

[Sunstone]

A heterosexual who lacks bi-sexual drive, isn't going to be motivated to pursue a sexual encounter with someone of the same sex...

Do you think there might be a few heterosexuals left in this world who are naturally curious enough that it could motivate them to experiment with same-sex pleasure-pummeling now and then?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

^This, plus the Bible has an impact on western culture, the Old Testament specifically condemns male gay sex, and then translations are maybe questionable but Paul in the New Testament talks mostly about gay men as well, with perhaps one mention of women doing it, from what I remember.

Focus is almost always on the guys when talking about homosexuality, homosexual marriage, etc. It's always about that one specific sex act between men, rather than the full range of same sex behavior between men or between women.

This is true, and in cultures of antiquity and some other places, the man that is giving rather than receiving for that act, is not necessarily even viewed as gay, and his masculinity is not in question. Only the one that is accepting. But pretty much cross-culturally, a man that is accepting in that type of sex, is viewed as submissive, as not masculine, which is unfortunate.

I actually think the focus on male and male sex in the bible is probably for a similar reason, don't lay down with a man like you would do with a woman, "like you would do with a woman," why not? Because the woman is the submissive one.

 

[dawny0826]

But the article makes the point that this sexual fluidity isn't a matter of bi-sexual drive, but a dabbling in the other sexual camp: a straight person dallying with someone of the same sex or a homosexual dallying with someone of the opposite sex.

I'm aware. Sexual fluidity is a matter of mindset. Move forward, sexually, as you desire to, abandoning labels.

As I've stated, there are people who aren't going to be inclined to dabble in another sexual camp, regardless as to how freeing such a mindset can be.

Thinking back on your first question, I'm not sure that we're headed towards some sort of sexual "revolution" of sorts, when we're kind of already there. We're already, moving in a direction where people are becoming more and more comfortable in their own skin and acting according to their desires.

For me, personally, as a bisexual female, I'm bisexual whether you label me bisexual or not. When I've been single, I've been quite fluid. My attractions - still hardwired, bisexually.

My straight male friends wouldn't be the least bit interested in screwing each other, regardless as to how open society might be or become to it, because another dude isn't going get the little nasty upright. Just the way it is.

I had the one or two guy friends who identified as bisexual . They were already open to having sex with whomever met their fancy. They were already quite sexually fluid, in my opinion.

I think that most people my age have a fluid mindset. My circle of peeps have always been open to canoodling with whomever they want to canoodle with, despite labeling, but, at the root of it - we were all straight, gay or bi.

And I don't believe it's new either, although I wasn't aware it was as prevalent as the article implies, or has grown to such a huge extent among women.

Most of my female friends are bisexual or admit to having bisexual tendencies. I'm 34. Perhaps it's my age, but, this is quite common place amongst most of the girls that I know.

Those that aren't bisexual or interested in having sex with a woman are no less open or fluid in their mindset, they just prefer male attention in the bedroom.

 

[Father Heathen]

It seems to me like "sexual fluidity" simply means bisexual albeit with a strong leaning toward one gender or the other.

 

[Sunstone]

It seems to me like "sexual fluidity" simply means bisexual albeit with a strong leaning toward one gender or the other.

You might be right, but that's not quite how I read it. I think it's heterosexuals just getting curious about what it would be like to bliss bop with someone of their own sex. After all, our species of super-sized ape is pretty well noted for being naturally curious.

 

[dawny0826]

Do you think there might be a few heterosexuals left in this world who are naturally curious enough that it could motivate them to experiment with same-sex pleasure-pummeling now and then?

Sure.

I'm sure that someone who has never understood the concept of honesty and self acceptance might have a eureeka moment if introduced to sexual fluidity. Nothing new, here.

But, most of the people that I know are already doing what works best for them, others be darned.

 

[Father Heathen]

You might be right, but that's not quite how I read it. I think it's heterosexuals just getting curious about what it would be like to bliss bop with someone of their own sex. After all, our species of super-sized ape is pretty well noted for being naturally curious.

So then "sexual fluidity" = bi-curious.

 

[dawny0826]

So then "sexual fluidity" = bi-curious.

Sexual fluidity would also apply to the homosexual who decides to play with someone of the opposite sex too.

It's the concept of abandoning labels to do what feels natural. Such an experience (or experiences) wouldn't make one homosexual, heterosexual, bi-sexual or otherwise. It's just an experience or experiences.

People may still naturally fit a particular sexual sterotype, even if you chuck labels. The heterosexual man who decides to play with a male friend for the experience may still posess a natural inclination towards women. This concept proposes that he not be labeled as anything, sexually.

Edit: He would not need a label, as he's sexually fluid, doing what feels natural, sexually, be it a dabble or otherwise.

 

[Skwim]

It seems to me like "sexual fluidity" simply means bisexual albeit with a strong leaning toward one gender or the other.

Might help to take the words of the writer of the article into consideration.

"Adèle is sexually fluid, a person who dabbles with either sex but unlike a bisexual, identifies as gay or straight."

 

[dawny0826]

Might help to take the words of the writer of the article into consideration.

"Adèle is sexually fluid, a person who dabbles with either sex but unlike a bisexual, identifies as gay or straight."

She self identifies as gay or straight as she pleases, but, is still bisexual from an organic perspective, if she's attracted to both sexes.

It's unlikely that she is both gay and straight at the same time, unless she has split personalities. I understand his confusion.

 

[Sunstone]

So then "sexual fluidity" = bi-curious.

That's pretty much my impression, FH. I would guess "sexual fluidity" is not much more than what the cool kids are calling "bi-curious" these days.

At any rate, I don't get the impression that sexual fluidity is a sexual orientation. Instead, I think it's merely a behavior. And if that's the case, it could apply to people of any orientation. Hetero, homo, or bi.

 

[dawny0826]

That's pretty much my impression, FH. I would guess "sexual fluidity" is not much more than what the cool kids are calling "bi-curious" these days.

At any rate, I don't get the impression that sexual fluidity is a sexual orientation. Instead, I think it's merely a behavior. And if that's the case, it could apply to people of any orientation. Hetero, homo, or bi.

Or mindset. Freedom to act upon desire without the restrictions of labeling.

 

[Sunstone]

Or mindset. Freedom to act upon desire without the restrictions of labeling.

Good point. I guess you could call it both a mindset and a behavior.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I just think it's more acceptable for females to be "sexually fluid" and to express romantic and sexual attraction for other females than it is for males to do so with other males. There is still a ton of bigotry/prejudice against male homosexuality in culture that it will be much more difficult to change that. Female homosexuality has its stigmas but it's not as bad.

As for me I'm pansexual, meaning that I can be attracted to a person regardless of their gender identity or biological sex (I like men, women, transgender/transsexual people, etc). I prefer to call myself a queer, though, because it is a more subversive term. I don't like "straight", "gay", "lesbian" and "bisexual" as labels because I feel that they are too limiting. Of course any label is limiting in a way, but if I have to label myself, I prefer one that affords me the most amount of freedom.

 

[Penumbra]

You might be right, but that's not quite how I read it. I think it's heterosexuals just getting curious about what it would be like to bliss bop with someone of their own sex. After all, our species of super-sized ape is pretty well noted for being naturally curious.

So then "sexual fluidity" = bi-curious.

She self identifies as gay or straight as she pleases, but, is still bisexual from an organic perspective, if she's attracted to both sexes.

It's unlikely that she is both gay and straight at the same time, unless she has split personalities. I understand his confusion.

I view it like Kinsey did, on a spectrum. Rather than there being three distinct groups of "heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual", it can be thought of as a spectrum, at least in simple terms. So like, what if someone is more attracted to the opposite sex but still attracted to some extent to her own sex? Like somewhere between a neutral bisexual and a heterosexual?

I wouldn't call myself bisexual because that might give the impression that I would consider dating a woman seriously, which I would not. I'm not romantically or physically attracted to women to any major degree compared to men, but I'm also not specifically un-attracted either. My experience with a woman was a very enjoyable one but I don't really feel any lust towards women nor do I particularly plan to do it again, so for all practical purposes I just say I'm hetero if it's relevant.

 

[dawny0826]

I view it like Kinsey did, on a spectrum. Rather than there being three distinct groups of "heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual", it can be thought of as a spectrum, at least in simple terms. So like, what if someone is more attracted to the opposite sex but still attracted to some extent to her own sex? Like somewhere between a neutral bisexual and a heterosexual?

I wouldn't call myself bisexual because that might give the impression that I would consider dating a woman seriously, which I would not. I'm not romantically or physically attracted to women to any major degree compared to men, but I'm also not specifically un-attracted either. My experience with a woman was a very enjoyable one but I don't really feel any lust towards women nor do I particularly plan to do it again, so for all practical purposes I just say I'm hetero if it's relevant.

What you describe is the nature of bi-curiosity. In my opinion, you have a sexually fluid mindset, as you've acted on desire, as you've seen fit and continue to do so.

A label is a label. What matters is how you self-attach to them and if such labeling serves you well.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Possibly, we'll see increasing numbers of women becoming sexually fluid, but I think it less likely that we'll see increasing numbers of men becoming sexually fluid. A while back I was reading up on the differences in sexuality between gay men and gay women, and I was struck by how much more frequently women who identified themselves as homosexuals were willing to engage in long-term or committed heterosexual relationships than were men who identified themselves as homosexuals. Some folks concluded from that, and from other lines of evidence, that gay women -- and possibly even women in general -- might typically have a less fixed sexual orientation that gay men, or than men in general.

I don't view sexual fluidity as is itself any more relevant to morality than heterosexuality or any other orientation. That is, I see it as irrelevant.

I think men can be fluid as well. Josh Hutcherson also identifies as hetero, but has also said that does not rule out possible male relationships in the future. *crosses fingers*:drool: I personally prefer to see sexuality as it is shown on the Kinsey Scale, although some may consider it outdated.

 

[Skwim]

Sexual fluidity would also apply to the homosexual who decides to play with someone of the opposite sex too.

It's the concept of abandoning labels to do what feels natural. Such an experience doens't make one homosexual, heterosexual, bi-sexual or otherwise. It's just an experience.

The stupid thing about this, in my opinion, is that from a biological standpoint, one might still naturally fit a stereotype. I'm all for abandoning labels, but, it doesn't change who people are and how people self-identify.

You seem to be preoccupied with this labeling thing. Not that you're not entitled to your pet peeves, but it might help to remember that labeling , in of itself, isn't necessarily a bad thing. It often helps define a meaningful difference.

My question is, what do you see wrong with identifying someone who dabbles with either sex but unlike a bisexual, identifies as gay or straight, if that's what they do?

 

[Skwim]

I think men can be fluid as well. Josh Hutcherson also identifies as hetero, but has also said that does not rule out possible male relationships in the future. *crosses fingers*:drool: I personally prefer to see sexuality as it is shown on the Kinsey Scale, although some may consider it outdated.

It appears those sexually fluid would be either a 1 or a 5.

 

[dawny0826]

You seem to be preoccupied with this labeling thing. Not that you're not entitled to your pet peeves, but it might help to remember that labeling , in of itself, isn't necessarily a bad thing. It often helps define a meaningful difference.

My question is, what do you see wrong with identifying someone who dabbles with either sex but unlike a bisexual, identifies as gay or straight, if that's what they do?

I don't disagree with you.

If someone identifies as gay or straight, per the situation, more power to them! I respect any labeling that a person chooses to self-identify with.

I admit I don't understand why Adele identifies as gay, straight but not bisexual. It's interesting to me and a little perplexing. But, I don't present that negately.

What doesn't make sense to me, is if you're going to abandon labeling in favor of sexual fluidity, be it a mindset and/or behavior, why would you identify as gay or straight at all? This part of the article read as a contradiction to me.