Spectrums and fluidity in gender and sexuality

wonderfulname

So, I figured I'd continue on from some of the points raised in earlier discussion, namely the concepts of spectrums and fluidity in gender and sexuality, and how these fit in with our modern constructs in the area.

I'm a firm believer in the concept of a sexuality 'spectrum', indeed it's an accepted theory at this stage, personally I think the Kinsey scale is limited to say the least. The Klein Grid fits closer to how I view the world, as do, for the most part, the views of Dr. Fritz Klein (although I think we could go a lot further and get a lot more complicated with the whole concept of sexuality);

The Klein Grid measures actual sexual experiences, but also sexual attractions, fantasies, emotional preference, social preference, lifestyle and self-identification as they relate to a person's past, present and ideal future. Klein's research showed that these factors can change over time for an individual, and vary not just between but also within groups of straight, gay and bisexual people. He concluded that people generalize from their own experiences and feelings to assume, often wrongly, that other people must experience their own sexual orientations the same way.

As a result, Klein concluded sexual orientations are too complex to be broken into simple, well-defined categories.

If you don't have a clue what I'm on about, the concept is very well illustrated by the Grid itself (linked above), seeing where you yourself sit on it will allow you to visualise the above.

I don't want to be repeating myself when what I have quoted is effectively my viewpoint, but I do believe this shows our pigeonholing of sexual expression to be largely defunct.

One thing I do have an issue with is the reasoning behind there being change over time. Some would point to this being evidence for individual sexual fluidity, personally I see it as pointing to an increase/change in self awareness/expression over time, rather than an actual change in sexuality. Feel free to correct me, as above, I am completely open to the idea that I may just be generalising by experience.

Now on to gender, this is slightly more shaky ground for me so I'd appreciate patience on behalf of the more knowledgeable here!

Again, I don't agree with the rigid separation of male and female, gender is a lot more than what's between your legs, or even the core identification between your ears, yet again I'm going to steal from another source to verbalise my position;

...beyond anatomy, there are multiple domains defining gender. In turn, these domains can be independently characterized across a range of possibilities. Instead of the static, binary model produced through a solely physical understanding of gender, a far more rich texture of biology, gender expression, and gender identity intersect in multidimensional array of possibilities. Quite simply, the gender spectrum represents a more nuanced, and ultimately truly authentic model of human gender.

And what about fluidity in gender? Again in my own experience I would point to a journey of self discovery rather than an actual change, and again, I am open to opposing views, in fact, I am open to opposing views in all I've said.

So what does this mean for rigid structures that have been promoted by both the straight and LGBT communities? If we are to keep them, as we will for a while at least, where do we draw the lines? At what point does a man become a woman? A gay person bisexual? Is it possible to promote labelling without many people falling through the cracks? Or being lumped into categories they do not fit?

I think it's obvious where I stand on those questions, and I think I've said everything I wanted to... so lets open it to the floor!

AndrewJD

So much to think about...

I'd like the Klein grid a whole lot more if the first column (dealing with the past) were deleted. Whilst the past must surely have a great influence on the development identity, usually one is only interested in the identity of right now. Which is both where I am (middle column) and where I'd like to be (the last column).

I see it as pointing to an increase/change in self awareness/expression over time, rather than an actual change in sexuality

I've no more to back this up other than how I personally perceive it, but I've always felt that there is no separation between these two concepts. Isn't your sexuality partly how you are aware of it, how you express it? It seems to complex ad nuanced for me to split these up. I'm only attracted to men as long as I'm aware that I am. This may be a bit simplistic. When applied to fluidity you could argue that my sexual identity is fluid because my awareness of it is, rather than simply saying my awareness changes, but the identity does not.

I suppose fluidity in gender would depend on how you're defining gender. I always think of it in a very strict sense. I have male anatomy, I enjoy having male anatomy (giggity) and whilst there are a great many parts of my personality, psyche, identity etc that don't conform to traditional western ideas of masculinity, there's something (perhaps instilled socially) within me that says I feel male. And as far as my personal definition goes I don't feel any fluidity. I don't think my gender has changed one iota from when I was 7. Or whenever. If you were to broaden it out then sure I could see fluidity in there, but gender isn't a big thing for me outside of these basic statements. The piece you quoted with the "multidimensional array of possibilities" is probably right, but I don't reckon we need those. Thinking more on it, in a way I don't even really need the 'gender you feel' part of it. All that's important to me is that I have male anatomy, I find sexual gratification in male anatomy, end of story.

Obviously our rigid structures of man/woman aren't going anywhere, but the way society has changed over the past few decades might indicate that a man needing to be masculine, a female needing to be feminine are out the window at this stage. So maybe what we call ourselves will have only really to do with whats in our pants before long. At least that's where I'd like to see it. In terms of intersex people, well it's up to you. That's too much for me to decide by myself :P

Rigid structures for sexuality as well I've never found a problem with. I doubt we'll ever get rid of them (imagine navigating a sexual world without them...) but the definitions aren't set in stone. Having a small, almost passing curiosity in men doesn't mean a girl can't call herself gay (or lesbian), it just means that she sees that as her way. Another person in the same situation might go for bisexual. I don't think it really matters. If people don't feel like labelling themselves then that's good too. Having Klein grid like responses is obviously a more exact if completely impractical option.

To be honest, there's nothing you've written that I can disagree that strongly with, just things I feel differently about. I'm aware I missed bits out as well, on some points I couldn't wrangle a rational thought to write. I found that the most thought provoking OP I've seen in a long time. So even though I'm not sure if I was able to respond very well, I felt compelled to give it a go. I'd love to see some other peoples responses too

wonderfulname

AndrewJD wrote: »

I've no more to back this up other than how I personally perceive it, but I've always felt that there is no separation between these two concepts. Isn't your sexuality partly how you are aware of it, how you express it? It seems to complex ad nuanced for me to split these up. I'm only attracted to men as long as I'm aware that I am. This may be a bit simplistic. When applied to fluidity you could argue that my sexual identity is fluid because my awareness of it is, rather than simply saying my awareness changes, but the identity does not.

Hmm, after a bit of thought I'm inclined to agree, we are who we are in the present, and changes in our awareness or expression shouldn't invalidate who we were, or what we experienced.

On gender I think you'll agree that many on here don't experience the 'between the legs' aspect of gender as you do. I agree 'male' and 'female' will and should remain as our guides for defining gender, but what of the grey area? And of course the perceived masculine and feminine characteristics, should we still define these by sex or just as human characteristics, not associated with gender?

AndrewJD wrote: »

Rigid structures for sexuality as well I've never found a problem with. I doubt we'll ever get rid of them (imagine navigating a sexual world without them...) but the definitions aren't set in stone. Having a small, almost passing curiosity in men doesn't mean a girl can't call herself gay (or lesbian), it just means that she sees that as her way. Another person in the same situation might go for bisexual. I don't think it really matters. If people don't feel like labelling themselves then that's good too. Having Klein grid like responses is obviously a more exact if completely impractical option.

You see I think that if society became completely comfortable with sexuality there would be no need for labels, maybe it's a bit of a pansexual viewpoint but I think that without both prejudice and labels, if people hit it off right they'd be open to more, if they didn't they wouldn't. You'll meet one hell of a lot of people of whatever gender you're interested in who you have zero interest in, and who have zero interest in you, I think if the possibility of offence were removed the necessity to define would be too. For the time being I agree with you that someone should go by whatever they feel most comfortable with.

AndrewJD wrote: »

I found that the most thought provoking OP I've seen in a long time. So even though I'm not sure if I was able to respond very well, I felt compelled to give it a go. I'd love to see some other peoples responses too

You responded very well, and gave me a lot to think about too!

I'm also looking forward to further responses *glares expectantly at other regulars*

apache

sorry there now. bit of a double post.

apache

my post will be short
i took that test but i already knew the outcome before i got the results.
the past box ie sexual encounters in the past from all your years living on this planet is a curve ball.
the only reason i slept with men in the past when i was younger (twice - which i am just about over the trauma!) was because of social and peer pressure and being naive and wanting to fit in. shameful but true and fact.
this as a result did not put me 100% gay which i am.

i am not really interested in these tests or statistics. they can be construed in so many ways and are not accurate.

i have no problem with sexual fluidity if those that do so also understand that there are people who are very rigid in their sexuality and do see a problem in others proclaiming to be something they are obviously not.

that is the only point i really want to get across. thank you

wonderfulname

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

...i have no problem with sexual fluidity if those that do so also understand that there are people who are very rigid in their sexuality and do see a problem in others proclaiming to be something they are obviously not.

What do you mean here? This goes back to the question in my OP: Where do we draw the lines?

At what point is somebody proclaiming as such, in your opinion?

Oh and I'd agree with the points thus far that the 'past' option for the Klein Grid really buggers the results as it doesn't allow for experimentation and attempts to live up to expectation, this would be one of the reasons behind my disagreement with the implied reasoning behind the changes over time.

rainbow kirby

wonderfulname wrote: »

Oh and I'd agree with the points thus far that the 'past' option for the Klein Grid really buggers the results as it doesn't allow for experimentation and attempts to live up to expectation, this would be one of the reasons behind my disagreement with the implied reasoning behind the changes over time.

I would be very much inclined to agree with this - particularly in the case of women who have come out in their 20s or later. Trying to live up to expectation (from society, family, your own expectations...) can be a very powerful force, and on a test of this type it can heavily skew the results.

apache

wonderfulname wrote: »

What do you mean here? This goes back to the question in my OP: Where do we draw the lines?

At what point is somebody proclaiming as such, in your opinion?

i touched on this before. we all draw the lines individually. they are quite clear.

i personally as a gay woman feel sick at having sex with a man. my gay male friends are the same vice versa. that is fairly defined and definite that we are gay.
there is no fluidity there - zero!

if people are fluid in their sexuality that is fine. i understand this. but why proclaim yourself as being gay?

that is not what gay means. gay is rigid. not fluid.
straight is rigid.
if you do not fall into these categories you are fluid and therefore not either of them.

wonderfulname

Sexual fluidity is the idea that peoples sexuality can change over time, it is not another word for bisexuality.

bodice ripper

I am still perfectly happy to describe myself as gay in a situation where having a 25 minute discussion about bisexuality is undesirable and the fact that I have a girlfriend is relevant. Most of the time I will describe myself as "not straight". what is the problem? Obviously "gay" is frequently used as short hand for LGBT - unless all these times I see someone mention the "gay community" and "gay rights" and "gay marriage" they were trying to erase me..... but I doubt that.

Chuchoter

I don't know if your sexuality changes over time but your understanding of it definitely does, and I think social pressures play into that a lot.

wonderfulname

bodice ripper wrote: »

I am still perfectly happy to describe myself as gay in a situation where having a 25 minute discussion about bisexuality is undesirable and the fact that I have a girlfriend is relevant. Most of the time I will describe myself as "not straight". what is the problem? Obviously "gay" is frequently used as short hand for LGBT - unless all these times I see someone mention the "gay community" and "gay rights" and "gay marriage" they were trying to erase me..... but I doubt that.

Gay has become sort of a catch all term hasn't it?
Most of the time I don't particularly feel the need to proclaim my sexuality, thinking of it now I've probably been going with some variant of "I have a girlfriend" IRL for some time now, wow, my allergy to labelling is really starting to become apparent this past while...

Crayola: Pretty much where I am, I'd be interested to know if anyone can say they have experienced changes, for all I've heard in the media I've never heard a personal account.

apache

wonderfulname wrote: »

Sexual fluidity is the idea that peoples sexuality can change over time, it is not another word for bisexuality.

lol that is an oxymoran.

apache

bodice ripper wrote: »

I am still perfectly happy to describe myself as gay in a situation where having a 25 minute discussion about bisexuality is undesirable and the fact that I have a girlfriend is relevant. Most of the time I will describe myself as "not straight". what is the problem? Obviously "gay" is frequently used as short hand for LGBT - unless all these times I see someone mention the "gay community" and "gay rights" and "gay marriage" they were trying to erase me..... but I doubt that.

bisexuals can have long lasting relationships with same sex partners. you don't need me to be pedantic and tell you that. you are aware of that.

LGBT is there for a reason. it covers it all. not just gay people. so there is no need to describe yourself as gay when you are not.

wonderfulname

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

lol that is an oxymoran.

No, you seem not to understand what bisexuality is? A bisexual is someone who is attracted to both men and women, to varying degrees. They are not defined by who they are in a relationship with at the time, a single bisexual might go out on the town and see both men and women they have an attraction for, its not a case of one or the other at any given time. Someone could say they are equally attracted to men and woman and never vary from that throughout their lives - this is as rigid a definition as someone who views themselves as gay or straight throughout their lives.

Now would you like to review any of your points?

apache

wonderfulname wrote: »

No, you seem not to understand what bisexuality is? A bisexual is someone who is attracted to both men and women, to varying degrees. They are not defined by who they are in a relationship with at the time, a single bisexual might go out on the town and see both men and women they have an attraction for, its not a case of one or the other at any given time. Someone could say they are equally attracted to men and woman and never vary from that throughout their lives - this is as rigid a definition as someone who views themselves as gay or straight throughout their lives.

Now would you like to review any of your points?

not really. i covered all the points. they are bisexual not gay. that is a rigid definition. a gay person would not consider having a relationship with someone of the opposite gender. that is the point!

i feel i'm pissing in the wind here due to political correctness. :mad:

apache

oh and thanks for taking the time to explain bisexuality to me.
i really appreciate it. :rolleyes:

wonderfulname

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

not really. i covered all the points. they are bisexual not gay. that is a rigid definition. a gay person would not consider having a relationship with someone of the opposite gender. that is the point!

i feel i'm pissing in the wind here due to political correctness. :mad:

No, you're pissing in the wind because you're bundling different phenomena in together, I have already explained bisexual, now for sexual fluidity;

Sexual fluidity is the idea that someones core sexual identity can actually change, that, for example, a lovely dyke who feels ill at the thought of sleeping with a man may find at some point in future that she has developed an attraction to them, and that she may even at some point find she is no longer attracted to women, or that she no longer cares what gender her partner is. This is a theory regarding sexuality as a whole, it is not an individual sexuality. It is not my theory, nor a namby pamby politically correct idea, just a theory, based on a study carried out over a period of ten years with a number of queer woman.

It is not bisexuality, now some of us have theorised that perhaps what some view as a change in sexuality is actually a change in awareness and expression of ones sexuality, but none of us are stating this as fact, merely as our own experience.

Again, bisexuality is a rigid definition, the question is can people change between these rigid definitions, so far you are the only one to answer with certainty, and I have yet to see why.

wonderfulname

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

oh and thanks for taking the time to explain bisexuality to me.
i really appreciate it. :rolleyes:

Evidently if you think it and fluidity are one and the same then you need one of them explained...

bodice ripper

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

bisexuals can have long lasting relationships with same sex partners. you don't need me to be pedantic and tell you that. you are aware of that.

LGBT is there for a reason. it covers it all. not just gay people. so there is no need to describe yourself as gay when you are not.

It's not your call to make, unfortunately. I find "I am lgbt" stilted and unclear most of the people I am talking about. I am trying to avoid a 25 minute explanation to strangers.

apache

wonderfulname wrote: »

No, you're pissing in the wind because you're bundling different phenomena in together, I have already explained bisexual, now for sexual fluidity;

Sexual fluidity is the idea that someones core sexual identity can actually change, that, for example, a lovely dyke who feels ill at the thought of sleeping with a man may find at some point in future that she has developed an attraction to them, and that she may even at some point find she is no longer attracted to women, or that she no longer cares what gender her partner is. This is a theory regarding sexuality as a whole, it is not an individual sexuality. It is not my theory, nor a namby pamby politically correct idea, just a theory, based on a study carried out over a period of ten years with a number of queer woman.

It is not bisexuality, now some of us have theorised that perhaps what some view as a change in sexuality is actually a change in awareness and expression of ones sexuality, but none of us are stating this as fact, merely as our own experience.

Again, bisexuality is a rigid definition, the question is can people change between these rigid definitions, so far you are the only one to answer with certainty, and I have yet to see why.

as i already stated here i have no time for studies or statistics. this just seems txt book study to me and you quoting politically correct responses. it is nice but not indicative of life experience.

i disagree strongly on all your points. you seem to contradict yourself a lot.

i have said all my points and feel i cannot go any further here. let somebody else take the floor...


why am i the only one to answer with certainty? well from my short time here there is more "sexually fluid" people here than anybody else.

and those that have a point to make may feel intimidated or just don't want to get involved or want to go with the politically correct stance which i absolutely abhor without good reasoning and argument to back it up.

maybe wait and see till tomorrow and see what the rest say.

and yet again thanks again for explaining sexual fluidity to me. i find that very patronising in the extreme.

apache

bodice ripper wrote: »

It's not your call to make, unfortunately. I find "I am lgbt" stilted and unclear most of the people I am talking about. I am trying to avoid a 25 minute explanation to strangers.

not a good enough reason to declare yourself gay. sorry for the inconvenience. and here we have it - because it is easier!

Kanoe

I want to say but I have to fix my words first or it will come out all jumbled up. (and you may have to explain some things to me along the way just so as I'm not taking it up wrong, brain is tired today)

I totally appreciate idea of the fluidity of sexuality in the way you describe it but I'm not sure I feel the same way about gender, the way I feel has never changed and for me, it has been the one constant behind it all and it's kind of makes it confusing. It's probably why I have such difficulty aligning with the concept of homosexuality because I've mostly felt non gendered. or both gendered, so if I'm with a woman I don't feel or have ever felt that I'm gay. (I did when I was with a man though ) It just doesn't sit right in my head. And queer really feels right.

Good topic, just wish I had the ability to form a coherent sentence atm.

bodice ripper

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

not a good enough reason to declare yourself gay. sorry for the inconvenience. and here we have it - because it is easier!

I'll do what I like, you can't stop me.

I was gay for years, I am not now. shall i review every few months and make sure I update my sexuality status? So you don't get the wrong tin of peas? Nuts to that. I am entitled to choose how i interact with other adults, and how I see myself. I'll not have it dictated to me by someone who has never met me. My sexuality is ENTIRELY fluid and changes day in day out. This is not something I have in common with every (or indeed most) bisexuals, and is NOT a feature of bisexuality.

if it makes you feel any better, because it seems to me this is a club house issue for you, I never ever refer to myself as a lesbian or a dyke.

apache

you are not gay. you never were. end of story. i don't care about anything else in this context only that. thank you.

of course i can't stop you but you wonder why you get a hard time of gay women???????

you need to start embracing the word bisexual.

bodice ripper

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

you are not gay. you never were. end of story. i don't care about anything else in this context only that. thank you.

of course i can't stop you but you wonder why you get a hard time of gay women???????

you need to start embracing the word bisexual.

you can't tell me what I was or was not. you were preaching up there about not believing statistics and studies mirror life experience, so how about you take your own advice here. Just because my experience doesn't match yours, doesn't mean it didn't happen. I went through years and years of having ZERO sexual or romantic interest in men. I am sorry if that threatens hardliners/fundamentalists, but it happens. if you find that in someway undermines you personaly, the problem is you.

This thread was supposed to be about discussing fluid sexuality, and you went off on one about how unfair it was forpeople try and say it is true of everyone and you feel it isn't. Fine, i agree actually. but by the same token, that fact that is not true of you does not mean it is not true of me.

bodice ripper

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

of course i can't stop you but you wonder why you get a hard time of gay women???????

.

i have only one gay woman in my life, and she is just fine with me. Should i be expecting a visit from the paramilitary wing at any moment?

apache

lets go to bed bodice ripper. we are well tired

Kanoe

*inserts funny comment

wonderfulname

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

as i already stated here i have no time for studies or statistics. this just seems txt book study to me and you quoting politically correct responses. it is nice but not indicative of life experience.

It is a study indicative of other peoples life experience, how on earth do you think it could come to any conclusion otherwise? Why is there something wrong with study anyway? With broadening ones horizons beyond ones front door?

I'd also just like to point out that the current politically correct viewpoint is the "born this way" one, which generally rejects the idea that someone's sexual preferences could change, this is a viewpoint which fits perfectly my own experiences, however I am not so ignorant as to assume that the limited experience of any one person is broad enough as to draw a concrete conclusion from. When the study I at least am referring to came out it was met with outrage on many fronts, it's not something which is pandering to any form of correctness.

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

i disagree strongly on all your points. you seem to contradict yourself a lot.

Where? I certainly see no contradiction in the concepts I have presented, perhaps if you elaborate I can clarify?

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

why am i the only one to answer with certainty? well from my short time here there is more "sexually fluid" people here than anybody else... and yet again thanks again for explaining sexual fluidity to me. i find that very patronising in the extreme.

Again, if you are taking the majority of people here to be "sexually fluid" I have to query your understanding of the term, I do not mean to be patronising, merely helpful.

bodice ripper wrote: »

I'll do what I like, you can't stop me.

I was gay for years, I am not now. shall i review every few months and make sure I update my sexuality status? So you don't get the wrong tin of peas? Nuts to that. I am entitled to choose how i interact with other adults, and how I see myself. I'll not have it dictated to me by someone who has never met me. My sexuality is ENTIRELY fluid and changes day in day out. This is not something I have in common with every (or indeed most) bisexuals, and is NOT a feature of bisexuality.

if it makes you feel any better, because it seems to me this is a club house issue for you, I never ever refer to myself as a lesbian or a dyke.

I apologise if I'm being intrusive, or asking a stupid question, I just genuinely don't know what this would be like, do you feel your experience, or something surrounding your sexuality changes, or that your actual core sexuality fluctuates? Just I can't imagine what to me feels like such a solid thing ever changing, so I have a kind of gyroscope type image in my head.

You really don't have to answer if I'm being thick - which I feel I might be...

bodice ripper

wonderfulname wrote: »

I apologise if I'm being intrusive, or asking a stupid question, I just genuinely don't know what this would be like, do you feel your experience, or something surrounding your sexuality changes, or that your actual core sexuality fluctuates? Just I can't imagine what to me feels like such a solid thing ever changing, so I have a kind of gyroscope type image in my head.

You really don't have to answer if I'm being thick - which I feel I might be...

no no, its fine. It has taken me years and years to really even accept that it is happening, in part because everyone one around me believed that every stage was a phase until i "came around" to the truth: that I am gay and kidding myself/bisexual and insecure/straight and lead astray.

and, oddly, because it does seem to be my core sexuality shifting, all of the above statements have felt true at some point. it is very disorienting, and puts massive strain on a number of relationships in my life, including with friends. I don't think anyone knows quite what to do with me; I have a tendancy to run hot and cold on various friends of mine, depending on where I am oriented at the time.

and to be fair, for some people, I am actually that bisexual that gay people are frequently afraid of and that bisexuals would like to distance themselves from: I *do* stealthily move between gay and straight social circles, I *will* be with some one who is gay and find my self lusting after the opposite sex, I *do* find it hard to be monogamous and I *don't* think one gender will "satisfy" me. And deep in my heart, I don't see why it should.

I feel very alone, even when I read discussion amongst or about bisexuals on here and other fora I don't seem to have much common ground.

wonderfulname

That sounds very difficult.

You have given me a lot of food for thought, again because it is something I find quite hard to comprehend, I think I shall sleep on it. Thank you for the insight.

apache

bodice ripper wrote: »

no no, its fine. It has taken me years and years to really even accept that it is happening, in part because everyone one around me believed that every stage was a phase until i "came around" to the truth: that I am gay and kidding myself/bisexual and insecure/straight and lead astray.

and, oddly, because it does seem to be my core sexuality shifting, all of the above statements have felt true at some point. it is very disorienting, and puts massive strain on a number of relationships in my life, including with friends. I don't think anyone knows quite what to do with me; I have a tendancy to run hot and cold on various friends of mine, depending on where I am oriented at the time.

and to be fair, for some people, I am actually that bisexual that gay people are frequently afraid of and that bisexuals would like to distance themselves from: I *do* stealthily move between gay and straight social circles, I *will* be with some one who is gay and find my self lusting after the opposite sex, I *do* find it hard to be monogamous and I *don't* think one gender will "satisfy" me. And deep in my heart, I don't see why it should.

I feel very alone, even when I read discussion amongst or about bisexuals on here and other fora I don't seem to have much common ground.

so at one moment in one space in time you are essentially that orientation?
i find this hard to understand and thats ok for me to say so because i don't understand it. i am not a hard core lesbian feminist or anything of the sort. lol if only you knew

but i do understand it a small bit more. just a small bit. but at least that is a step

bodice ripper

Lovely Dyke wrote: »

so at one moment in one space in time you are essentially that orientation?
i find this hard to understand and thats ok for me to say so because i don't understand it. i am not a hard core lesbian feminist or anything of the sort. lol if only you knew

but i do understand it a small bit more. just a small bit. but at least that is a step

it never settles down. When I am in the humour for men, no woman will do and vice versa. and there are times when i would like both, desperately. and I feel like I am missing out on one or the other frequently. the emotional and sexual response that women bring out in me is entirely different from that which is brought out of me by men. I would go further and say that i am an entirely different person around women I find attractive and men I find attractive, so much so that I find it very difficult to be in the presence of both at the same time - I don't know who to be.

all joking aside, it is constant torment.

limra

i don't think that queerness is approached in the right way, it just seems kind of strange, its confusing, and for us, being queer and also like kind of a psychic person which apparently isn't that strange of a combination, but still, we had difficulties and still do, its that too much comes up at once, and no one understands, maybe there were some signs or something that we missed out on, as schizoaffective, this means often we come across flat though we are not meaning, to or may not have much to say in normal conversation, its just i guess, we haven't really meet too many queer people who were quiet, especially guys, and thats strange, because well, it just seems like everyone is afraid, and maybe we're just alone, truly alone, truly different, in many ways we are different, i guess unique, we also were a fairy changeling, and no one really seemed to care realizing that, coming out as being transgendered was harder, but it is too many distinctions at once, why would i want to list that, i am just who i am, and thats how i feel about other people too, i think pansexuality is a great concept because its just like, attracted to what you are attracted to, and it doesnt set limits, i like to idea of having sex with everything (but not causing harm, and some things are honestly disgusting) but yeah, that kind of openness, i feel like all of it, its all just containers, boxes and boxes and i'd like to break through all of them one day, and just spontaneously be someone, maybe its not possible, maybe we're just dreamers oh well oh.... LOVE!! LOVEE!!!

are you aware that new colors are being discovered every day?

Morag

bodice ripper wrote: »

It's not your call to make, unfortunately. I find "I am lgbt" stilted and unclear most of the people I am talking about. I am trying to avoid a 25 minute explanation to strangers.

That is why I may say not straight or just queer

I dont' have an issue with being Bi or saying I am Bisexual but I get sick of then having to educate people esp if I am out for the evening and not in the mood.