Where do you fall on the Kinsey Scale?

iguana · 27-12-2015 03:21PM

Candie wrote: »

I think most people find their own experience and it's polar opposite much easier to understand than a more fluid or central orientation that encompasses attraction to both sexes. It makes perfect sense that Medusa finds it easier to imagine people being even slightly bi to some degree than not at all by the same token given her own experience.

It's just perspective, there's no need for the defensiveness or annoyance.

It's not necessarily more fluid though. Yes bisexuality can obviously increase the pool of people you are attracted to but attraction is subjective and gender isn't the only thing matters. A bi-sexual person may not be attracted to a wide variety of ethnicities and body shapes. Whereas a strictly heterosexual/homosexual person might find attraction with people from all over the world and with a wide variety of body shapes.

johnnyskeleton · 27-12-2015 03:26PM

How does the question about your friends' sexuality affect the answer? I dont see how hanging out with exclusively straight people makes me more straight, or exclusively gay people any less!

Also, does proudly announcing "Im 100% hetero/homosexual buddy" as opposed to "I never really talk about it" make you more hetero/homosexual? Sounds pretty repressed if you ask me.

CyclopsDeluxe · 27-12-2015 03:30PM

Ficheall wrote: »

I believe you're talking out your arse.

Most of the stick you're getting here is because you're saying most people are bisexual. And you're saying they probably just don't know it. It's pretty insulting/bigoted - in my opinion.

I don't know, I personally don't find it insulting. Maybe the way you read the whole thing shows more about your own state of mind than the OPs?

A pity how a theoretical debate had to turn nasty and resort to name calling

Medusa22 · 27-12-2015 03:30PM

What about the ancient Greeks and Romans? Cultural norms at certain periods of time meant that it was acceptable for men to sleep with other men, there were other cultural norms to adhere to, such as it wasn't socially acceptable once the teenage boy or young man was over a certain age and there were also societal rules about who was penetrated. What I am saying though is that it was socially acceptable for men to sleep with other men, and many men did so. I doubt all men did, and I am not trying to say that all men did sleep with other men, I'm just saying that perhaps cultural norms also have some influence over how comfortable people feel about their sexuality. I'm not saying that everyone who says they are 100% straight are in the closet or in denial, I'm just saying that perhaps as it becomes more socially acceptable, there will be more people openly identifying as bi-sexual.

RDM_83 again · 27-12-2015 03:31PM

I've the mildly controversial view that men tend to be pretty straight apart from the 15-20 percent that are Bi and the 5% that are gay (top of the head figures).
In past societies where homosexual behavior among men has been part of the culture AFAIK its seems to point a split in view that active vs receiving with the latter being frowned upon, basically it was ok to use a male as a something to get off with but very much not ok to view the idea of helping a man get off as appealing.

For woman it seems to be way way more plastic than that, look at the fact that political lesbianism is a thing as an example.

The above is basically me making stuff up because it fits my world view, then again its a thread about Kinsey and thats basically what he did.
(Personally think he's one of the best examples ever of observer effect in research)

Avatar MIA · 27-12-2015 03:33PM

Strictly Heterosexual. Wondered if saying I had gay friends and that I am not attracted to, but can recognise attractive people of the same sex would affect the outcome. It doesn't appear to.

El Weirdo · 27-12-2015 03:37PM

Deleted User wrote: »

... So those people who believe themselves to be straight - have just failed to meet someone who tickles their balls yet...

FTFY

Freak Midget · 27-12-2015 03:48PM

Medusa22 wrote: »

I am saying that most people are predominantly gay or straight but with some homosexual/heterosexual tendencies to varying degrees, I don't believe this to be a very controversial statement. Sexuality is fluid, most people are aware of this, most people are not 100% gay or straight but fall somewhere on the spectrum, and like I said previously that could be 99.9 gay or straight, and as I have said, it is MOST people, not all.

Just because your gender studies professor told you most people are 'sexually fluid' does not mean its true.

Medusa22 · 27-12-2015 03:51PM

Freak Midget wrote: »

Just because your gender studies professor told you most people are 'sexually fluid' does not mean its true.

I didn't study gender studies.

27-12-2015 03:57PM

I did that test a couple of times before, and it said I'm an incidental lesbian. Did it there and the responses seem slightly different. Now it says I'm bisexual which isn't true.

Ficheall · 27-12-2015 03:58PM

CyclopsDeluxe wrote: »

I don't know, I personally don't find it insulting. Maybe the way you read the whole thing shows more about your own state of mind than the OPs?

"I beg to differ, CD - you do actually find it insulting, you just don't realise it yet."
No? Someone saying you don't know what you think/feel is fine by you? Maybe insulting isn't the right word, I suppose.

It's not the topic that bothers me (in case that's what your second sentence is alluding to) - it's people presuming to know more about other people than they know about themselves. I don't like sweet potato fries - if someone tried to insist that I was wrong and that I actually did like sweet potato fries, I wouldn't be particularly impressed.

Maybe that analogy fails though. I suppose if you smothered sweet potato fries in rasher and goats cheese and honey, maybe I wouldn't notice the sweet potato fries. ****, maybe I'm bi...

CyclopsDeluxe · 27-12-2015 04:13PM

Ficheall wrote: »

"I beg to differ, CD - you do actually find it insulting, you just don't realise it yet."
No? Someone saying you don't know what you think/feel is fine by you? Maybe insulting isn't the right word, I suppose.

It's not the topic that bothers me (in case that's what your second sentence is alluding to) - it's people presuming to know more about other people than they know about themselves. I don't like sweet potato fries - if someone tried to insist that I was wrong and that I actually did like sweet potato fries, I wouldn't be particularly impressed.

Maybe that analogy fails though. I suppose if you smothered sweet potato fries in rasher and goats cheese and honey, maybe I wouldn't notice the sweet potato fries. ****, maybe I'm bi...

I am amused by your analogy. Who knows, there is a good chance you might actually enjoy the sweet potato fries if they were prepared differently.
Alternatively you could of course always shove them into a different orifice and ponder on other ways you have felt hard done by. Enjoy the million possibilities and sweet potatoes

Medusa22 · 27-12-2015 04:14PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I did that test a couple of times before, and it said I'm an incidental lesbian. Did it there and the responses seem slightly different. Now it says I'm bisexual which isn't true.

Ah the Kinsey scale is quite basic/primitive and I just used it to start a discussion on sexuality and where people believe that they are on the homosexual-heterosexual continuum and if they wanted to take the quiz to see what it said. Sorry, I probably should have said that in the OP, sexuality is a lot more nuanced than that.

27-12-2015 04:14PM

iguana wrote: »

It's not necessarily more fluid though. Yes bisexuality can obviously increase the pool of people you are attracted to but attraction is subjective and gender isn't the only thing matters. A bi-sexual person may not be attracted to a wide variety of ethnicities and body shapes. Whereas a strictly heterosexual/homosexual person might find attraction with people from all over the world and with a wide variety of body shapes.

Orientation (or maybe it's better phrased as flexibility) not fluidity, in attraction between sexes is what I was referring to, not taste.

Being attracted to blue eyed blond(e)s is taste, if the sex is secondary to that attraction.

Azalea · 27-12-2015 04:19PM

Apart from one, my responses were entirely straightforwardly heterosexual, no ambiguity - and then I responded to one with "I would be open to trying new things" and get the result that my sexuality is quite fluid.

I can't see how it's fluid at all - just because I said in response to one of the questions that I would be open to trying new things. It doesn't mean I definitely would, it just means I wouldn't rule it out, because you never know. I only fancy men, I have only ever been with men, and I only fantasise about men - this makes my sexuality pretty rigid surely.

Some day I might fall absolutely head over heels for a woman (and if it happens, I'd bet she'd be quite a masculine woman) - I'm only speculating this way because it has been known to happen, not because I've experienced something like that though, or fantasised about it.

Medusa22 · 27-12-2015 04:23PM

Azalea wrote: »

Apart from one, my responses were entirely straightforwardly heterosexual, no ambiguity - and then I responded to one with "I would be open to trying new things" and get the result that my sexuality is quite fluid.

I can't see how it's fluid at all - just because I said in response to one of the questions that I would be open to trying new things. It doesn't mean I definitely would, it just means I wouldn't rule it out, because you never know. I only fancy men, I have only ever been with men, and I only fantasise about men - this makes my sexuality pretty rigid surely.
Some day I might fall absolutely head over heels for a woman (and if it happens, I'd bet she'd be quite a masculine woman) - I'm only speculating this way because it has been known to happen, not because I've experienced something like that though, or fantasised about it.

Azalea has epitomised part of what I have been trying to say. She may never meet a woman that she is attracted to or that she wants to sleep with or that she will fall in love with but she wouldn't rule it out, because she can't be 100% sure that she won't. I'm not sure if anyone can be 100% sure that they definitely won't because nobody knows what the future holds, it is a possibility, even if it may never happen at all or seems highly unlikely.

RayM · 27-12-2015 04:46PM

Strictly heterosexual.

Azalea wrote: »

Apart from one, my responses were entirely straightforwardly heterosexual, no ambiguity - and then I responded to one with "I would be open to trying new things" and get the result that my sexuality is quite fluid.

I didn't like the wording of the responses to that question. I went with "I'm heterosexual. Always have been, always will be," but I'm not horrified or disgusted by the idea of a man standing over me, with his lad in his hand, wanting me to degrade myself. It's just not something that I can ever imagine myself seeking out.

GLaDOS · 27-12-2015 04:48PM

Strictly heterosexual, how boring.

Ficheall · 27-12-2015 05:00PM

Medusa22 wrote: »

Azalea has epitomised part of what I have been trying to say. She may never meet a woman that she is attracted to or that she wants to sleep with or that she will fall in love with but she wouldn't rule it out, because she can't be 100% sure that she won't. I'm not sure if anyone can be 100% sure that they definitely won't because nobody knows what the future holds, it is a possibility, even if it may never happen at all or seems highly unlikely.

And following that logic, presumably we're all part zoophile, because you might just not have met the right sheep yet, even if you might find the idea extremely unappealing now. Brilliant.

27-12-2015 05:02PM

You got: Mostly homosexual.

You’re mostly gay, but maybe you haven’t always been. You find yourself attracted to members of the same sex as your own, but not exclusively. You can’t say for sure that you’ll always identify as a homosexual, but you definitely do for now. You’re sexuality is more fluid than most.

Sounds about right. I don't really like calling myself gay, because I don't think I'll ever be 100% on that side of the spectrum, but it somehow feels dishonest to say I'm bisexual (even if technically correct) because it's so weighted towards the "gay" end.

Personally I do believe in sexuality being a fluid thing, and that a lot of people (if not most people) would fall somewhere in between on the spectrum, but if someone says they're 100% straight or 100% gay then I'm not going to argue with them because they obviously know themselves better than I or anyone else does. Nobody should ever be told by anyone else how they identify, or how they "should" identify.

McChubbin · 27-12-2015 05:12PM

Here's what I got:

You got: Equal parts homosexual and heterosexual.
At times, you’ve found yourself drawn to different types of people: gay, straight, male, female, and whatever else. Your sexuality is about as fluid as it gets, and it’ll probably remain so as long as you’re having sexual impulses.

I would consider myself bisexual but this sounds like pansexuality to me....

Whitewinged · 27-12-2015 05:14PM

I got "mostly heterosexual".

I'd agree with this but I do hate those questionnaire things to determine or define. I think that they only work if the person answers honestly and if the person answers honestly then they kind of already know the answer and don't really need to be put in a category. But yeah I get it for the purpose of the thread.

Fat Christy · 27-12-2015 05:16PM

Equal parts homo and hetero. Pure fluid like yourself OP.

I'll take what I can get, man, woman or goat.

Avatar MIA · 27-12-2015 05:18PM

A bi-sexual saying they believe everyone is somewhat bisexual is similar to a colourblind person believing everyone sees colours the way they do.

Earthhorse · 27-12-2015 05:38PM

Medusa22 wrote: »

Azalea has epitomised part of what I have been trying to say. She may never meet a woman that she is attracted to or that she wants to sleep with or that she will fall in love with but she wouldn't rule it out, because she can't be 100% sure that she won't. I'm not sure if anyone can be 100% sure that they definitely won't because nobody knows what the future holds, it is a possibility, even if it may never happen at all or seems highly unlikely.

That's kind of meaningless though. You might end up murdering someone someday, you just can't know. But right now you are as good as not a murderer.

diograis · 27-12-2015 05:51PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I've the mildly controversial view that men tend to be pretty straight apart from the 15-20 percent that are Bi and the 5% that are gay (top of the head figures).
In past societies where homosexual behavior among men has been part of the culture AFAIK its seems to point a split in view that active vs receiving with the latter being frowned upon, basically it was ok to use a male as a something to get off with but very much not ok to view the idea of helping a man get off as appealing.

For woman it seems to be way way more plastic than that, look at the fact that political lesbianism is a thing as an example.

The above is basically me making stuff up because it fits my world view, then again its a thread about Kinsey and thats basically what he did.
(Personally think he's one of the best examples ever of observer effect in research)

Do you mean by observer effect that he caused a change in the statistics he took? How so?

Whitewinged · 27-12-2015 05:52PM

Earthhorse wrote: »

That's kind of meaningless though. You might end up murdering someone someday, you just can't know. But right now you are as good as not a murderer.

I agree there are definitely people who are 100% straight and will always be straight or 100% homosexual and will always be but there are also alot of people who identify as straight or homosexual but would not completely rule out a sex or a relationship with opposite or same sex.

hatrickpatrick · 27-12-2015 06:00PM

Interesting, it told me I was straighter than a ruler despite my answering that I have more female friends and tend to connect more socially with women, which is an answer I would have thought most straight guys wouldn't give. Sexually I've always been 100% straight but I always thought I was a bit of an anomaly when it came to socialising.

Azalea · 27-12-2015 06:00PM

Ficheall wrote: »

And following that logic, presumably we're all part zoophile, because you might just not have met the right sheep yet, even if you might find the idea extremely unappealing now. Brilliant.

I dunno - I mean, not sure I'd be inclined to compare humans to animals.

Peregrine · 27-12-2015 06:06PM

Medusa22 wrote: »

Azalea has epitomised part of what I have been trying to say. She may never meet a woman that she is attracted to or that she wants to sleep with or that she will fall in love with but she wouldn't rule it out, because she can't be 100% sure that she won't. I'm not sure if anyone can be 100% sure that they definitely won't because nobody knows what the future holds, it is a possibility, even if it may never happen at all or seems highly unlikely.

Azalea is only one individual though and her own nuanced sexuality isn't the same for all monosexual people.

I'm repulsed by thought of me lying with another man. Any man. It's not fair to say that it's still a possibility or that I don't know what the future holds when I'm certain that it's not something I want to do.

Where do you fall on the Kinsey Scale?

Comments