Your Sexuality is
Gay Or Lesbian
5.5% (32)
5.5% (32)
Bisexual
13% (76)
13% (76)
Pan-Sexual
3.8% (22)
3.8% (22)
Demi-Sexual
1.9% (11)
1.9% (11)
Straight
67.7% (396)
67.7% (396)
Asexuality
4.8% (28)
4.8% (28)
Other
2.2% (13)
2.2% (13)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: The 'why' in Sexuality

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Matthew94:

Angry Juju:

Aurgelmir:
What is Demi-sexual? And how does Pan-sexuality differ from bisexuality?

Pansexuality is where you're attracted to literally anyone, no matter who they are.

Bisexuality is just male/female

Tell me of these other mythical genders.

There's an article here that details some other genders and their distinctions. Also, I'm sure you don't mean it at all, but the way your comments are phrased sounds, to me, a little rude, although I'm sure this was unintentional.

verdant monkai:

BiscuitTrouser:
[quote="verdant monkai" post="18.373421.14436304"][quote="BiscuitTrouser" post="18.373421.14436176"][quote="verdant monkai" post="18.373421.14436108"]

Sorry again your biology is wrong. Carriers can lead to other carriers. And who says the emergence of the gay gene took place with a mutation that lead to a full on expression of the gene? A carrier may have been born through mutation and mated with another carrier. Its perfectly possible. Carriers have children with a normal person and 25% of children are carriers.

Youre right you dont know biology. It isnt your fault but the carrier arguement is valid and its not really your field of expertise. I dont mind not getting a reply. The arguement you put forward is fallacious.

If carriers "weaken" the gene then cystic fibrosis can only get better. It doesnt. It doesnt make people "less gay". Carriers spread it and it likely started in carriers if it exists. Which i admit it might not. Im just saying the idea that it CANT exist because gays have children is as invalid as the idea cystic fibrosis (or any other genetic disorder) cannot exist since these people cannot reproduce.

SORRY SORRY your last reply was to interesting to ignore, last one I promise.

I have to thank you for teaching me the word fallacious it's great.
Web definitions:
containing or based on a fallacy; "fallacious reasoning"; "an unsound argument"

as for the actual argument bit, my point is Gays don't have straight sex in the first place so there would be no carrier offspring. Gays cant have kids (so there cant be any carriers).
If you believe in evolution like I do, then you know all life is a sort of mutation, generally only the beneficial ones are passed on.

So you can criticize my biological comprehension all day, but my argument is by no means fallacious.

Here is a new word for you synecdoche
Noun:
A figure of speech in which a part is made to represent the whole or vice versa, as in Cleveland won by six runs (meaning "Cleveland's baseball team").

You realize gay people marry women, and have kids with them, because they are too embarrassed or cannot come to terms to due social reasons that they are gay, right?

You also realize that this was especially prevalent the further back in history you go?

So if there is a "gay" gene, its very possible it could spread to other children.

OH and Edit: Women sells their eggs the same way men sell their sperm. If there is a "gay gene" its possible for gays to continue spreading their "gayness".

BiscuitTrouser:

Those are the appropriate key words. Their level is irrelivant to be honest. I used the words to describe what i meant. I do A level biology and i finish next week. Its hardly like i was pitched an examination on genetics. We discussed a topic and i pointed out that carriers can propegate a disease since some diseases cause sterility or kill before people can reproduce. I also pointed out mutation can cause carriers to arise rather than "sufferers" as the first incidence. I also pointed out that things can be "recessive" by being covered by many other genes both dominant and co dominant.

However ive changed my view on seeing twins arnt 100% gay when one is gay. This definately points toward the idea it isnt genetic. Defnately something to do with the development of personality and neural pathways after conception/childhood/life. Cant really comment. Very interesting though. Id like to see more studies done.

If you are doing an A level I suggest you stop talking to me and revise for it

If you are saying it isn't genetic now as well, what is the point in arguing with me?
I get you don't like my train of thought but seriously if you think the same what's the point?

My earlier point disproves the recessive point.

Polock:

You realize gay people marry women, and have kids with them, because they are too embarrassed or cannot come to terms to due social reasons that they are gay, right?

You also realize that this was especially prevalent the further back in history you go?

So if there is a "gay" gene, its very possible it could spread to other children.

I have covered this check out the earlier posts. Dont expect an answer I am bored to death of this thread now. (I know I have said that before but enough is enough.... honest)

I'm mostly straight, I think. I've had a girlfriend, but I have wondered what being with a guy is like. I think I'd label myself as "unsure" more than anything else. Can't know until you've tried etcetera.

Angry Juju:

Matthew94:

Angry Juju:

Look at everything inbetween male and female.

Again, would you care to list them?

I would not, but I think you understand what I mean when I say everything inbetween.

The why should I listen to you if you won't even back up your points.

I won't take "trust me" as an answer.

Chefodeath:

Matthew94:

They both like exactly the same things, it's just worded a different way. Like I thought, they are the same thing except pansexuals use the term to look different.

They like the same thing, but for different reasons. Labelling them as the same would be like calling manslaughter and premediated murder the same thing because at the end of the day, they both killed a guy.

That's a pretty bad analogy.

Manslaughter is unintentional while murder is.

Neither PS or BS is unintentional.

I'm asexual, and female, if it matters. I dunno why, I just am. Before I knew it was a sexuality, I just thought I never grew out of the 'Eww Cooties!' stage. I never had a traumatic experience. Well, nothing that would change my sexuality, anyway. That doesn't mean I don't like people though. Just instead of seeing someone I think looks good and thinking that I'd like to have sex with them, I'd be like "Damn, I'd play Halo with them all night long!"

Aurgelmir:
What is Demi-sexual? And how does Pan-sexuality differ from bisexuality?

Hermaphrodites are also an option.

Grogman:

Matthew94:

Angry Juju:

Pansexuality is where you're attracted to literally anyone, no matter who they are.

Bisexuality is just male/female

Tell me of these other mythical genders.

There's an article here that details some other genders and their distinctions. Also, I'm sure you don't mean it at all, but the way your comments are phrased sounds, to me, a little rude, although I'm sure this was unintentional.

Thanks for the link. It's pretty informative.

Matthew94:

Chefodeath:

Matthew94:

They both like exactly the same things, it's just worded a different way. Like I thought, they are the same thing except pansexuals use the term to look different.

They like the same thing, but for different reasons. Labelling them as the same would be like calling manslaughter and premediated murder the same thing because at the end of the day, they both killed a guy.

That's a pretty bad analogy.

Manslaughter is unintentional while murder is.

Neither PS or BS is unintentional.

You're missing the point completely.

Two people can do the exact same thing, but what leads them to what is ultimately the same conclusion is often significant enough for us to distinguish between them. The fact that pansexuals are just plain attracted to people while bisexuals are attracted to males and females specifically is enough for us to distinguish between them even though they are hitting on the same people at the bar.

verdant monkai:

BiscuitTrouser:

Those are the appropriate key words. Their level is irrelivant to be honest. I used the words to describe what i meant. I do A level biology and i finish next week. Its hardly like i was pitched an examination on genetics. We discussed a topic and i pointed out that carriers can propegate a disease since some diseases cause sterility or kill before people can reproduce. I also pointed out mutation can cause carriers to arise rather than "sufferers" as the first incidence. I also pointed out that things can be "recessive" by being covered by many other genes both dominant and co dominant.

However ive changed my view on seeing twins arnt 100% gay when one is gay. This definately points toward the idea it isnt genetic. Defnately something to do with the development of personality and neural pathways after conception/childhood/life. Cant really comment. Very interesting though. Id like to see more studies done.

If you are doing an A level I suggest you stop talking to me and revise for it

If you are saying it isn't genetic now as well, what is the point in arguing with me?
I get you don't like my train of thought but seriously if you think the same what's the point?

My earlier point disproves the recessive point.

If this was the point about if the gene was recessive it would die out i disproved that by just pointing to cystic fibrosis. Thats alive and well in our population (somewhat ironically) despite only being passed by carriers and by those who havnt expressed the gene yet in early life (like the hypothetical gay gene).

In science its important to realise that even if you agree its important to work out HOW the conclusion was drawn. We see the propegation of genes actively selected AGAINST in society that can only be passed by carriers and yet they endure BECAUSE of carriers and those who breed before the effects show - EXACTLY the same as the hypotherical gay gene. Why the same observable principle doesnt apply to the "gay gene" is a part of your point i dont understand.

I favor the idea that genetics plays a role.

Im going to go revise now. Thanks for the reminder. I get so distracted! At least someones got me on task.

Demi-sexual? Well there's another sexuality added to the mix! So what is it now? The LGBTQIADPS? Wait, I forgot, drop that last one, they don't let straight folk into their little club.

Rhetorical nonsense. You fuck what you what to fuck. There would be a lot more fucking going on if people started dealing with the persons more than there categorizations.

It's absolutely everything that you have ever known and everything that was before you knew that defines your sexuality. Your interpretations of experiences and life affect it; your genes affect it; the way you were raised affects it; absolutely fucking everything.

Also no, not as of yet anyway, I've only ever been attracted to females.

Finally: Fuck your bullshit terms. Pansexuality ad Demisexuality? The fuck kind of detailed sexualities are they? Pansexuals are just bisexuals who aren't fussy, you don't need a new term for that. Demisexuals are just prude cautious whatever they are.

Chefodeath:

Matthew94:

Chefodeath:

They like the same thing, but for different reasons. Labelling them as the same would be like calling manslaughter and premediated murder the same thing because at the end of the day, they both killed a guy.

That's a pretty bad analogy.

Manslaughter is unintentional while murder is.

Neither PS or BS is unintentional.

You're missing the point completely.

Two people can do the exact same thing, but what leads them to what is ultimately the same conclusion is often significant enough for us to distinguish between them. The fact that pansexuals are just plain attracted to people while bisexuals are attracted to males and females specifically is enough for us to distinguish between them even though they are hitting on the same people at the bar.

How is it significant enough?

That's like assigning a different sub-set of sexuality for each attribute a person prefers. You don't give a guy who prefers ass a different name you would a guy who prefers tits. "Sure they like the same person but their reasoning is different".

How a particular sexual orientation develops in any individual is not well understood by scientists. Various theories provide different explanations for what determines a person's sexual orientation, including genetic and biological factors and life experiences during early childhood. Despite much research there is no proven explanation of how sexual orientation is determined. However, many scientists share the view that for most people sexual orientation is shaped during the first few years of life through complex interactions of genetic, biological, psychological and social factors.

Despite what some people claim, there is no evidence that society's greater acceptance of homosexuality results in more people having a homosexual sexual orientation. The greater numbers of people identifying as homosexual are a result of fewer people fighting their homosexual feelings while attempting to live heterosexual lives.

For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Some people report trying very hard over many years to change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual, with no success. For these reasons, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation for most people to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed. People don't choose their sexual orientation; they can of course choose the kind of a life they want to live.

Matthew94:

Chefodeath:

Matthew94:

That's a pretty bad analogy.

Manslaughter is unintentional while murder is.

Neither PS or BS is unintentional.

You're missing the point completely.

Two people can do the exact same thing, but what leads them to what is ultimately the same conclusion is often significant enough for us to distinguish between them. The fact that pansexuals are just plain attracted to people while bisexuals are attracted to males and females specifically is enough for us to distinguish between them even though they are hitting on the same people at the bar.

How is it significant enough?

That's like assigning a different sub-set of sexuality for each attribute a person prefers. You don't give a guy who prefers ass a different name you would a guy who prefers tits. "Sure they like the same person but their reasoning is different".

Whether or not it's significant enough to warrant its own name really depends on the standards of the society in which the language is based. Some people thought it was however, so here we are. If you want to call those people idiots, I won't contest you.

krazykidd:

Implying that everyone accepts that humans came from monkeys as fact .

Honey, not everyone accepts the fact that fire his hot as fact. That doesn't make it any less so. Honestly, if you're looking for consensus to rule your life, you're going to be waiting a long time. People can't even come to a consensus that kittens are cute. People still have massive conspiracies indicating the world is flat and there is some age-old conspiracy to hide that from the rest of the populace because PONIES!

Yes, some people do not accept that we share common ancestors with primates. And some people believe fire can't melt steel. I suppose the question is why were are pandering to people who admittedly don't know jack.

SkarKrow:

Ectoplasmicz:

Magnificent specimen of a man xD

SkarKrow:

Ectoplasmicz:

Magnificent specimen of a man xD

DevilWithaHalo:
Demi-sexual? Well there's another sexuality added to the mix! So what is it now? The LGBTQIADPS? Wait, I forgot, drop that last one, they don't let straight folk into their little club.

Rhetorical nonsense. You fuck what you what to fuck. There would be a lot more fucking going on if people started dealing with the persons more than there categorizations.

I hate the QUILTBAG douchebags. You're straight, you're gay or you're bisexual. What the fuck is pansexuality? And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

Whats your sexuality?
Gay.
Do you think there is a Why too your Sexuality?
I don't think there is and frankly, even if there was a 'why' to it, I wouldn't care. I am what I am, and that's all that matters.
Are we born this way? or does it just happen? or do are experiences Define our sexuality?
Personally speaking, I was born gay. Seriously, look at childhood photos of me and there's no doubt in my mind I've always been a total fag.
Have you ever been Sexual Attracted to a member of the Opposite Sex when you are Homosexual?
Attracted... sort of. Hard to explain, really. Sexually attracted? No.

So far as I know I'm completely straight and enjoy sex with women and find them highly sexually attractive.

But i saw some tranny porn once with a really hot looking ladyboy and struggled to suppress a little feeling in the back of my head that said, you know if i ever found myself in bed with one and i was really drunk I wouldn't mind giving that a go just this once...

What box do I go in? Would anybody else like to join me in this box? I'm sure it would be very cosy...

Raven's Nest:
So far as I know I'm completely straight and enjoy sex with women and find them highly sexually attractive.

But i saw some tranny porn once with a really hot looking ladyboy and struggled to suppress a little feeling in the back of my head that said, you know if i ever found myself in bed with one and i was really drunk I wouldn't mind giving that a go just this once...

What box do I go in? Would anybody else like to join me in this box? I'm sure it would be very cosy...

I think that's normal... I think. I like to think of it as the male brain being blown. The thought process being: Hot girl boobs... oh shit a dick... but boobs... but theres a dick! But there's boobs! And she looks like a girl, crap a penis! Would that be wrong?...I'm not sure, it's like a gender centaur! Maybe if I don't look down and keep to doggy style.. and round in a loop.

MammothBlade:
I'm bisexual because I can derive romantic and sexual stimulation from both sexes. Not much else to it.

image

Umm, basically this.
Just without the picture that seems to be emplying...Shenanigans.
I CALL SHENANIGANS!
NURSE!

-Straight

-Born that way. I was pretty much raised in a way that was as open to homosexuality as one could be in 1980s USA. Very, very progressive schooling and such. Still drawn to the female form like a moth to flame since I was about 8 years old. That's pretty much the only why of it.

-Never been attracted to the male form. It's just a functional, aesthetic neutral to me.

Additionally... sex is just a biological reaction to me. Needing to cum is about like needing to piss, only the release is much harder to achieve and feels even better. So, not tied to any emotion, just physical release.

Lesbian.

There probably is a strong genetic basis, since I was kinda like that ever since as a kid, but probably some experiences have influenced my preferences to some extent.

Not just that I like women, but what kind of women I like.

Freechoice:
And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

And why is atheism a religious identity? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

That Guy Ya Know:

Freechoice:
And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

And why is atheism a religious identity? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

Atheism isn't a religious identity at all. And the word you are looking for is apatheist...

elvor0:

Raven's Nest:
So far as I know I'm completely straight and enjoy sex with women and find them highly sexually attractive.

But i saw some tranny porn once with a really hot looking ladyboy and struggled to suppress a little feeling in the back of my head that said, you know if i ever found myself in bed with one and i was really drunk I wouldn't mind giving that a go just this once...

What box do I go in? Would anybody else like to join me in this box? I'm sure it would be very cosy...

I think that's normal... I think. I like to think of it as the male brain being blown. The thought process being: Hot girl boobs... oh shit a dick... but boobs... but theres a dick! But there's boobs! And she looks like a girl, crap a penis! Would that be wrong?...I'm not sure, it's like a gender centaur! Maybe if I don't look down and keep to doggy style.. and round in a loop.

Normal is a dangerous word to use in a thread like this lol. I would agree that I was conventionally straight. I could only find a penis attractive if it was attached to a body with a female form. I can't watch man on tranny porn, it makes me gag.

That Guy Ya Know:

Freechoice:
And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

And why is atheism a religious identity? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

Cause people care waaay too much about this shit...

CAPTCHA: easy as cake
Indeed...

That Guy Ya Know:

Freechoice:
And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

And why is atheism a religious identity? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

You also missed the point. Atheism means you ain't no goddamn sunovabitch. You better think about it, baby.

I'm Bi/pansexual. The only thing I don't really find attractive is pre-operation trans gender males.

I just find it weeeeird to have guys with out any dicks, but I fully welcome dicks on chicks.

Raven's Nest:

That Guy Ya Know:

Freechoice:
And why is asexuality a sexuality? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

And why is atheism a religious identity? It literally means you do not give a fuck.

Atheism isn't a religious identity at all. And the word you are looking for is apatheist...

elvor0:

Raven's Nest:
So far as I know I'm completely straight and enjoy sex with women and find them highly sexually attractive.

But i saw some tranny porn once with a really hot looking ladyboy and struggled to suppress a little feeling in the back of my head that said, you know if i ever found myself in bed with one and i was really drunk I wouldn't mind giving that a go just this once...

What box do I go in? Would anybody else like to join me in this box? I'm sure it would be very cosy...

I think that's normal... I think. I like to think of it as the male brain being blown. The thought process being: Hot girl boobs... oh shit a dick... but boobs... but theres a dick! But there's boobs! And she looks like a girl, crap a penis! Would that be wrong?...I'm not sure, it's like a gender centaur! Maybe if I don't look down and keep to doggy style.. and round in a loop.

Normal is a dangerous word to use in a thread like this lol. I would agree that I was conventionally straight. I could only find a penis attractive if it was attached to a body with a female form. I can't watch man on tranny porn, it makes me gag.

I'm straight but yeah, that makes me feel pretty grossed out as well, same as if I accidently stumble on girl with strapon on man porn... that shit is just weird. I don't think I'd go through with a shemale, I just think that reaction fits because to most people a girl with a dick is just so wrong compared to what is expected, thus the confused reaction. Strangly futa hentai/anime doesn't gross me out in the slightest though. Ah whatever floats your boat I guess.

I'm confused what pansexual even is. Is it like, 'men, women and the occasional dog' or what? Is it like those people who want to fuck the Berlin wall or what?

1.Gay Male.

2/3.Nope, I honestly think that it is that your just born into your sexuality, and you don't start with being Straight and then deviating when your older, because then it would have to be that way across the board. And honestly, if it were that way, humans, with all of our media suited for straight dudes and dudets there shouldn't be a queer in the modern world. Honestly, go onto Fox and see how many of those shows about Romantic Comedies are on today.

It makes more sense for it to be almost random then for it to be with experiences.

4. Never been sexually attracted to a transwoman or transmale or to a regular female.

Sindaine:
I'm confused what pansexual even is. Is it like, 'men, women and the occasional dog' or what? Is it like those people who want to fuck the Berlin wall or what?

In the simplest terms, its sex with any human creature despite their gender. Its not Bisexuality, since you still fly on what genders currently exist. Here, its love without borders to humans. You generally just want to fuck the human race is the best way of putting it, with no discrimination at all.

elvor0:

I'm straight but yeah, that makes me feel pretty grossed out as well, same as if I accidently stumble on girl with strapon on man porn... that shit is just weird. I don't think I'd go through with a shemale, I just think that reaction fits because to most people a girl with a dick is just so wrong compared to what is expected, thus the confused reaction. Strangly futa hentai/anime doesn't gross me out in the slightest though. Ah whatever floats your boat I guess.

It always starts with futa-hentai...always...

Be on your guard lest the taint infect you too ;)

Straight, to an extreme. So far that I would say that certain women are aesthetically perfect. I find males highly unattractive and incapable of exceeding a certain point, which inevitably causes me to put more stock in women than men. To the extent that I would prefer any given woman to be a lesbian than straight. Which basically makes me a lesbian that was born a man.

I'm not sure why, I suppose I just evolved as a person and gradually started thinking of myself (indirectly, through games) as woman. I also dislike typical male ideals so I always distanced myself from those.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked