Bi but...?

[LargoKitt]

Just a possibility, not a surety.

I think an answer to my page 3 question would have provided some much-needed context.

So what is a virgin teenager supposed to say?

My virgin grandkids, some of them, are saying, "I don't really know yet who really turns me on. Too soon. But there is something hot about both guys and gals." This doesn't necessarily mean they are 'gender fluid'. It means they are fascinated by and probably 'feel twinges' or more when they imagine, or see, cocks and pussies and other 'turn on accoutrements.' Maybe they see Elizabeth Gilbert as a role model. The hot and heavy is all about the actual person who connects with them. OTOH, I'm not sure lots of young people have thought about the fact that marriage is something different from who you love or have the hots for. It is old-fashioned and it puts strictures on you for the sake of other people.

 

[usable001]

I'm not sure lots of young people have thought about the fact that marriage is something different from who you love or have the hots for. It is old-fashioned and it puts strictures on you for the sake of other people.

Haha. I'm pretty sure that has always been true, even when our own grandparents were kids.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Yes. So now the proper response is education, not hostility.

I tried education. So did many others. You can lead a horse to water…

 

[XerXesXu]

A question for you: why the fuck are you so caught up on this that you feel the need to dismiss and denigrate other people’s lives, when you clearly know nothing about the area? Why do you care?

This has now become a commentary on you, not other people. You are simply revealing your own misconceptions and biases.

Probably because he's nearly as old as me. These things didn't feature in our acculturation. Not everybody has the same history as you. Young people seem to think that the world has always been the same as they've experienced it.

 

[SmilingLez]

Close, but when I got married, instead of choosing "men" or "women", I chose one person. Again, as I suspect you did.

That is true for most human beings who find their person/people

 

[LargoKitt]

Thinking, "Well, you're currently with a person of the opposite gender. That proves you can't still feel desire for people of some other gender."

People keep confusing 'having feelings for' with 'identifying as'.

Sorry, but this is utter BS. And you are now getting into being offensive to the many bisexual people here (me included) who have tried to explain to you. Drop it.

Emily, I have a right to be confused. If your sexuality is puzzling to me, or if mine is puzzling to you, in the abstract, in this forum and I want to understand it better, maybe by putting forward my own ignorance, then, by gum I'm going to do it. For Athena's sake, you have expressed 'puzzlement' at you fellow AHers enough times. Sorry, you don't get to say who says what about what. I honor your boundaries and if I have trod on them. The whole point of the OP was to say, "This language confuses me. Does it also confuse people who are moving into relationships, perhaps with a person like me?"

 

[usable001]

Before I forget, let me point out that there are people in the world actively trying to create an enemy for people to rally behind. Nothing brings people together like a common foe. Some of these people are just repeating what they've been told without looking any deeper, and some are actively lying in an effort to create problems where none exist. The only reason I mention this is because "for the children" is one of those huge rallying cries helping people think persecuting other people is okay.

My virgin grandkids, some of them, are saying, "I don't really know yet who really turns me on. Too soon. But there is something hot about both guys and gals." This doesn't necessarily mean they are 'gender fluid'. It means they are fascinated by and probably 'feel twinges' or more when they imagine, or see, cocks and pussies and other 'turn on accoutrements.'

This has always been true. There have always been rules--legal rules--to prevent people from rushing into anything permanent that they might regret later. These rules are even stricter for young people.

People keep confusing 'having feelings for' with 'identifying as'.

Yes. This is also why two sets of labels exist. One set is who you are attracted to (heterosexual, bisexual, polyamorous). The other set is who you are (cisgender, transgender, gender fluid). I personally think too many labels exist, but I also understand the desire to say one word instead of explaining yourself over and over.

 

[KittyOfSteele]

And because you like reading novels you have decided never to play tennis again; but you identify as someone who presently both reads novels and plays tennis (Not 'likes' but 'plays and reads'. Seems like there are two circumstances here: An unmarried and legally unattached person says, " I like sex with both men and women. And if I find the right person I'll go with that kind of sex." But marriage has elided a bit since I did mine nearly sixty years ago. Economics and the sight of so many parents splitting hard created generations of people who now say, basically, "I'm going to commit myself to *trying out* this relationship as long as it 'works'. If one way isn't good I''l try another." Another generation or so along people seem to be saying (to exaggerate a bit), "Lots of sexual and emotional 'modes' feel interesting to me. And I see myself as an evolving being. This week I feel like trying a bit of this and a little of that and putting myself forward like this. The pronouns that attract me are anything including 'it'. As for finding a permanent life partner...permanent is a very long time and people change. If a person I love can't handle that complexity...fuck 'em. Marriage? Oh. That isn't really necessary any more." I'm not really judging these changes, but forgive me if for my generation they feel kind of like whiplash.

There is a lot to unpack here...

You can identify as someone who both reads novels and plays tennis, but if you decided to never play tennis again, you can say that you used to play tennis instead. The same goes when you're married; you can say you used to have sex with this set of people. But unlike playing tennis, you can't say you used to be bisexual before you got married because sexual orientation is not something you can change on a whim; it's already something coded in your being. Maybe you can say you explored things before you realized you weren't, but getting married doesn't remove your sexual orientation.

In fact, at its core, has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Hell, it never even had anything to do with love in the first place. Historically speaking, marriage was, and still is, a contract, even if you don't sign a piece of paper because there are people who aren't married by any institution, yet their relationship dynamic is that one of a marriage. Those are very common in my country, especially around your generation. In fact, a lot of couples that I know, both younger and older than me, prefers this type of dynamic instead of the expenses of a lavish party for a piece of paper that won't guarantee a lasting relationship because there's only two ways those end: separation and death.

People can experiment; let them be, that's how we figure out our identity. My only issue is the huge amount of tags that keep popping out, which only causes the same confusion that you're experiencing. Just rest assured that what you said in the OP was an untrue stereotype of what bisexuality is. If you want it reduced to the simplest point, here it is: you like both men and women, but that doesn't make you promiscuous, unfaithful, or unsatisfied.

 

[usable001]

"This language confuses me. Does it also confuse people who are moving into relationships, perhaps with a person like me?"

Yes.

When I was in college, I had a girlfriend who used to listen to songs and find something deeply personal within them (not that unusual). She would then write me notes containing nothing but those song lyrics, under the assumption that I would look at those lyrics and somehow magically know what she was feeling. Miscommunication is all over the place. So much so that it is a standard trope in romance novels (particularly with lazy writing).

 

[LargoKitt]

Well, it might *seem* that way, but it's a mistake to cling to believing that.

What it is, is, a refusal to be erased.

It doesn't mean you're going to break up over your partner's gender, it doesn't mean you're going to cheat on them, it doesn't mean you're going to demand nonmonogamy, it just means you're not going to stop identifying as what you goddamn well are.

What does 'identifying as' mean? I'm confused. If people think of 'bisexual' as actually meaning 'bigender', "I have both masculine and feminine traits or feelings and my identity is bound up in both of them." Then bisexuality is a matter of identity. But understanding is skewed by the custom that 'heterosexual' means someone who has sex with the opposite gender and 'homosexual' has sex with the same gender. By that token 'bisexual' suggests that the person has sex with both genders, no matter how they identify.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

@LargoKitt: it isn't in fact complex. "Bisexual" is used to mean "one who feels attraction to members of both major genders." That's it.

For some reason, some people in this thread seem to insist that it means "one who fucks people of both major genders." I do not understand why.

I am straight, but this seems quite straightforward (pun fully intended) to me. Maybe because I talk to queer people sometimes in Real Life(tm)?

 

[LargoKitt]

There is a lot to unpack here...

You can identify as someone who both reads novels and plays tennis, but if you decided to never play tennis again, you can say that you used to play tennis instead. The same goes when you're married; you can say you used to have sex with this set of people. But unlike playing tennis, you can't say you used to be bisexual before you got married because sexual orientation is not something you can change on a whim; it's already something coded in your being. Maybe you can say you explored things before you realized you weren't, but getting married doesn't remove your sexual orientation.

In fact, at its core, has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Hell, it never even had anything to do with love in the first place. Historically speaking, marriage was, and still is, a contract, even if you don't sign a piece of paper because there are people who aren't married by any institution, yet their relationship dynamic is that one of a marriage. Those are very common in my country, especially around your generation. In fact, a lot of couples that I know, both younger and older than me, prefers this type of dynamic instead of the expenses of a lavish party for a piece of paper that won't guarantee a lasting relationship because there's only two ways those end: separation and death.

People can experiment; let them be, that's how we figure out our identity. My only issue is the huge amount of tags that keep popping out, which only causes the same confusion that you're experiencing. Just rest assured that what you said in the OP was an untrue stereotype of what bisexuality is. If you want it reduced to the simplest point, here it is: you like both men and women, but that doesn't make you promiscuous, unfaithful, or unsatisfied.

"You like both men and women." I like both men and women. I'll go beyond that, I love both men and women. I don't fuck both men and women. I have very close relatives and friends who have at different points in their lives. I have relatives who have been different genders. Back to the OP, how to people in strong relationships talk about their sexual needs?

 

[LargoKitt]

Haha. I'm pretty sure that has always been true, even when our own grandparents were kids.

What seems to be different is a paradigm shift. The old 'rule' was that you were expected to marry because that was a key stich in the social fabric. If you found someone you loved and were simpatico with on all fronts...wow...you lucked out. And the obligation of sex with them might actually be fun.

 

[usable001]

For the sake of 'story research' I am curious about how the dialog goes when you ask your lover for the first time, "Are you okay with me being bi?" And maybe they ask, "What does that mean...for us?"

If this is for a story, imagine substituting "not what you expected" for "being bi."

When I was younger, it was expected that men were sexually active before marriage and women were virgins. So imagine a man saying, "Are you okay with me being a virgin?" He could not say anything and try to fake it (people do that all the time), or he could talk too soon about uncomfortable topics with someone who isn't even sure she likes him yet. Bad communication exists.

But the predominant attitude in the community is that you should make an effort to communicate honestly and tactfully about who you are and what you are looking for in others.

 

[KittyOfSteele]

"You like both men and women." I like both men and women. I'll go beyond that, I love both men and women. I don't fuck both men and women. I have very close relatives and friends who have at different points in their lives. I have relatives who have been different genders. Back to the OP, how to people in strong relationships talk about their sexual needs?

How do you talk about your sexual needs?

 

[GeezIDunno]

There is a lot to unpack here...

You can identify as someone who both reads novels and plays tennis, but if you decided to never play tennis again, you can say that you used to play tennis instead. The same goes when you're married; you can say you used to have sex with this set of people. But unlike playing tennis, you can't say you used to be bisexual before you got married because sexual orientation is not something you can change on a whim; it's already something coded in your being. Maybe you can say you explored things before you realized you weren't, but getting married doesn't remove your sexual orientation.

In fact, at its core, has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Hell, it never even had anything to do with love in the first place. Historically speaking, marriage was, and still is, a contract, even if you don't sign a piece of paper because there are people who aren't married by any institution, yet their relationship dynamic is that one of a marriage. Those are very common in my country, especially around your generation. In fact, a lot of couples that I know, both younger and older than me, prefers this type of dynamic instead of the expenses of a lavish party for a piece of paper that won't guarantee a lasting relationship because there's only two ways those end: separation and death.

People can experiment; let them be, that's how we figure out our identity. My only issue is the huge amount of tags that keep popping out, which only causes the same confusion that you're experiencing. Just rest assured that what you said in the OP was an untrue stereotype of what bisexuality is. If you want it reduced to the simplest point, here it is: you like both men and women, but that doesn't make you promiscuous, unfaithful, or unsatisfied.

Needed to read this! Ty!

 

[GeezIDunno]

How do you talk about your sexual needs?

You didn’t ask Mr but generally I don’t because they’ve been ignored. I’m in the closet and someone else has the key.

 

[usable001]

What does 'identifying as' mean? I'm confused. If people think of 'bisexual' as actually meaning 'bigender'

Remember when I said I am polyamorous and omnisexual? I'm also a cisgendered male. I have no desire to put on a dress or be feminine in any other way.

"Identifying as" means "I think of myself as". The term popped up because of the assumption that all poly people were sleeping around. Actual poly communities are strongly against cheating. BDSM communities are strongly against abuse. "I identify as" popped up as a way of saying "I can think of myself as ____ and still not act the way you think a ____ person should act."

 

[LargoKitt]

There is a lot to unpack here...

You can identify as someone who both reads novels and plays tennis, but if you decided to never play tennis again, you can say that you used to play tennis instead. The same goes when you're married; you can say you used to have sex with this set of people. But unlike playing tennis, you can't say you used to be bisexual before you got married because sexual orientation is not something you can change on a whim; it's already something coded in your being. Maybe you can say you explored things before you realized you weren't, but getting married doesn't remove your sexual orientation.

In fact, at its core, has nothing to do with sexual orientation. Hell, it never even had anything to do with love in the first place. Historically speaking, marriage was, and still is, a contract, even if you don't sign a piece of paper because there are people who aren't married by any institution, yet their relationship dynamic is that one of a marriage. Those are very common in my country, especially around your generation. In fact, a lot of couples that I know, both younger and older than me, prefers this type of dynamic instead of the expenses of a lavish party for a piece of paper that won't guarantee a lasting relationship because there's only two ways those end: separation and death.

People can experiment; let them be, that's how we figure out our identity. My only issue is the huge amount of tags that keep popping out, which only causes the same confusion that you're experiencing. Just rest assured that what you said in the OP was an untrue stereotype of what bisexuality is. If you want it reduced to the simplest point, here it is: you like both men and women, but that doesn't make you promiscuous, unfaithful, or unsatisfied.

Kitty, you are aware that generations of Boomers and before thought of sexual behavior (and identity) as a choice, and lots of people still think that way. One reason they think that way is that the 'societal rules' said, "choose to be like most people so you can be 'respectable' and get your proper piece of the pie. 'Fitting in' is your primary job." So the 'understanding' was that if you had 'feelings for' the 'wrong' people you read your scriptures and you buried those feelings as deep as you could. This was embedded in the trope that all sensual feelings were 'against God' and if you could, you 'rose above them.' This isn't just some hardass Puritan crap; for centuries it is the root of what a 'good person' is supposed to be and do. Jesus, the ideal person, was someone who...didn't. Times have changed, or... It is surprising right here on Literotica how pervasive the idea that the most exciting sex is transgressive. For lots of people bisexual isn't just 'one of the ways people are'. Your priest may see your bisexual identity as transgressive because, after all, for some inexplicable reason, in God's fecund world, he can't fuck anybody.