Unusually high % of bisexuals here?

[BohemianEcstasy]

This is somewhat random and coming from a newbie, so feel free to distribute lashes accordingly if I should shut up (then again, who knows, I might just enjoy the lashing...could be fun!)

Judging from recent posts, it seems MANY on this board fall into the bisexual or bi-curious category. Is this accurate? I mean, I know the GLBT includes bisexual, but I'm so used to being on the fringe of the GLBT crowd...it's kindof refreshing! However, at the same time, it's as if I'm in a twilight zone...I've never felt as if I were almost in the majority!

Is this an accurate inference?

BohemianEcstasy

 

[DirkPryde]

No idea Though it is nice to have a place to feel like you belong.
Maybe us bisexuals are just very chatty

 

[TechnoSlut]

Well, this is a board based explicitly on sex, so most of the people who choose toi bw on it are goign to be highly sexual people. Highly sexual people are more likely to be sexually experimental, open minded, libertarian and hedonistic. This all stands to reason, does it not?

 

[DirkPryde]

certainly does

 

[OzDvl]

Well, this is a board based explicitly on sex, so most of the people who choose toi bw on it are goign to be highly sexual people. Highly sexual people are more likely to be sexually experimental, open minded, libertarian and hedonistic. This all stands to reason, does it not?

make sense to me

I'm just happy that there is a place people can come and feel comfortable being around like minded people..not everyone is open or can be open in real life about their sexuality or in the case of being curious their fantasies

 

[OzDvl]

 

[plethora]

I would not think this site's population is a cross-section of the world's sexuality. The anonymity and level of sexual expression could lead to a higher percentage of bisexuals and homosexuals, as well as other sexual minorities.

 

[BohemianEcstasy]

All interesting sentiments expressed. Kinda makes me wonder where all the GAYS went, though! Hehehe, it's all good.

 

[John Doe]

Well, this is a board based explicitly on sex, so most of the people who choose toi bw on it are goign to be highly sexual people. Highly sexual people are more likely to be sexually experimental, open minded, libertarian and hedonistic. This all stands to reason, does it not?

Not really, no. You can find quite a lot of political and sexual Conservatives on the GB.

 

[geishaGirl]

us bisexuals are running rampant!!!

no, just kidding (above)

maybe posting does have a nice anonymity about it so people feel more comfortable about "admitting" their sexuality

either way it's a great place to just chat and put in your 2 cents worth...............
just like I have

 

[Pookie]

This is somewhat random and coming from a newbie, so feel free to distribute lashes accordingly if I should shut up (then again, who knows, I might just enjoy the lashing...could be fun!)

Judging from recent posts, it seems MANY on this board fall into the bisexual or bi-curious category. Is this accurate? I mean, I know the GLBT includes bisexual, but I'm so used to being on the fringe of the GLBT crowd...it's kindof refreshing! However, at the same time, it's as if I'm in a twilight zone...I've never felt as if I were almost in the majority!

Is this an accurate inference?

BohemianEcstasy

I do think there are more bisexuals than homosexuals. But I also believe that only a small number of bisexuals are also bi-amorous. The bisexuals I know, for the most part, are only interested in sex when it involves the same gender. Very few have shown any interest in ever being in a committed relationship with the same gender. That's just my opinion and observations though.

 

[BohemianEcstasy]

Re: Re: Unusually high % of bisexuals here?

I do think there are more bisexuals than homosexuals. But I also believe that only a small number of bisexuals are also bi-amorous. The bisexuals I know, for the most part, are only interested in sex when it involves the same gender. Very few have shown any interest in ever being in a committed relationship with the same gender. That's just my opinion and observations though.

That is so true! Okay, not to diss those who feel bisexuality as more of a sexual pull, but I want a GIRLFRIEND, not a female lover specifically. I've kindof come to similar conclusions, as well. *nods*

 

[Mikijl Dragon]

But I also believe that only a small number of bisexuals are also bi-amorous. The bisexuals I know, for the most part, are only interested in sex when it involves the same gender.

AT least in my case this is true. I could not see myself in a relationship with someone of my same sex. Even before I was married.

 

[BlowTheseDice]

Same goes for me. I'm only bi-curious for the sex.

 

[John Doe]

Why wouldn't a bisexual person be in a relationship with a person of the same gender? Straight people have same gender friends all the time, why doesn't that apply to bi people?

 

[Pookie]

Why wouldn't a bisexual person be in a relationship with a person of the same gender? Straight people have same gender friends all the time, why doesn't that apply to bi people?

I'm not talking about a typical "friendship" when I speak of "bi-amorous." It goes MUCH deeper than a "friendship."

 

[John Doe]

I'm not talking about a typical "friendship" when I speak of "bi-amorous." It goes MUCH deeper than a "friendship."

So you can't be committed to a relationship or love someone unless it's romantic love?

 

[Pookie]

So you can't be committed to a relationship or love someone unless it's romantic love?

I didn't say that, nor was I discussing that type of relationship.

Do you know what an amorous relationship is?

 

[John Doe]

I didn't say that, nor was I discussing that type of relationship.

Do you know what an amorous relationship is?

I'm discussing commitment in general. So what you're saying is, when you say "commited relationship," you really just mean a romantic relationship?

Do you know what a civilized discussion is? I'm seriously asking, as opposed to your condescending question, because you can't seem to say anything to me without being rude, condescending or just plain insulting.

 

[Pookie]

I'm discussing commitment in general. So what you're saying is, when you say "commited relationship," you really just mean a romantic relationship?

Do you know what a civilized discussion is? I'm seriously asking, as opposed to your condescending question, because you can't seem to say anything to me without being rude, condescending or just plain insulting.

Yes, I'm referring to what is typically thought of as a "romantic relationship." You seemed to be asking a question of someone that had responded to my use of the term "bi-amorous" to describe relationships that most bisexuals are not involved in. I thought I clearly responded to you that I wasn't discussing "friendships" in my initial post. Then you asked me about something I had not even been discussing, as if I was disagreeing with you about it.

I don't know how I've been uncivilized toward you in attempting to address what I assumed was your misunderstanding. Can you explain how, or quote the text where, I've been uncivilized toward you? You appeared to not understand the meaning of an "amorous relationship," which is why I asked the question. If you found that condescending or insulting, then that's your issue ... not mine.


Edited for clarification

 

[DirkPryde]

pffft at it again

How do you know that at text question is condescending ?
You like to assume things about people, maybe it's just a reflection of how you think of others.

 

[Pookie]

pffft at it again

How do you know that at text question is condescending ?
You like to assume things about people, maybe it's just a reflection of how you think of others.

He can argue with himself. He took what I said and twisted it how he wanted to create his own issue for discussion. I'm not going to play his game with him. I clearly was discussing amorous relationships when I mentioned committed relationships in my initial post. I clearly clarified to him in a later post that I wasn't discussing "typical friendships."

I honestly think he can understand and comprehend that, which leaves me to believe he just wanted to be an ass again. I guess old habits die hard for him.

 

[John Doe]

Yes, I'm referring to what is typically thought of as a "romantic relationship." You seemed to be asking a question of someone that had responded to my use of the term "bi-amorous" to describe relationships that most bisexuals are not involved in. I thought I clearly responded to you that I wasn't discussing "friendships" in my initial post. Then you asked me about something I had not even been discussing, as if I was disagreeing with you about it.

I don't know how I've been uncivilized toward you in attempting to address what I assumed was your misunderstanding. Can you explain how, or quote the text where, I've been uncivilized toward you? You appeared to not understand the meaning of an "amorous relationship," which is why I asked the question. If you found that condescending or insulting, then that's your issue ... not mine.


Edited for clarification

If you think "typical friendships" do not involve love, then I'd hate to be your friend.

As for your condescension and harassment, it is plain as day to anyone who has not engaged in it themselves. However, if you want a specific reference, then I refer you to the vast majority of your posts that were directed towards me in the last few weeks.

I also find it interesting that on the one hand both you and DirkPryde seem to think I am an ass, and you make quite a few other clearly insulting and condescending comments in the same breath that you not only claim that asking someone a question to which the answer is obvious is condescending is merely my intepretation of a "text question", but it is even filtered through my alleged view of others. I wonder, is this due to your view of others (or are you above your own rules and social theories?), or is it merely because I disagree with your penchant for pigeonholing everyone into such narrow, ill-defined categories?

That being said, I don't see the need for either of you to attack me or ridicule me merely because I ask a few simple questions or even if I disagree with you. However, I am willing to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

[John Doe]

He can argue with himself. He took what I said and twisted it how he wanted to create his own issue for discussion. I'm not going to play his game with him. I clearly was discussing amorous relationships when I mentioned committed relationships in my initial post. I clearly clarified to him in a later post that I wasn't discussing "typical friendships."

I honestly think he can understand and comprehend that, which leaves me to believe he just wanted to be an ass again. I guess old habits die hard for him.

I'm not twisting anything...or are you not talking about bisexual people in relationships? Although that is off the topic of the number of bisexual people on the GLBT board. Or is it ok for you to steer a conversation, but not me? But I can't start a new thread either without being accused of seeking attention. Which is it?

 

[Pookie]

If you think "typical friendships" do not involve love, then I'd hate to be your friend.

As for your condescension and harassment, it is plain as day to anyone who has not engaged in it themselves. However, if you want a specific reference, then I refer you to the vast majority of your posts that were directed towards me in the last few weeks.

I also find it interesting that on the one hand both you and DirkPryde seem to think I am an ass, and you make quite a few other clearly insulting and condescending comments in the same breath that you not only claim that asking someone a question to which the answer is obvious is condescending is merely my intepretation of a "text question", but it is even filtered through my alleged view of others. I wonder, is this due to your view of others (or are you above your own rules and social theories?), or is it merely because I disagree with your penchant for pigeonholing everyone into such narrow, ill-defined categories?

That being said, I don't see the need for either of you to attack me or ridicule me merely because I ask a few simple questions or even if I disagree with you. However, I am willing to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

You really do have a problem with reading comprehension, don't you? No one else has had a problem reading my post and understanding that I was speaking of amorous relationships. And even after I clarified it specifically for you, you still can't grasp it. As I said already, I was NOT discussing typical friendships. I never said anything about typical friendships not involving love. Your insistence on claiming I hold that view is typical of the trolling asshole that you are.

Also, you're being deceptive. "Vast majority" of my posts to you over the past few weeks? Pffft. Until the past few days, I have replied to you ONE time in any thread on any board for the last few weeks. And even that reply was to an irrelevant question to a topic being discussed in a GB thread ...

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=8321238&highlight=Stuponfucious#post8321238

Even my first post to you in the GLBT forum since April 19 was far from being considered "clearly insulting and condescending comments." ...

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=8429050&highlight=Stuponfucious#post8429050

As far as argreeing to disagree ... do what you want, bub. When you can stop inventing and attributing your own clearly ignorant views for my own, then I'll stop giving you "clearly insulting and condescending comments" in reply to it. But for the sake of my avoiding further disruption on the GLBT board by continuing to argue with a trolling asshole, you're now on ignore.