Happy Atheist Forum

I'm bisexual. If you're comfortable talking about it, what do you class yourself as?

My preference is for the ladies (I'm a dude for those not in the know) but the others don't freak me out or anything.  I'm too comfortable with my own sexuality to be intolerant of others...

I likes me men, and I concur with Squid.  As long as it's not forced on me, I don't care what anyone's orientation is.

95% straight.

I treat sexual orientation the same way I treat pizza toppings.
If that's what you like, that's what you like, and it really doesn't affect me.
Just don't try and shove it down my throat.

I'm straight, but it's not really how I define myself. I define myself more for my atheism or my tastes in music or how well I do my job than my orientation.

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"95% straight.

That's a good way to describe it...I could swing the other way but ultimately I prefer men. 95% straight is probably about right for me too but I'd identify as bisexual on a survey if it would somehow help the gay rights movement.  Sexual orientation isn't what comes to mind when I think of how I'm going to label myself if asked what I am....kinda like how I don't label myself as a brunette.

I'm 100% straight, but I like gay people.

However... If John Mayer played guitar for me, I'd totally do him.

I ticked straight because that's what I seek out as a rule. But I've been in some mixed situations and just gone with the flow and had a good time. And as has already been mentioned, if it's safe, legal and consensual then whatever floats your boat is fine by me, I just wouldn't necessarily grab a paddle and join in!

even though I never ahd a relationship, I know I'm straight. I am attracted to the male figure
I wish I were gay though, or even bi, just to annoy some people!

I think, given my name, that it's patently obvious that I'm gay. But, just for those not in the know, yea, I'm totally gay...well...as stated above, 95% gay anyway. Also a gay activist, and an anti-theist. ANYWHO...yea...gay.

I assume pansexual means you have sex with pans, this is not relevant to my interests.

Pan Sex! Tasty!

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.technologyinthehome.com%2FProductImages%2F111%2FBIG%2FBIG%2FBIG%2F111.jpg&hash=742ccab07e7e54b3a3bf89e375bafe16bf0ca1c8)

Quote from: "Tank"Pan Sex! Tasty!

Remember kids,
If you're not non-stick, oil it 'till it's slick!

Quote from: "Tank"Pan Sex! Tasty!

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.technologyinthehome.com%2FProductImages%2F111%2FBIG%2FBIG%2FBIG%2F111.jpg&hash=742ccab07e7e54b3a3bf89e375bafe16bf0ca1c8)

Mmm. Pans. Sunny side up.

Untarnished record of staunch heterosexuality.

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"95% straight.

I third this, though I clicked bisexual/pansexual just to be cool.  

What do these percentages imply?

I'm straight...but I'm not gonna go around shoving it down peoples throats. Thats not my method.
--FT

Am I really the only gay guy posting on this...we need a voice! Then again I do seem to be a one man news crew

I know we use to have more gay active members; I guess they must have found more productive things to do than post on a forum

What is the "other" option for? Pedophile?

Quote from: "GAYtheist"Am I really the only gay guy posting on this...we need a voice! Then again I do seem to be a one man news crew

Might have some luck shifting the percentages around if you start a religion where it is a sin to be a breeder.  Global climate change, rogue comets, meteors, super volcanos, etc., have nothing on overpopulation when it comes to threatening the human race, or at least our way of life.  Competition over resources will be a problem, I think, long before any of these other things you can see on the History channel on a given Saturday.  Fossil fuel, water, and food supply shortages will lead to wars and such.  Perhaps a spread of homosexuality will lead to less breeding, putting climate change back on top!

Quote from: "fester30"

Quote from: "GAYtheist"Am I really the only gay guy posting on this...we need a voice! Then again I do seem to be a one man news crew

Might have some luck shifting the percentages around if you start a religion where it is a sin to be a breeder.  Global climate change, rogue comets, meteors, super volcanos, etc., have nothing on overpopulation when it comes to threatening the human race, or at least our way of life.  Competition over resources will be a problem, I think, long before any of these other things you can see on the History channel on a given Saturday.  Fossil fuel, water, and food supply shortages will lead to wars and such.  Perhaps a spread of homosexuality will lead to less breeding, putting climate change back on top!

Yea, but to start a religion I'd have to knock my IQ down about 5 dozen notches wouldn't I? Kidding, naturally, but yea...no.

I've personally been a bit surprised at the number of gay people who are Christian. Considering the concerted efforts of so many church organizations to take away basic rights from gay people and the unending attacks, it demonstrates to me a very powerful ability to compartmentalize. Not only that, but the vast vast majority of atheists I know believe strongly in equality for the lgbt community. In many ways, we're some of the most committed allies. I myself am a member of and donate to a number of gay rights organizations, particularly Equality California. All that having been said, there are a lot of lgbt atheists out there, and they're always welcome here on HAF.

Quote from: "Will"I've personally been a bit surprised at the number of gay people who are Christian. Considering the concerted efforts of so many church organizations to take away basic rights from gay people and the unending attacks, it demonstrates to me a very powerful ability to compartmentalize. Not only that, but the vast vast majority of atheists I know believe strongly in equality for the lgbt community. In many ways, we're some of the most committed allies. I myself am a member of and donate to a number of gay rights organizations, particularly Equality California. All that having been said, there are a lot of lgbt atheists out there, and they're always welcome here on HAF.

Thanks for saying this. I didn't need to hear it as I knew it already, but it is always a wonderful thing to hear. Like I said, I tend to be a one man news crew, because I check my email and websites everyday for news about the Gay Rights Movement. You're right in that it is a little disturbing how the gay community compartmentalizes within the Christian community, but also I have noticed a lot of churches opening up to us. The biggest problem we face are Catholics and Mormons...or Morons, depending on how you like to spell it. Thankfully there is only one Westboro Baptist Church, and their leading is getting old enough that we may have a reason to celebrate soon. I don't care how that sounds, the day that S.O.B. dies will be a wonderful day for mankind...IMHO.

Quote from: "Will"I've personally been a bit surprised at the number of gay people who are Christian. Considering the concerted efforts of so many church organizations to take away basic rights from gay people and the unending attacks, it demonstrates to me a very powerful ability to compartmentalize. Not only that, but the vast vast majority of atheists I know believe strongly in equality for the lgbt community. In many ways, we're some of the most committed allies. I myself am a member of and donate to a number of gay rights organizations, particularly Equality California. All that having been said, there are a lot of lgbt atheists out there, and they're always welcome here on HAF.

Also...is that picture you? If it is...

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"Untarnished record of staunch heterosexuality.

Staunch:  Adjective - Firm and dependable
Verb - Stop the flow of a liquid
Both of these things sound like admirable traits in a hetro, they may even allow you into the Nonbreeder faith.

Untarnished: free from blemishes
Maybe it should have been unadorned.

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"Untarnished record of staunch heterosexuality.

...This kinda makes it sound like being gay is a bad thing ...I'm hoping you don't mean it like that, but if you do...oh, well...

Quote from: "Will"there are a lot of lgbt atheists out there,

Yup, we even have a lgbt atheist group in Dallas.

I don't pay much attention to the sexual orientation of my friends...unless they say something about what kind of gender they are attracted to or are in a relationship I don't know if they are gay or straight.

No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

Sorry I should have put a    on it, people around here don't usually do political corrections on word choices.

Celibacy isn't a sexual orientation! Sexual orientation has to do with attraction, celibacy has to do with sex... specifically of choosing not to have it.

For that matter asexuality is a sexual orientation in the same way that atheism is a religion.

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

It's from a Seinfeld episode, "The Jacket" in speaking of Jerry's new expensive jacket, except that the line goes:

QuoteGEORGE: (Nods) Can I say one thing to you? And I say this with an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality.

JERRY: Absolutely.

GEORGE: ..It's fabulous.

JERRY: I know.

Love me my Seinfeld.
Seinfeld Scripts (http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheJacket.htm)

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Celibacy isn't a sexual orientation! Sexual orientation has to do with attraction, celibacy has to do with sex... specifically of choosing not to have it.

Asexual is an orientation, though a very rare and not well scientifically understood one. Alfred Kinsey, iirc, did a bit of work exploring asexuality in humans, but not a lot has been done since then.

Quote from: "AnimatedDirt"

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

It's from a Seinfeld episode, "The Jacket" in speaking of Jerry's new expensive jacket, except that the line goes:

QuoteGEORGE: (Nods) Can I say one thing to you? And I say this with an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality.

JERRY: Absolutely.

GEORGE: ..It's fabulous.

JERRY: I know.

Love me my Seinfeld.
Seinfeld Scripts (http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheJacket.htm)

Nice pull on the Seinfeld reference. I knew it was that show, and George who said it, but I would've had to IMDB it to find which episode. Isn't that the one where he has to turn the jacket inside out, and it has the pink stripes, to protect the suede?

Show is classic!  

Quote from: "hismikeness"

Quote from: "AnimatedDirt"

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

It's from a Seinfeld episode, "The Jacket" in speaking of Jerry's new expensive jacket, except that the line goes:

QuoteGEORGE: (Nods) Can I say one thing to you? And I say this with an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality.

JERRY: Absolutely.

GEORGE: ..It's fabulous.

JERRY: I know.

Love me my Seinfeld.
Seinfeld Scripts (http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheJacket.htm)

Nice pull on the Seinfeld reference. I knew it was that show, and George who said it, but I would've had to IMDB it to find which episode. Isn't that the one where he has to turn the jacket inside out, and it has the pink stripes, to protect the suede?

Show is classic!  

And didn't Elaine's father force him to wear it with the suede side out even though it was raining? And so the jacket got ruined and he gave it to Kramer?

Quote from: "AnimatedDirt"

Quote from: "Ihateyoumike"No I didn't mean it like that. It's a quote from a tv or movie or something. Can't remember which one.

It's from a Seinfeld episode, "The Jacket" in speaking of Jerry's new expensive jacket, except that the line goes:

QuoteGEORGE: (Nods) Can I say one thing to you? And I say this with an unblemished record of staunch heterosexuality.

JERRY: Absolutely.

GEORGE: ..It's fabulous.

JERRY: I know.

Love me my Seinfeld.
Seinfeld Scripts (http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheJacket.htm)

Whitney-damn it (how's that for adding power to a curse?), you're right. I got the quote wrong, but I guess it was close enough. I guess when you have watched more tv and movies than one person should in a lifetime, it's hard to keep them all straight.
Now I wanna watch me some Seinfeld.

Sexual Orientation: The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes, especially a direction seen to be dictated by physiologic rather than sociologic forces.

Quote from: "Will"Asexual is an orientation, though a very rare and not well scientifically understood one. Alfred Kinsey, iirc, did a bit of work exploring asexuality in humans, but not a lot has been done since then.

Asexuality is by it's definition the lack of a sexual orientation. Celibacy is something you have in addition to a sexual orientation.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Sexual Orientation: The direction of one's sexual interest toward members of the same, opposite, or both sexes, especially a direction seen to be dictated by physiologic rather than sociologic forces.

Quote from: "Will"Asexual is an orientation, though a very rare and not well scientifically understood one. Alfred Kinsey, iirc, did a bit of work exploring asexuality in humans, but not a lot has been done since then.

Asexuality is by it's definition the lack of a sexual orientation. Celibacy is something you have in addition to a sexual orientation.

Celibacy is not a sexual orientation, but asexuality, according to asexual people, is. The reason asexual is an orientation whereas atheist isn't a religious belief comes down to null hypothesis. We are all born atheists, lacking a belief in god or gods, but are either convinced or unconvinced some time later. No one is born with theistic beliefs. Sexual orientation, however, is something one is generally born with. If I am sexually attracted to women, I've been so all along. If I'm sexually attracted to men, I've been so all along. Orientation is not a belief, but a way of being.

I highly doubt that babies have sexualities. They may or may not have a predisposition (genetic or otherwise) to a specific sexuality, but that doesn't  become apparent until they start feeling sexual attraction. Whenever that may be.

Can you actually say that you were sexually attracted to women when you were a baby, or even a toddler?

A-theism is the lack of theism, A-sexuality is the lack of sexuality. Simple as that.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"I highly doubt that babies have sexualities.

Scientific researchers have demonstrated that sexuality is genetic (http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20050128/is-there-gay-gene). You're not born checking out men or women, but a genetic link to sexual orientation has been demonstrated through evidence and scientific testing. Gay people are born gay. Straight people are born straight. Thus, babies have sexualities. That the sexuality isn't apparent in behavior does not mean it's not there.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"A-theism is the lack of theism, A-sexuality is the lack of sexuality. Simple as that.

You're confusing two very different things. Theism is a belief attained, no one is born theistic. Everyone, however, is born with a sexual orientation.

Even if a baby was genetically homosexual, that doesn't mean their sexual orientation is homosexual. Even if they will eventually find their own gender sexually attractive that doesn't change the fact that they don't at the moment.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Even if a baby was genetically homosexual, that doesn't mean their sexual orientation is homosexual.

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNuZHg.png&hash=9308f87c2f0ab1048df49cdb79cdebd7c4eecede)

Say for example a child had the genes for brown hair, they also had a disease that made it so they have never and will never grow hair. Is this child a brunette?

My answer is no, because the child does not have brown hair... or any hair for that matter.

It's a question of what is the cause and what is the effect. It used to be "I'm attracted to women, so I'm straight." Because we now know it's genetic, though, it's "I'm straight, so I'm attracted to women."The genetic information is something which in place since before birth, long before attraction begins, but it's there.

Yes, but that still doesn't change the fact that babies don't have sexualities. They may be predisposed, or destined to have one at some point but that is irrelevent to their present condition.

What if it's found that there's a Christianity gene, does that mean that a child can be born Christian?

Quote from: "Byronazriel"What if it's found that there's a Christianity gene, does that mean that a child can be born Christian?

Yes. It's virtually impossible that such a gene could exist, but in your hypothetical situation, yes.

Essentially what your saying is that a child, with no knowledge of Jesus, or the bible, that has never gone to church, and cannot even wrap their head around the concept of religion is a Christian.

Besides, if there was such a thing as genetic sexuality and that someone must always have the sexual orientation dictated by their genes... Why is it that identical twins can have different sexualities? Is one of them lying or mistaken?

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Essentially what your saying is that a child, with no knowledge of Jesus, or the bible, that has never gone to church, and cannot even wrap their head around the concept of religion is a Christian.

I'm going by your hypothetical. You didn't say predisposition, where there would be wiggle-room as to whether or not it would happen, and you didn't say theist, which would leave religious wiggle-room. You said a Christianity gene, or a gene that means one is Christian. That's why I was clear to point out that such a gene is virtually impossible.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Besides, if there was such a thing as genetic sexuality and that someone must always have the sexual orientation dictated by their genes... Why is it that identical twins can have different sexualities? Is one of them lying or mistaken?

Monozygomatic twins don't have perfectly identical DNA (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215121214.htm). It's close, closer even than regular siblings who share parents, but it's not identical.

Alright, but still your argument dictates that all people with this "gay gene" are gay, and that all gay people have this gene. The article you linked earlier directly contradicted this.

Even if there is a genetic basis for sexuality, which I've yet to see any evidence for and I've been looking all afternoon, that still in no way means that babies have sexual orientations.

I can understand a virgin having a sexuality, sexual intercourse isn't the basis for sexual orientation, but sexual attraction is!

You can talk about genes all day, but the definition for sexuality/sexual orientation isn't: "One who has this gene, or these genes."

One way or another it is about preference or attraction of the sexual sort, which babies (almost certainly) don't have.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"[...]that still in no way means that babies have sexual orientations.

I can understand a virgin having a sexuality, sexual intercourse isn't the basis for sexual orientation, but sexual attraction is!

You can talk about genes all day, but the definition for sexuality/sexual orientation isn't: "One who has this gene, or these genes."

One way or another it is about preference or attraction of the sexual sort, which babies (almost certainly) don't have.

I've heard this ridiculous argument several times, babies are also not born with pubic hair, facial hair etc. and yet they contain the genes for growing pubic hair. To argue that babies must display a certain thing otherwise it's not born with it, and therefor not a gene is to suppose that growing pubic hair is not genetic.

Ok, there is a theory that explains homosexuality found in men. I don't know the website, but it was put out there a few years back, and it deal largely with hormones, sibling, and the mother. Depending on how many boys a women has, the odds that her next child will be gay grows. When the fetus becomes male, the mother's body identifies it as a threat and begins to bombard the fetus with antibodies. The more boys the mother has, the more adept at feminization the body becomes, until eventually the child is born gay. Personally I see that it makes a great deal of sense.

Quote from: "Davin"To argue that babies must display a certain thing otherwise it's not born with it, and therefor not a gene is to suppose that growing pubic hair is not genetic.

They have the genes to grow it, but they cannot be described as having it before they have it. Yes babies have the genes to grow pubic hair, but until they grow it they cannot be said to have pubic hair. They have the potential for pubic hair.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"

Quote from: "Davin"To argue that babies must display a certain thing otherwise it's not born with it, and therefor not a gene is to suppose that growing pubic hair is not genetic.

They have the genes to grow it, but they cannot be described as having it before they have it. Yes babies have the genes to grow pubic hair, but until they grow it they cannot be said to have pubic hair. They have the potential for pubic hair.

Apply this to sexual orientation.

Quote from: "GAYtheist"Ok, there is a theory that explains homosexuality found in men. I don't know the website, but it was put out there a few years back, and it deal largely with hormones, sibling, and the mother. Depending on how many boys a women has, the odds that her next child will be gay grows. When the fetus becomes male, the mother's body identifies it as a threat and begins to bombard the fetus with antibodies. The more boys the mother has, the more adept at feminization the body becomes, until eventually the child is born gay. Personally I see that it makes a great deal of sense.

I've read something similar...that one possible explaination is that in the womb the fetus is bombarded with a hormone bath that is typically associated with the opposite gender.  I don't know enough about embryo development to know what they meant by hormone bath though.