My Photo

The Out Campaign

Atheist Blogroll

Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2005

« Atheist Meme of the Day: "I do not fear death" | Main | Atheist Meme of the Day: "I prayed for twenty years..." »



I feel that having active sex with both men and women makes them bisexual (or ambisextrous).


If they're not bisexual, they're making one helluva sacrifice to stay in the closet as appear "normal".


I disagree strongly with the comment "I feel that having active sex with both men and women makes them bisexual". A closeted, self-hating gay man who has sex with women, is married, has children, whatever, is still gay. i.e., Who you have sex with doesn't determine your sexual orientation - that's an internal thing, not a product of behaviour(s). The pressures in our society to be normal, (i.e. straight) are intense, even more so in conservative/religious situations - the number of gay men and lesbian women in straight relationships is actually quite large. I was raised in a very orthodox religious family, and if circumstances had been different, I might have married a women and had children - yet I'll never be nor ever would have been bisexual.

Certainly though, many heterosexually married men who have sex with or desire to have sex with men are bisexual, and the same with bi women. It's two completely different situations, really - though they have a common cause.

Greta Christina

I also don't think having sex with people of both sexes automatically makes you bisexual. And not just because of closet cases.

Someone who's had occasional sex with people of the opposite sex, but for whom that sex wasn't particularly satisfying or particularly important to them, might choose to define themselves as gay or lesbian. And someone who had never had even one same-sex encounter and never planned to (say, someone in a committed monogamous relationship), but who had serious same-sex attraction and for whom the fact of that attraction was important and defining, might choose to define themselves as bisexual. And IMO, both of those decisions would be entirely reasonable.

The determining factor or factors for defining sexual orientation are different for everyone. For some it's who they're attracted to; for some it's who they're sexually involved with; for some it's who they're romantically involved with; for others it's their sexual history; for others it's their hopes and desires for their sexual future; etc. This stuff is so vaguely defined -- and so personal -- that I think we really have to let people define themselves.

Which is not to say that we never have the right to question those definitions. If someone refuses to define themselves as bisexual because they have negative and false ideas of what bisexuals are like, for instance, it's worth questioning that. And, of course, you have the closet case problem discussed in this piece. But ultimately, people get to name themselves.


It's getting to the point where, when a politician is rabidly homophobic, I just assume now that they're gay. It's become a standard item on my gaydar

Ruben Bolling did a strip on "The New Gay Sterotype" a few years back which echoes your sentiments rather well.


I'm only commenting here, because I'm at work, and am surprised I didn't recognize your name from Blowfish!
Ironically I got to your personal blog not from there, but from Pharyngula.

Jesse Weinstein

Reposted here: since the Blowfish archives are down.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe/ Donate to This Blog!

Books of mine

Greta on SSA Speakers Bureau

  • Greta Christina is on the Speakers Bureau of the Secular Students Alliance. Invite her to speak to your group!

Your email address:

Powered by FeedBlitz

Powered by Rollyo

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Atheism

Some Favorite Posts and Conversations: Sex

Some Favorite Posts: Art, Politics, Other Stuff