• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Bisexuality

boywonder

Member
Renard:
I'm not able to read the whole thing because I have schoolwork to do (lol procrastination) but I must say it's definitely interesting. I loved the great quote "a threat is best dealt with when it is dismissible," and I didn't know at least half of that history of bisexuality! And the paragraph I saw on transgender/intersex/crossdressing people was good, in that it actually addressed the issue (and used a FTM as an example, to boot!) of concepts of gender and what's wrong with our idea of gender roles.

(Reminds me a bit of that bit in an issue of Midnighter, where the time police from the future have no idea what "gay" means and are just attracted to whoever they're attracted to. /geek)
 

Kankaru

Member
Oni said:
Get-dancing said:
Kankaru said:
I for one have never had any sexual interactions with a woman.

On that. Ive always wondered. How do two women, um, enjoy themselfs? I mean its just two holes, I dont get it.:|
They eat popsicles.

popsicle-insertion.jpg


Sheesh! I thought everyone knew that~!

o_o..... LMAO
 

Kankaru

Member
Fesworks said:
Bi-Lesbian? Does that mean "Bi" but "moreso Lesbian"?

also, Polytheism FTW!

Yes, it means bi but closer to lesbian. I have a preference for the women. No offense to men here, but women have more beautiful features, such as our curves and breast. And a certain area is better too, because it doesn't hang out all over the place like a man's does.
That's just my opinion though. ^.^

As for "Polytheism FTW!", I don't quite understand the comment. Are you asking what it is, or are you saying that because you are against it?
 

Kankaru

Member
TheSkunkCat said:
And perverted... Hey, if it doesn't hurt anyone, then should consenting adults not be allowed to do whatever they please? Who cares about the biblethumpers and those people so insecure about their own sexuality they have to stamp out what they probably secretly desire? Those people really aren't worth my time.

Interesting point. Yeas, people should be allowed to do as they please, as long as both sides are positive they want to consent.
My definition of a pervert is different from the actual definition. To me a pervert is someone who would force their sexual desires onto someone who doesn't want it (In other words, Rapists are perverts). And someone who would lie about loving another person, just to get into their pants.
 

boywonder

Member
Kankaru said:
Fesworks said:
also, Polytheism FTW!
As for "Polytheism FTW!", I don't quite understand the comment. Are you asking what it is, or are you saying that because you are against it?
FTW means For The Win. c:

And Kankaru, that's an interesting definition of "pervert". So you would say that some things that are normally considered "perverted", you would call kinky? Correct me if I'm wrong.
 

Fesworks

New Member
Kankaru said:
Fesworks said:
Bi-Lesbian? Does that mean "Bi" but "moreso Lesbian"?

also, Polytheism FTW!

Yes, it means bi but closer to lesbian. I have a preference for the women. No offense to men here, but women have more beautiful features, such as our curves and breast. And a certain area is better too, because it doesn't hang out all over the place like a man's does.
That's just my opinion though. ^.^

As for "Polytheism FTW!", I don't quite understand the comment. Are you asking what it is, or are you saying that because you are against it?

"FTW" is a bit of an internet dorky thing to do... I try to use them Sparingly. So yes, I'm for it ;)
 

Tevildo

Member
Kankaru said:
My definition of a pervert is different from the actual definition.
This is potentially interesting. If something (not necessarily sex) is "perverted", it's being used for something other than its real purpose. Now, traditional morality would say that the "real purpose" of sex is reproduction, so that any sex that isn't for reproduction is perverted.

However, we've abandoned traditional morality. What, then, is sex _for_ these days? Unless we decide this, we can't use words like "perverted". Pleasure? But then the rapist (who presumably gets pleasure from his act) isn't a pervert, while prostitution (sex for money rather than pleasure) becomes the ultimate perversion.
 

Kankaru

Member
boywonder said:
Kankaru said:
Fesworks said:
also, Polytheism FTW!
As for "Polytheism FTW!", I don't quite understand the comment. Are you asking what it is, or are you saying that because you are against it?
FTW means For The Win. c:

And Kankaru, that's an interesting definition of "pervert". So you would say that some things that are normally considered "perverted", you would call kinky? Correct me if I'm wrong.

Well.... That really depends on what it is.
For example, some people would consider someone who watches porn to be a pervert. But there are many reasons for watching porn. You could watch it to please yourself, which is a normal, sometimes healthy, thing to do. Other people might watch it to learn things.
Now what I would consider kinky that others would consider perverted are things like... Tieing your partner down. Or "spanking" someone.
 

Kankaru

Member
Fesworks said:
Kankaru said:
Fesworks said:
Bi-Lesbian? Does that mean "Bi" but "moreso Lesbian"?

also, Polytheism FTW!

Yes, it means bi but closer to lesbian. I have a preference for the women. No offense to men here, but women have more beautiful features, such as our curves and breast. And a certain area is better too, because it doesn't hang out all over the place like a man's does.
That's just my opinion though. ^.^

As for "Polytheism FTW!", I don't quite understand the comment. Are you asking what it is, or are you saying that because you are against it?

"FTW" is a bit of an internet dorky thing to do... I try to use them Sparingly. So yes, I'm for it ;)

I'd never seen "FTW" before. But I have heard a friend saying "Fuck the what?!" So I kind of interpreted it like that. ^^;
I'm glad your supportive.
 

Kankaru

Member
Tevildo said:
Kankaru said:
My definition of a pervert is different from the actual definition.
This is potentially interesting. If something (not necessarily sex) is "perverted", it's being used for something other than its real purpose. Now, traditional morality would say that the "real purpose" of sex is reproduction, so that any sex that isn't for reproduction is perverted.

However, we've abandoned traditional morality. What, then, is sex _for_ these days? Unless we decide this, we can't use words like "perverted". Pleasure? But then the rapist (who presumably gets pleasure from his act) isn't a pervert, while prostitution (sex for money rather than pleasure) becomes the ultimate perversion.

Hmm.. thats an interesting point there.

My reason for sex is to be close to the person you love. Sure, it wanders from traditional morality, but it's still a good reason. I think of intercourse not as having sex, but making love. Its a way of being as close as physically possible. I mean, so can't get much closer than that, ey? And the emotions that come with it when its with someone you truly love are amazing. I would never have sex with someone unless I loved them.
 
Tevildo said:
This is potentially interesting. If something (not necessarily sex) is "perverted", it's being used for something other than its real purpose. Now, traditional morality would say that the "real purpose" of sex is reproduction, so that any sex that isn't for reproduction is perverted.

Well thats a medieval definition. But I guess 'traditional morality' is pretty backwards. (Hey, its completely removed from science and logic, what would one call it BUT backwards. Me? I am unburdened by political correctness here.)

However, we've abandoned traditional morality. What, then, is sex _for_ these days? Unless we decide this, we can't use words like "perverted". Pleasure? But then the rapist (who presumably gets pleasure from his act) isn't a pervert, while prostitution (sex for money rather than pleasure) becomes the ultimate perversion.

Traditional morality was abandoned because people progressed beyond it. They've learned new things, and they now know better then people who lived thousands of years ago and who thought the earth was flat, the sun went around the earth and that a big sky man would smite them if they disobeyed an archaic set of random and often contradictory demands. And those who cling to the morality of these people simply leave themselves behind in the end. Their like cavemen who refuse to use the wheel because its new and thus not approved of by tradition.

But perversion IS a useless term. All that matters is law, and law should protect those who cannot protect themselves or who lack the mature judgment to make proper decisions.

As such the law also has no bussiness interfering with the desires of consenting adults. For there is no one to be protected and all participants can reasonably be considered to be mature.

People can balk at that, and the harsh putdown I give to traditional morality. But I think that the only reason people would dispute it, is because it contradict whatever world image they adopted in order to feel good about themselves. Thats what people do, make up stuff to feel good about themselves. And cling to that with all fierceness. Regardless of wether or not its the right thing to do. Or wether or not there's any truth to it.
 

Giorgio Gabriel

You Will Be Godlike.
I would say that I have achieved pansexuality.

What can I say? I unashamedly indulge in all sexes and/or gender identities. :p
 

Tevildo

Member
TheSkunkCat said:
But perversion IS a useless term. All that matters is law, and law should protect those who cannot protect themselves or who lack the mature judgment to make proper decisions.
I basically agree with you, but - define "mature", and, more importantly, define "proper". Any system of morality, traditional, "rational", or what have you, is based on some authority deciding what others can and can't do. Why should the arbitary decision of an "enlightened" judge (if we're using the law as our standard) be worse than the arbitary decision of a priest?
 

Kankaru

Member
Tevildo said:
TheSkunkCat said:
But perversion IS a useless term. All that matters is law, and law should protect those who cannot protect themselves or who lack the mature judgment to make proper decisions.
I basically agree with you, but - define "mature", and, more importantly, define "proper". Any system of morality, traditional, "rational", or what have you, is based on some authority deciding what others can and can't do. Why should the arbitary decision of an "enlightened" judge (if we're using the law as our standard) be worse than the arbitary decision of a priest?

Well, I can reply to the "mature" part. If someone hasn't learned about these things yet, and... For example lets say their father, or other close person who knows what their doing, convinces the child to let them touch certain private places, or worse. That would be considered..... Damn, how do you spell that? Statchatory? Whatever, it's rape.
I know a boy who had no clue what rape was, or anything about gay stuff. An older male friend of his took advantage of that. He started touching him and shit. My friend told his parents about it later on and they told him what had actually happened. He never went near that guy again.

As for the "legal/law" definition of mature, I think it's bull shit. If you've learned about all of it then you know what you're doing. Unless your mentally challenged or something. So if you willingly consent to it without being pressured, it's not rape.
 
Tevildo said:
TheSkunkCat said:
But perversion IS a useless term. All that matters is law, and law should protect those who cannot protect themselves or who lack the mature judgment to make proper decisions.
I basically agree with you, but - define "mature", and, more importantly, define "proper". Any system of morality, traditional, "rational", or what have you, is based on some authority deciding what others can and can't do. Why should the arbitary decision of an "enlightened" judge (if we're using the law as our standard) be worse than the arbitary decision of a priest?

Well the judge has several thousands of years of progress behind him that the priest hasn't. And due to that progress the decision is less arbitrary and more scientifically sound. And may change if science comes to new insights. But thats besides the point.

Really, I mainly made the point with those two words, so as to make clear I view (As any sane person would) that proper legal protection must be given to non-adults.
 

Tevildo

Member
(Sorry if this is getting off-topic - perhaps a new thread is in order).

TheSkunkCat said:
Well the judge has several thousands of years of progress behind him that the priest hasn't.
Progress? Towards what? (And not "away from superstition", please). Progress implies a definite goal, an objective to be attained - what is this objective? And, even if you can define it, how can you say that progress towards it is good?
Really, I mainly made the point with those two words, so as to make clear I view (As any sane person would) that proper legal protection must be given to non-adults.
My point is that "proper", "mature", and "adult" are _just words_. There's no sort of absolute, impartial standard for them that we can determine "scientifically", or whatever you regard as giving us genuine knowledge. Whether or not a decision is "proper", or a person is "mature", is an _entirely arbitary_ judgement, made by whoever has political power at the time.

If you think that my views are wrong, I'd be very interested to know what you consider to be the objective standard we can use for morality. Presumably not the Bible. :)
 

greg-the-fox

Well-Known Member
I'm starting to worry that I'm leaning towards gay. I'm wondering if what they say is true, that bi's can be gays in denial. I don't know, my interest in women is just... fading I guess. But I've always wanted to start a family someday and have kids. Plz help I'm scared.
>_>
<_<
 

Oni

Member
greg-the-fox said:
I'm starting to worry that I'm leaning towards gay. I'm wondering if what they say is true, that bi's can be gays in denial. I don't know, my interest in women is just... fading I guess. But I've always wanted to start a family someday and have kids. Plz help I'm scared.
>_>
<_<
Artificial insemination? It would be your DNA in a woman forming a child. I say have your fun, just remember if children are important to you, then you should polish up your seduction skills for the ladies. ;d
 

wolfydog

New Member
I am bi, and very sick of it. My bf is one of the few guys who doesnt care, and although I love him to my hearts core....it makes me wonder why others arent as open minded as he is. I'm not saying that because he is my bf, I'm saying that because he really doesnt care about someones sexuality at all.
 

boywonder

Member
Oni said:
greg-the-fox said:
I'm starting to worry that I'm leaning towards gay. I'm wondering if what they say is true, that bi's can be gays in denial. I don't know, my interest in women is just... fading I guess. But I've always wanted to start a family someday and have kids. Plz help I'm scared.
>_>
<_<
Artificial insemination? It would be your DNA in a woman forming a child. I say have your fun, just remember if children are important to you, then you should polish up your seduction skills for the ladies. ;d

Adoption is just as good--it gives a home to kids who need one instead of creating more kids to use up more resources. /pessimist lol
 

boywonder

Member
I see. Well, that's a personal thing, so there's not much I can say, but keep in mind that really, it's none of their business. If people are bothering you, just walk away. (Of course, a lot of it has to do with location. Worse comes to worse, move the hell out!)
 
Top