So what does being Bisexual, mean to you ?

*Anya* · 09-26-2011, 02:16 PM

My very measured response has zero to do with the sex or gender of anyone involved. I personally can not help but identify with the two husbands involved (unknowingly so).

I have never been unfaithful in any relationship I have had. My ex, was.

If I had gone into that relationship and we had both agreed to have some sort of "open" relationship, then to me, that would not be cheating. Our relationship was, however, pledged to be monogamous.

Different picture. Different expectations. Different outcome once I discovered the betrayal.

That there are children involved in both families makes it even more difficult to stand by and say nothing.

When we put our lives out there for this community to read, we/I run the risk of negative feedback. We have human reactions and feelings.

I try very hard to not be reactive in my posts. I am aware I am failing to be
objective in this instance. It is the best I can do given the digression from the original topic.

Cin · 09-26-2011, 02:56 PM

Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility.

If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial.

If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially.

The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all.

dreadgeek · 09-26-2011, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility.

If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial.

If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially.

The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all.

The above in red is what I was driving at when I asked my question about what role the gender of the participants played in things. To me, if this situation is acceptable such that we should not judge things in this instance then we should not be in the least bit disturbed *regardless* of the configuration of the parties.

If it's okay for Barb to cheat on Mike with Mary, then it must also be okay for Mike to cheat on Barb with Julie or, for that matter, for Barb to cheat on Mary with Stan. Once we have decided that this is entirely unremarkable behavior, then any limits we choose to put on this must be *entirely* arbitrary. We should not endorse any behavior or principle--most especially our own--unless we are willing to have that behavior or principle become universal. If we do endorse some behavior or principle, particularly one that has manifest potential to cause harm to others, for ourselves then by what logic do we deny it to others?

Cheers
Aj

Cin · 09-26-2011, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

The above in red is what I was driving at when I asked my question about what role the gender of the participants played in things. To me, if this situation is acceptable such that we should not judge things in this instance then we should not be in the least bit disturbed *regardless* of the configuration of the parties.

If it's okay for Barb to cheat on Mike with Mary, then it must also be okay for Mike to cheat on Barb with Julie or, for that matter, for Barb to cheat on Mary with Stan. Once we have decided that this is entirely unremarkable behavior, then any limits we choose to put on this must be *entirely* arbitrary. We should not endorse any behavior or principle--most especially our own--unless we are willing to have that behavior or principle become universal. If we do endorse some behavior or principle, particularly one that has manifest potential to cause harm to others, for ourselves then by what logic do we deny it to others?

Cheers
Aj

I think your whole post is very important to understand and to digest. I especially wanted to emphasize the part in red. That's what I was aiming for but I missed the mark. Thank you.

Chancie · 09-26-2011, 03:32 PM

Could I count on Starbuck and her lover if I were outed as a teacher and my job was in jeopardy?

Would they say, Oh, she's a fabulous teacher; I can't wait until my child is in high school.

Or would they snicker when my name came up at a PTA meeting?

Novelafemme · 09-26-2011, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility.

If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial.

If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially.

The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all.

Thank you, Miss Tick. Beautifully written and articulated in a non-judgemental manner.

JustJo · 09-26-2011, 05:15 PM

Having been the partner that was cheated on, I have zero tolerance for cheating.

Having been the partner who was "the meal ticket" that was used for my money, I have no respect for those who take financial advantage of others either.

To be clear, if there is honesty in the relationship, then I have no issue. In my view, any set or group of partners can make whatever arrangement works for them with regard to open or closed relationship, or who supports whom....and I have no issue.

But there has to be honesty and openness about what's going on.

I don't have an issue with Starbuck, or anyone else, being bisexual or having multiple partners, even if married or in a committed relationship...as long as that has been shared openly and agreed to.

What bothers me is that Starbuck and her lover are both decieving their partners, and Starbuck makes no bones about staying with her husband for financial security (and because she enjoys some of the activities they share), but that his sexual desire for her is a burden. To me, she is using her husband and lying to him....and that bothers me a lot, especially when coupled with her gleeful confidence that he would never cheat, and her profile statements about loving God and going to church. For me, there's a huge disconnect....and I doubt that her husband would take the same view of the situation that she apparently does.

Anastasia....I feel for you. I truly do. I know how hard it is to be in a sexless marriage with someone you care about. I endured 2 years of that in my first marriage, and it's soul killing stuff.

I do have to say, though, that I still don't agree with the deception (and I don't think you do either or you wouldn't be in such pain about it). Can you not be honest with him about what you have and do feel for him, assure him that you will stay married and continue to provide the medical insurance he needs, and redefine your relationship going forward to allow you to get what you need and want?

Only you can answer that, of course....but to me it's a course worth pursuing, for your own emotional well-being as well as his.

I know that taking the ethical route is hard. I'm doing it now in a different circumstance and struggling to "do the right thing." I still think it's worth doing.

betenoire · 09-26-2011, 05:39 PM

If Caroline loses her sex drive (because she was depressed, because she had had a hysterectomy, because because because) and Jonathan decides to cheat on her (With Judith or Samuel or Blake) because his sexual needs are not being met - I certainly hope that everybody who thinks I am mean today because I say there is no set of circumstances that justifies cheating remembers to dote on Jonathan and be understanding.

dreadgeek · 09-26-2011, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility.

If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial.

If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially.

The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all.

Would you mind terribly if I linked to this in the Breaking the Spell thread? What you say here is the kind of meme I want being batted around in that thread.

Cheers
Aj

Cin · 09-26-2011, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Would you mind terribly if I linked to this in the Breaking the Spell thread? What you say here is the kind of meme I want being batted around in that thread.

Cheers
Aj

No, of course I certainly wouldn't mind at all. Help yourself. That's quite flattering coming from you. Thanks.

citybutch · 09-26-2011, 09:01 PM

There are ways I agree with you... kind of.

Laws are impartial. The legal thing to do in any given situation is black and white. Stealing for example is illegal... there is no difference in terms of the law that what you are doing is legal or illegal. A murderer is as much operating outside the law as someone who shoplifts. It is merely the level of punishment that will differ. Both a murderer and someone who steals is operating outside the law. What may be legal behavior may not be moral. What is moral behavior is always legal.

Ethical or moral behavior, on the other hand is far more blurred and far LESS black and white. What may be legal behavior may not (and sometimes IS not) ethical or moral behavior. Ethical/Moral behavior is behavior that we would want to be above and beyond legal behavior. For our society for some it is based on the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you... or even higher, place the needs and concerns of others above your own. This can be open to interpretation. In fact, sometimes two different can come to different solutions based on one's moral universe or moral compass.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Tick

Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility.

If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial.

If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially.

The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all.

Cin · 09-27-2011, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by citybutch

There are ways I agree with you... kind of.

Laws are impartial. The legal thing to do in any given situation is black and white. Stealing for example is illegal... there is no difference in terms of the law that what you are doing is legal or illegal. A murderer is as much operating outside the law as someone who shoplifts. It is merely the level of punishment that will differ. Both a murderer and someone who steals is operating outside the law. What may be legal behavior may not be moral. What is moral behavior is always legal.

Ethical or moral behavior, on the other hand is far more blurred and far LESS black and white. What may be legal behavior may not (and sometimes IS not) ethical or moral behavior. Ethical/Moral behavior is behavior that we would want to be above and beyond legal behavior. For our society for some it is based on the Golden Rule. Do unto others as you would have others do unto you... or even higher, place the needs and concerns of others above your own. This can be open to interpretation. In fact, sometimes two different can come to different solutions based on one's moral universe or moral compass.

I agree with you to a point.

Laws may be impartial but often, quite often, their implementation is not.

So I guess we could do with a bit more equity on that front.

You said, “What may be legal behavior may not be moral. What is moral behavior is always legal.” How can that be? If you have legal behavior that is not moral then anyone engaging in that legal behavior is engaging in behavior that is immoral. Conversely if they refuse to engage in that legal behavior that is immoral then their behavior is illegal while being moral.

But even if you are only referring to the sometimes immoral behavior of some in the legal profession when you say legal behavior may not be moral, I’m still not sure that moral behavior is always legal. Laws are laws but they are not always moral. Hence disobeying them may be unlawful but not necessarily immoral. As a matter of fact I would go so far as to say in some cases disobeying certain laws is the only moral course of action. Certainly we can find historical precedent for this. I’m also equally sure with little effort we can find immoral laws on the books right now. Isn’t obeying immoral laws both legal and immoral? While disobeying them is both illegal and moral?

I suppose we can also look at motivation for certain crimes. Murder can never be the ethical choice, except when it is. And I guess we can all come up with scenarios where killing someone whose continued life would mean terrible things for so many is worth, at least, contemplating this moral dilemma. Stealing is illegal and someone who steals is operating outside the law, but when you need to feed your family what can you do. Who is morally bankrupt, the person who steals to feed his children or the society who promotes an ideology that would create situations where a human being must decide between becoming a criminal or allowing his children to go hungry?

I really believe that if the measuring stick a person uses to judge their actions and choices is equity, meaning the action or choice you are making is one you would be comfortable with everyone and anyone choosing, then you will most likely make a choice that has equal respect for the humanity of all.

However, I see quite clearly that my post has fallen far from the topic of this thread and I pledge that my next post here will be about bisexuality exclusively. I mean it will be about bisexuality only. My experience with it I mean.

Cin · 09-27-2011, 06:04 AM

I lived with a women for six years who identified as bisexual. She always said that she loved the person and not the gender. She was attracted to both men and women, although her attraction surrounding women was restricted to those with a masculine presentation. For her, it was simply about whoever she fell in love with. She preferred monogamy and did not need both men and women in her life sexually at the same time.

She left me for a man. This threw me. It also forced me to confront some deep-seated issues. I became a better person because of that experience. Then she became involved with another woman. Threw me again she did. She married that woman and is still with her today. But when she went back with a woman I discovered some more issues I needed to work through. Apparently I have a number of issues. Fortunately she provided me with a unique opportunity to examine some deep-seated prejudices. I had to decide if I was ready to move past some of my less than useful beliefs as well as some of the biases that I had not been completely aware I carried. I did grow a lot because of this experience.

I’m not saying that involvement with someone who is bisexual will afford you an opportunity to grow as a person. Although it will, as will any relationship. I’m just saying I am grateful for the experience I had with this person. I found her to be one of the most honorable people I ever met. Her bisexuality was just a feature of who she was, like being a femme, or like her blonde hair and her blue eyes, or her honesty.

On another note, I have no problem with negotiated poly or open relationships. I have been involved in both in my life. But I would have a big problem if an open or poly relationship was being, for lack of a better word, DONE to me without my knowledge. It hurts just thinking about it.

*Anya* · 09-27-2011, 08:39 AM

Honor and integrity are the opposite of cheating or dishonesty.

Regardless of the sex/gender/identity/orientation, for me, the golden rule applies.

Tell me what you need, where your head and heart are at and allow me the choice to decide if I can live with it and accept it. If we can not negotiate or are in completely different places, I need to be given the choice to stay or to go.

For my soul and ability to live with myself (or with another), it really is just that simple. I am flexible about virtually everything in my life. Relationships to work, must have that as a core.

Honesty and truth about fidelity are not negotiable. That is a value of mine that I will never apologize for.

imperfect_cupcake · 09-27-2011, 09:34 AM

interesting question. I named myself bisexual from the age of 14 until the age of 27. previously, I had been sexually active with both sexes since I was about 10 (not full on fucking, I mean sexual).

Bisexuality, to me, in my barb self-naming universe, means being able to have long term relationships and to be in love with two or more sexes.

Being able to love and romantically realate only one sex, but have sex with two, to me is not bisexuality. That's heteroflexible or homoflexible. A lot of people are that way.

When I first ID'd as a dyke, I was told, quite bluntly, I was a "lesbian ID'd bisexual" and I was "a dime a dozen" (cheap and common, that's me!

) which hurt, because it the close friend who had been telling me for about 5 years that I wasn't a bi, I was a dyke. I think she expected me to "go butch" |(she said she always saw me as a butch dyke wanting to break free. well, I wish I had flipper and wings too. oh well.) and when I went femtastic, she was pissed off.

I don't see it as a sex thing. that's a different classification in my head. people can be hetero or homo flexible to varying degrees. depends on how flexible you are lol. But bisexuality - in my dictionary - involves *presently* as in, right now, havign the capacity or capability to fall in love with men or women. I don't care if they could 25 years ago, many people's sexuality is not for life, many people's shift over time (NOT EVERYONES m'kay? Mine did. I was never latently lesbian. I fell in love - head over heels with men and women. Now I don't think I could if my life depended on it. And I have zero interest in men's willies except as an aesthetic in porn. But not in real life, ta - only the kind inhabited by dyke dick).

Many of my mates were shades of heteroflexible, and some genuinely bisexual. A few were homoflexible on the less flexible end of that scale (they once in a very blue moon had sex with a gay male friend or they liked to strap on and fuck men for the odd kink thrill in a kinkclub)

I personally like the divisions between homo/heteroflexible and bisexual. I personally believe it give far more people room and credit.

09-26-2011, 02:16 PM	#1
Anya Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: Lesbian non-stone femme Preferred Pronoun?: She, her Relationship Status: Committed to being good to myself Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: West Coast Posts: 8,258 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 39,306 Thanked 40,445 Times in 7,285 Posts Rep Power: 21474858	My very measured response has zero to do with the sex or gender of anyone involved. I personally can not help but identify with the two husbands involved (unknowingly so). I have never been unfaithful in any relationship I have had. My ex, was. If I had gone into that relationship and we had both agreed to have some sort of "open" relationship, then to me, that would not be cheating. Our relationship was, however, pledged to be monogamous. Different picture. Different expectations. Different outcome once I discovered the betrayal. That there are children involved in both families makes it even more difficult to stand by and say nothing. When we put our lives out there for this community to read, we/I run the risk of negative feedback. We have human reactions and feelings. I try very hard to not be reactive in my posts. I am aware I am failing to be objective in this instance. It is the best I can do given the digression from the original topic. __________________ ~Anya~ Democracy Dies in Darkness ~Washington Post "...I'm deeply concerned by recently adopted policies which punish children for their parents’ actions ... The thought that any State would seek to deter parents by inflicting such abuse on children is unconscionable." UN Human Rights commissioner

09-26-2011, 02:56 PM	#2
Cin Senior Member How Do You Identify?: Butch Preferred Pronoun?: she Relationship Status: Truly Madly Deeply Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: In My Head Posts: 2,815 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 6,333 Thanked 10,401 Times in 2,477 Posts Rep Power: 21474853	Morality is a difficult thing to discuss really. Personal morality is by definition a personal choice. However, the reality is that if you believe yourself to be an ethical person then your response to a situation will be you doing the right or moral thing. Therefore anyone else confronted with the same situation would invariably make the same choice. To claim to not make the rules or to define morality for anyone else is just a way of not accepting this responsibility. If it is okay for you to cheat, lie, steal or whatever under a certain set of circumstances then it is okay for the other to do the same under the same conditions. To me the measure of morality is that it is impartial. If it is a logical right thinking choice for you in a situation, then in the same situation it is the logical right thinking choice for other reasonable people as well. Morality should be defined impartially. The other necessary component for personal morality is equal respect for the humanity of all persons. Not equal respect for everyone in everyway. Just equal respect for the humanity of all. __________________ The reason facts don’t change most people’s opinions is because most people don’t use facts to form their opinions. They use their opinions to form their “facts.” Neil Strauss

09-26-2011, 03:32 PM	#5
Chancie Senior Member How Do You Identify?: queer femme-inist Relationship Status: I'm lucky. Join Date: May 2010 Location: Western Mass Posts: 3,774 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 9,518 Thanked 14,540 Times in 2,744 Posts Rep Power: 21474855	I'm angrier than I realized. Could I count on Starbuck and her lover if I were outed as a teacher and my job was in jeopardy? Would they say, Oh, she's a fabulous teacher; I can't wait until my child is in high school. Or would they snicker when my name came up at a PTA meeting?

09-26-2011, 05:15 PM	#7
JustJo Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: pushy broad Preferred Pronoun?: she Relationship Status: Follow your heart; it knows things your mind cannot explain. Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Southeast corner Posts: 5,633 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 24,417 Thanked 25,404 Times in 4,660 Posts Rep Power: 21474857	Having been the partner that was cheated on, I have zero tolerance for cheating. Having been the partner who was "the meal ticket" that was used for my money, I have no respect for those who take financial advantage of others either. To be clear, if there is honesty in the relationship, then I have no issue. In my view, any set or group of partners can make whatever arrangement works for them with regard to open or closed relationship, or who supports whom....and I have no issue. But there has to be honesty and openness about what's going on. I don't have an issue with Starbuck, or anyone else, being bisexual or having multiple partners, even if married or in a committed relationship...as long as that has been shared openly and agreed to. What bothers me is that Starbuck and her lover are both decieving their partners, and Starbuck makes no bones about staying with her husband for financial security (and because she enjoys some of the activities they share), but that his sexual desire for her is a burden. To me, she is using her husband and lying to him....and that bothers me a lot, especially when coupled with her gleeful confidence that he would never cheat, and her profile statements about loving God and going to church. For me, there's a huge disconnect....and I doubt that her husband would take the same view of the situation that she apparently does. Anastasia....I feel for you. I truly do. I know how hard it is to be in a sexless marriage with someone you care about. I endured 2 years of that in my first marriage, and it's soul killing stuff. I do have to say, though, that I still don't agree with the deception (and I don't think you do either or you wouldn't be in such pain about it). Can you not be honest with him about what you have and do feel for him, assure him that you will stay married and continue to provide the medical insurance he needs, and redefine your relationship going forward to allow you to get what you need and want? Only you can answer that, of course....but to me it's a course worth pursuing, for your own emotional well-being as well as his. I know that taking the ethical route is hard. I'm doing it now in a different circumstance and struggling to "do the right thing." I still think it's worth doing. __________________ I'm not tall enough to ride emotional roller coasters

09-26-2011, 05:39 PM	#8
betenoire Senior Member How Do You Identify?: Satan in a Sunday Hat Preferred Pronoun?: Maow Relationship Status: Married Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: The Chemical Valley Posts: 4,086 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 3,312 Thanked 8,740 Times in 2,566 Posts Rep Power: 21474856	If Caroline loses her sex drive (because she was depressed, because she had had a hysterectomy, because because because) and Jonathan decides to cheat on her (With Judith or Samuel or Blake) because his sexual needs are not being met - I certainly hope that everybody who thinks I am mean today because I say there is no set of circumstances that justifies cheating remembers to dote on Jonathan and be understanding. __________________ bête noire \bet-NWAHR\, noun: One that is particularly disliked or that is to be avoided.

09-27-2011, 06:04 AM	#13
Cin Senior Member How Do You Identify?: Butch Preferred Pronoun?: she Relationship Status: Truly Madly Deeply Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: In My Head Posts: 2,815 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 6,333 Thanked 10,401 Times in 2,477 Posts Rep Power: 21474853	I lived with a women for six years who identified as bisexual. She always said that she loved the person and not the gender. She was attracted to both men and women, although her attraction surrounding women was restricted to those with a masculine presentation. For her, it was simply about whoever she fell in love with. She preferred monogamy and did not need both men and women in her life sexually at the same time. She left me for a man. This threw me. It also forced me to confront some deep-seated issues. I became a better person because of that experience. Then she became involved with another woman. Threw me again she did. She married that woman and is still with her today. But when she went back with a woman I discovered some more issues I needed to work through. Apparently I have a number of issues. Fortunately she provided me with a unique opportunity to examine some deep-seated prejudices. I had to decide if I was ready to move past some of my less than useful beliefs as well as some of the biases that I had not been completely aware I carried. I did grow a lot because of this experience. I’m not saying that involvement with someone who is bisexual will afford you an opportunity to grow as a person. Although it will, as will any relationship. I’m just saying I am grateful for the experience I had with this person. I found her to be one of the most honorable people I ever met. Her bisexuality was just a feature of who she was, like being a femme, or like her blonde hair and her blue eyes, or her honesty. On another note, I have no problem with negotiated poly or open relationships. I have been involved in both in my life. But I would have a big problem if an open or poly relationship was being, for lack of a better word, DONE to me without my knowledge. It hurts just thinking about it. __________________ The reason facts don’t change most people’s opinions is because most people don’t use facts to form their opinions. They use their opinions to form their “facts.” Neil Strauss

09-27-2011, 08:39 AM	#14
Anya Infamous Member How Do You Identify?: Lesbian non-stone femme Preferred Pronoun?: She, her Relationship Status: Committed to being good to myself Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: West Coast Posts: 8,258 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 39,306 Thanked 40,445 Times in 7,285 Posts Rep Power: 21474858	Honor and integrity are the opposite of cheating or dishonesty. Regardless of the sex/gender/identity/orientation, for me, the golden rule applies. Tell me what you need, where your head and heart are at and allow me the choice to decide if I can live with it and accept it. If we can not negotiate or are in completely different places, I need to be given the choice to stay or to go. For my soul and ability to live with myself (or with another), it really is just that simple. I am flexible about virtually everything in my life. Relationships to work, must have that as a core. Honesty and truth about fidelity are not negotiable. That is a value of mine that I will never apologize for. __________________ ~Anya~ Democracy Dies in Darkness ~Washington Post "...I'm deeply concerned by recently adopted policies which punish children for their parents’ actions ... The thought that any State would seek to deter parents by inflicting such abuse on children is unconscionable." UN Human Rights commissioner

09-27-2011, 09:34 AM	#15
imperfect_cupcake Senior Member How Do You Identify?: feminine dolly dyke Preferred Pronoun?: Your Grace Relationship Status: I put my own care first Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: In a gauze of mystery Posts: 1,776 My Photo Gallery Thanks: 2,426 Thanked 9,712 Times in 1,611 Posts Rep Power: 21474853	interesting question. I named myself bisexual from the age of 14 until the age of 27. previously, I had been sexually active with both sexes since I was about 10 (not full on fucking, I mean sexual). Bisexuality, to me, in my barb self-naming universe, means being able to have long term relationships and to be in love with two or more sexes. Being able to love and romantically realate only one sex, but have sex with two, to me is not bisexuality. That's heteroflexible or homoflexible. A lot of people are that way. When I first ID'd as a dyke, I was told, quite bluntly, I was a "lesbian ID'd bisexual" and I was "a dime a dozen" (cheap and common, that's me! ) which hurt, because it the close friend who had been telling me for about 5 years that I wasn't a bi, I was a dyke. I think she expected me to "go butch" \|(she said she always saw me as a butch dyke wanting to break free. well, I wish I had flipper and wings too. oh well.) and when I went femtastic, she was pissed off. I don't see it as a sex thing. that's a different classification in my head. people can be hetero or homo flexible to varying degrees. depends on how flexible you are lol. But bisexuality - in my dictionary - involves presently as in, right now, havign the capacity or capability to fall in love with men or women. I don't care if they could 25 years ago, many people's sexuality is not for life, many people's shift over time (NOT EVERYONES m'kay? Mine did. I was never latently lesbian. I fell in love - head over heels with men and women. Now I don't think I could if my life depended on it. And I have zero interest in men's willies except as an aesthetic in porn. But not in real life, ta - only the kind inhabited by dyke dick). Many of my mates were shades of heteroflexible, and some genuinely bisexual. A few were homoflexible on the less flexible end of that scale (they once in a very blue moon had sex with a gay male friend or they liked to strap on and fuck men for the odd kink thrill in a kinkclub) I personally like the divisions between homo/heteroflexible and bisexual. I personally believe it give far more people room and credit.