The Bizarre World of the BisexualDecember 30, 2010January 6, 2013 (For a longer, much less entertaining, prose version of this see my post ‘Curiouser and Curiouser: The Strange Disappearance of Male Bisexuality’.) Tip: Dermod Moore Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)MoreClick to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window) Related Tags:bisexualitycuriouser and curiousermale bisexuality 79 thoughts on “The Bizarre World of the Bisexual” Matthew July 17, 2011 at 10:26 pm Yes I am in Chicago. And recently been encouraged to speak on panels and be politically active which I have many reservations. I am a playwright and artist and have written on the theme. But really if I ever protested my sign would say something like: “I AM BISEXUAL and MY LIFE IS BORING!” or something like that. The truth is I have normalized myself in the art world and it is relatively easy to be out. But the moment I step out of this bubble I have been assaulted, harassed, punched, my apartment vandalized, job discrimination etc. The more violent has of course come from straight men, but harassment has come from gays and lesbians and enough to actually take possible legal action (if it happened again which I am sure it will). So I am becoming politically involved even though I would prefer a much more quiet life. Matthew July 17, 2011 at 9:44 pm It really is an odd phenomenon that the out bisexual men and women I am meeting now are counselors, psychologists, educators, social workers etc. And most have a similar perspective on intimacy. Which may not be everyone’s cup of tea. No worries the stereotypical bisexual sex fiends are still out there, I certainly was from age 18 – 31. Matthew July 17, 2011 at 11:09 am I think I have ditched the whole idea of casual sex. For emotionally available sex. Which generally scares off the people I don’t want to have sex with. They generally run for the hills! Those that stay are just so much more fun to play around with. Mark S July 16, 2011 at 11:28 pm Matthew: I’m sure your gay fuck-buddy is very lucky. Most gay tops aren’t very good company afterwards. And I should know. Matthew July 16, 2011 at 8:20 pm It’s partly a fear of being fucked/broken into isn’t it? And most ‘tops’ could arguably be said to have that fear/repression. I don’t feel as a ‘top’ I am repressed. I am not macho or anything I just like to let out a lot of aggression during sex or be the “giver”. After sex I am usually just a big “pussy”. As far as Anal sex I don’t practice that with any of my partners. there are other ways of fucking a man for example that is more pleasurable and much more safe for everyone. And as far as me receiving anal I tried, it wasn’t bad but not exactly the best. I think once again the “repression” is less about sex and more about emotion. The “macho” person defends himself from being vulnerable in anyway what-so-ever because he is scared of his vulnerability and is emotions. I have seen this in both gay and straight men. They often use bravado to cover up their fear and cowardess. But there is another way to express masculinity, it is to be courageous enough to be vulnerable especially with those you love and make love to. Matthew July 16, 2011 at 7:35 pm Cheers Mark! I love the video. As I mentioned I am now currently in a relationship with both a man and a woman and it is no secrete. And it is not just about sex, they are loving emotionally supportive relationships. I really am seeing what happens here my woman also bi has no problem just wants me always to come back to her. The guy is more antsy because this is not what he had in mind but sticks with it because few gay men will top him as well as I do and also be a cool guy to hang out with afterwards. So one day at a time in my bizaaro world that doesn’t exist. Mark S January 17, 2011 at 11:56 am You put it much better than I can, Ann. The only thing I’d add is that gay marriage inevitably admits queers to the world of hypocrisy. Not that all married homos are hypocrites but the yen for respectability and keeping up appearances that tends to go with marriage (and is in fact a major if not the major appeal for many gay marriage advocates) results in a new kind of closet. The gays who get married want to say: ‘My relationship is just as valid as yours.’ But more often than not end up saying ‘Is just like like yours.’ The reality is that most male long term relationships are not monogamous. And for most heterosexuals monogamy is the bedrock (literally) of marriage. It’s the price you pay for the privilege of marriage – hence perhaps all that talk of ‘cheating’. It would be nice to think that gays are widening the meaning of marriage, but I don’t really see that. I see gays dissimulating in the hope they will be invited to join the golf club. Ann Herendeen January 17, 2011 at 5:18 am Welcome back, Simon-Peter! Good to hear from you. I thought this discussion was over, but like zombies or The Terminator, it just keeps coming back to life. Seriously, I don’t think there’s anything ‘wrong’ with monogamy by choice. I think that, as Mark S. points out, and as the authors of that book I mentioned (Sex at Dawn) argue, people tend to have a very, very difficult time *being* monogamous; they ‘cheat’ or ‘stray;’ they feel guilty; they get caught; then they have ugly divorces and battles over child custody. It makes people unhappy and their kids unhappy. But it does work for some couples. I think most of the problem is due to the incredibly long lifespans we have now. A monogamoous relationship might be doable for ten years; forty years or more presents a greater challenge. As to the push for Marriage Equality: I think people like me and Mark S. are troubled by the focus on perpetuating the state-sanctioned relationships, rather than eliminating other areas of discrimination against queers. Of course people of all sexual orientations should have the same civil rights as everyone else. But as someone who is unlikely to be married, I am annoyed that people can get a tax break and other benefits simply because they’re ‘in love’ and I can’t because I’m not ‘in love.’ I’d much prefer we scrap the whole system of state benefits to married couples and instead limit benefits to people who are raising children, whether alone or in any kind of relationship. Religious ceremonies, with no state benefits, are fine. Ann Herendeen January 11, 2011 at 12:17 am I love Peter Tatchell. That same bisexual man I refuse to cheat on his wife with told me about his website and I liked it for its defense of “gay men who love women” and stuff like that. Marriage equality just seems to be one of those popular issues now. Even perfectly decent people are getting sucked into it. maybe the moment will pass in a year or two. I don’t mean to sound so pedantic and serious about the evolutionary biology. I think it’s interesting, that’s all. I was a bit of a biology nerd in high school and I’ve never lost my fascination with it. And I don’t think there’s anything so bad about looking at other animals’ behavior and seeing how our behavior compares. It can be fun recognizing yourself…or not! I wouldn’t advise moving over here now. Way too f’d up and getting worse. Sisu January 10, 2011 at 11:06 am We could reduce everything (anything) to evolutionary biology and end up with everything and nothing… the point is that human beings (or those that resemble them… I hardly ever feel human) are able to choose and modify and also react to their base “evolutionary instincts” that makes us unique. If we are to evolve, or even if we are to move beyond where we are now, we will see that our compatriots and even most hated co-humans have part or more of the answer; and that we deserve respect (even the least amongst us) for what we can achieve than what we do achieve. Mark S excepted, of course. 😉 Ann Herendeen January 10, 2011 at 9:43 am Sisu: I agree with you, but the argument the book is making is not about “normal” but about “natural.” Biology, sexuality, etc. I think it’s a stronger argument than one based on cultural norms. I think you and I and the writers of the book are all in agreement here. Sisu January 10, 2011 at 9:22 am Regardless of whether marriage and monogamy are “normal” or not, both are seen as a (preferable) societal norm. For a minority group such as teh g4ys to promote heteronormative relationships is a sad and sorriful indication of how attractive the “norm” is. I despair. Ann Herendeen January 10, 2011 at 8:27 am Before this discussion ends, I want to thank Mark S. for his principled stand against marriage and the cult of monogamy, and to mention a book that argues that monogamy is unnatural for humans, as all our closest relatives (chimpanzees, etc.) are most definitely *not* monogamous: Sex at dawn: the prehistoric origins of modern sexuality, by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jethá (New York: Harper, c2010) The big problem with this book is that it makes hardly any mention of gay sex, which seems absurd. But the argument against monogamy is still a good one, I think. Ann Herendeen January 10, 2011 at 12:16 am Re: “hussy.” Thanks! I do my best. Simon-Peter January 10, 2011 at 12:07 am My dad was a boxer in the RAF and my mum was a ballerina in Ballet Rambert. My uncle Robert was a very ‘out’ homo before homos were out… I think I was probably just as self obsessed then as I am now and that it was almost impossible for my parents to be homophobic and that dad just had a cold and I hadn’t noticed. I was a depressing child….. Graham Perrett January 10, 2011 at 12:02 am P.s. Maybe your dad was disgusted that the media found this scandalous. Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 11:59 pm Simon-Peter: Thats OK, its hard to convey the emotional content accurately in text. Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 11:38 pm I keep expecting Mark S. to chip in over the “falling for a married man” thing but he probably falls for the one grunt in the platoon immune to his many and varied charms instead. Or not. Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 10:38 pm Graham: be careful not to fall into the tabloid trap. “Gay Haunts”, “Dark and Depressing Places”, “Unspeakable Acts”…. “Skulking” falls into this catagorey I think. Just because someone gets their rocks off in a cruising area or a toilet doesn’t make theirs a “Sad and Lonely” life. When George Michael was done for cottaging there was a really irritating profile in The Observer (a supposedly liberal, left leaning Sunday newspaper in the UK) which used all these cliches and more. I took them to task about it and pointed out that The Sun (A very right wing, Murdoch owned and, usually, rabidly anti-homo daily tabloid) had headlined their story with the almost joyous “Zip Me Up Before You Go Go”. Words really do have immense power of subtle suggestion. Ann: I’m still not sure what I think about why women don’t cruise. I still,sort of, adhere somewhat to the old “women feel about sex differently to men” mantra but you’re both undermining that quite a bit, even if you two don’t agree completely! I’ll sit back and look & learn over this one, after all, you are both the requisite sex. One thing I would say, though, is that thinking one wouldn’t mind if one’s partner had sex with someone else isn’t necessarily what would actually happen. I thought I’d be utterly distraught if a particular partner I was seeing at the time had sex with someone else but, when he did, I found it didn’t really matter to me at all. Conversely, it didn’t occur to me that I’d be upset if another partner later on had sex with someone else but I realized, after the event, that I’d unconsciously assumed that he never would so I WAS really, really upset. Be careful what you wish for (and here’s me harping on about cliches): it might be what you want but it might not be. As we’ve spent the past 100 odd posts discussing, we’re very complicated beings. The chemistry included, Graham. 🙂 Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 11:34 pm Ann, you hussy! 🙂 Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 11:31 pm Graham: I’ve just re-read my post about the power of words and it comes across as incredibly patronizing. I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to it to be. I had a similar experience as your news story episode when I was about 8 or 9 (like you, and almost every gay boy I’ve ever met, I knew early). Being in the car with my dad, driving to school, a story came on about two men kissing in public. My dad made what I thought was a “disgusted” sound. No more was said. For years I felt I couldn’t ever tell my dad or he’d stop loving me. In fact he’s never, ever, expressed anything but pride and love and told me “not to listen to your mother” when she said she was upset that I wouldn’t be a father. I got it utterly wrong and it worried me for years. Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 11:28 pm I have bad habit of falling for straight men (well thats how I perceive them at least). But I think thats just so I can petulently stomp and say see you can’t have what you want. Ann Herendeen January 9, 2011 at 11:25 pm To Simon-Peter: I actually agree with your “cliche” about thinking I wouldn’t mind if my partner had sex with someone else–and then finding out how much I do mind if he does. But I’m approaching this more from the direction of being attracted to a man *because* he has sex with men or is in a relationship with one other man, and hoping to be added “into the mix,” as a bisexual man described his combination of sexual partners. In other words, I’m the one the guy would be “cheating” with, not the one he’s “cheating” on. And here’s another example: I am very fond of a bisexual man who is married to a woman. I could very easily “fall in love” with him, because he’s everything I like in a man: bisexual, witty, charismatic, vocal about his attractions to hot young men–and brave enough to do something about it sometimes. But I would never “cheat” with him–because in my idiosyncratic morality, it *is* “cheating” when the person the man is involved with is a woman. I don’t want to be the “other” woman. I want to be “the” woman. I also tend to agree with your feeling that woman experience sex differently than men do. Like all these feelings, it’s not 100%. I know some women who approach sex very much in the “cruising” masculine way. But I think they’re a small percentage of women, whereas most men seem to feel the pull toward cruising at some point in their life. I don’t know if this is a built-in “wiring” difference or a cultural artifact. If it’s the latter, it will take time for it to change. And that assumes there are any benefits for women to its changing. Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 11:18 pm Yes I agree Simon-Peter, its just hard to indicate sarcasm in text. It is the immense power of subtle suggestion of words, particularly in media that helps create the childhood isolation and hopelessness that I was bitching about earlier. I remember as a child hearing a news story on the radio about two guys being arrested for having gay sex in their apartment (the police actually raided their apartment) and it was story laced with the types of remarks you were talking about. Hearing that story left me with anxiety for years. The Sun headline is hilarious though. Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 11:14 pm And some men fall for married men too. It’s bloody difficult to be sensible. Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 10:37 pm No Sisu not at all.. but its nice to know there is more than that to queer life. Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 10:17 pm Sorry, been a bit busy, like Ann but without the job 🙁 Mark: There were 9 copies of The Queen is Dead in the shop (I remember having to phone up Gary Pulsifer of Arcadia and being a bit scared of him. Wierdly, I now live in the house he lived in then and he now lives opposite). That was quite a lot for us at the time and my boss was very sceptical. I sold the lot for you. Sisu January 9, 2011 at 10:16 pm Not that there is anything wrong with just skulking in parks or toilet blocks…. Ann Herendeen January 9, 2011 at 10:08 am I apologize for adding in these next two comments from way back in the beginning of this thread–but I posted them to Mark S. directly by mistake, then got involved with this bizarre and confining ritual called a “day job” and haven’t been able to correct my error until now. And Mark thought it was OK to repost to the group… 1. About self-identified gay men who have sex with women: I hear about it a little. A woman commented on my blog and referred to her “gay boyfriend.” It was a very amusing story, about him sitting around a campfire and telling scary stories to a group of gay men about having sex with women and encouraging them to try it if they felt like it. -And some gay guys I know (two of them) talk about having had sex with women, enjoying it, but not feeling that they were bisexual. These are young guys–under 30. It’s a different generation from mine (I’m 55). It *is* very C. Isherwood–but I think a lot of that is because when that generation was young, most men assumed they were straight and thought they should at least try sex with women. Now boys know they’re gay at age 7 or thereabouts. BTW, I love the tractor story and the discussion of cruising. Ann Herendeen January 9, 2011 at 10:31 am About women cruising: I am terrified of cruising in straight bars–forget outdoors. But there are famous places for doing it outside in NYC. I’m not saying my fears are sensible or that they’re overwrought. I only know that I don’t enjoy trying to pick up straight guys in a crusing situation. For me, going to a lesbian bar is much less frightening. Of course, that’s because, in my “bizarre world of the bisexual,” there were times when I might be interested in cruising for a woman. My very first sexual experience of any kind was with a woman who picked me up in a notorious dyke bar in NYC, The Duchess, on Sheridan Square (in Greenwich Village). It was a great first time (for me, if not for her, as I was clueless about sex.) There are some women who are brave enough to cruise men, but I’m not one of them. Ann Herendeen January 9, 2011 at 10:12 am Old comment 2. To Simon-Peter wondering about gays and lesbians being anti-bisexual: It depends on the group. What’s funny is I live in NYC. You’d think it would be oh-so-sophisticated, but some of the Gs and Ls are still very hostile to the Bisexuals. The straights tend to be OK with bi because they don’t see any distinctions. To them it’s all one big queer mush. Yes, I remember that 70s thing too, where it was cool to be bisexual. But at the same time there was a lot of pressure to “choose a side.” A lesbian actually said to me in 1975: “You have to make up your mind.” And no, I wasn’t having sex with her. She had seen me with a woman and then another time with a man. Even now when I go to events with the LGBTQ alumni group from my college, I’m the only one there publicly identifying as bisexual. Same thing with the LGBTQ group at my workplace, the American Museum Museum of Natural History (not exactly a bastion of conservatism about social issues). And people still equate bisexuality with “cheating” on one’s spouse. I write m/m/f “bisexual” stories, where the central male character has a wife and a boyfriend. When I tell people what I write, straight people sometimes say “Oh yes. Cheating husbands. My daughter was married to a guy like that…” I don’t consider that cheating. I call it my ideal arrangement. Mark S January 9, 2011 at 2:05 am Graham: Thanks very much for your encouragement – it warms my heart that this blog has been some use to you. The comments are invariably much more interesting than the posts, thanks in large part to some refreshingly ego-free regulars who seem to be genuinely interested in discussion and exchange instead of shouting and snarking and – worst of all – claiming the ‘moral high ground’. Which apparently people only do so they can piss on everyone else. (Between you and me, in the first instance Metrosexy will be a Kindle ‘exclusive’. If you have a Kindle, or a Kindle app, I think it will read the text out. But in a much more human voice than I’m capable of.) Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 1:49 am Simon-Peter: re chemical reactions again. Wouldn’t a chemical have to reach a “tipping point”, which would imply a state of transition (a gray area)? Simon-Peter January 9, 2011 at 12:39 am I think the words “book signing” lend it a slightly grand air that I’m not sure it deserved…. 🙂 Graham Perrett January 9, 2011 at 12:18 am I’m jealous Simon-Peter that not only do you have access to the books of Mark S but you get to meet him at a book signing. I have only been able to get a copy of Mark Ss’ book Anti-Gay. Not even in the gay bookstores on Oxford St (which is criminal I think) and if I can’t get a copy of “Metrosexy” I will have to make a bit of a scene I think. Which leads to the question Mark S… will there be an audiobook version available on iTunes? Simon-Peter January 8, 2011 at 9:40 pm And, honestly? Most of the men are certainly not young, nor gorgeous. It’s usually more in hope or sexual desperation (or just not being fussy)that is the leading factor. Probably luckily for me when I used to roam…. 🙂 Simon-Peter January 8, 2011 at 9:37 pm Have to admit, I’ve never been to Hampstead Heath at night. Think I find the idea both terrifying and more than a little off-putting too. Where’s the mystery? But then, if women DID want to have these cruising grounds then, surely, they would have. I appreciate that this is a bit of simplistic argument but They are 53% of the population and, in this case, the only power they would need is to be able to walk. Gay men have walked these walks despite, surely, equal oppression and are still demonized for it. I found the few full on lesbian bars that I went to equally ‘edgy’ and cruisey, maybe more so as they seemed to me far more threatening (but then, I am a man there). I know little of straight clubs apart from not being quick enough with the remote on telly when some horrible ‘Sun, Sea and Sex!’ type program is on so I can’t really comment. Simon-Peter January 8, 2011 at 8:22 pm I think I phrased the “racist” remark badly: I meant to link it to some of the more vile of the macho so called “gangsa rap” type culture which is almost de rigeur in some areas of London and that to be anti some teachings by mullahs (and, to be fair, vicars, bishops, rabbis etc) was somehow because one was racist. Simon-Peter January 8, 2011 at 4:08 pm By the way, I’ve no idea if the tractor driver was mentally challenged or not: We didn’t speak much and I didn’t ask for help with my homework. …Although I spent quite a few hours after that lolling about the cricket pitch (and under a tractor) I’m still no nearer to understanding the “128 for 4” bollocks and why doesn’t anyone tell the BBC that it’s just ACHINGLY BORING?…. Graham Perrett January 8, 2011 at 2:04 pm P.s. Sorry just re read you comment… obviously not true Graham Perrett January 8, 2011 at 1:45 pm P.s. Yes I hope MarkS gets enough positive feedback to keep him interested. But I think it might be the negative feedback that really drives him. Graham Perrett January 8, 2011 at 12:16 pm Simon-Peter: Was the tractor driver in your story mentally challenged? 🙂 Graham Perrett January 8, 2011 at 11:21 am Simon-Peter: when your done 🙂 re gray areas, maybe I should have said “a lot of things in the universe” … I do have a tendency to exaggerate to get my point across Simon-Peter January 8, 2011 at 10:06 am Graham: You’re probably right about the sliding scale of sexuality causing problems to insecure gay boys and girls (although, scientifically, there are innumerable ON/OFF, either/or situations in reality). And as to us here being intelligent and discursive, thanks! but hark! What’s this? Our dear leaderene (still can’t get over the manly pooftah thing) has reduced us to the titillation of yokel hotties. What can I say? I was bunking off school, sunbathing on Farnham Common. He was on a tractor, mowing the cricket ground, top off, torso glistening in the hot sun shorts bulging and damp. I was 15 years old and quivering with lust, my crisp, white shirt unbuttoned, my grammar school blazer draped nonchalantly over my shoulder and my tight black trousers outlining my …. Oh, you get the picture. I need to go…. Graham Perrett January 8, 2011 at 2:16 am I just tried to wade through the comments at http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/12/bizarre-world-of-bisexual.html myself and also found it drearily hateful as well. Personally as homosexual I find bisexuality the missing piece of my puzzle. I no longer have to struggle with difference. Bisexuality makes us all the same or both sides of the same coin at least. All things in this universe have two extremes and the gray area in between (or middle ground if you prefer) so why not sexuality as well. Maybe this is why so many homosexuals have anger to this subject. They have struggled so long and hard to have pride and self esteem in their difference only to find out in the end that they are the same. And also on a personal note I would like to thank Mark S and all the others on this blog for all the straight talk (if you’ll pardon the pun) on these subjects. It has enhanced my search for identity in a truly intelligent way and is unlike most blogs which is generally just a slanging match of people with unresolved issues and shouting at the nearest person. Mark S January 8, 2011 at 1:50 am Given the agricultural orientation this discussion has taken I feel able to mention that pre-legalisation bugger Joe Orton’s all-time favourite fantasy as recorded in his diaries was: ‘Fucking a mentally defective farm-hand on the back of his Land-Rover. In the rain.’ I think that’s probably the ultimate in rough trade. Sisu January 8, 2011 at 1:35 am Tractor sex is hot. And really, I wish I had been alive when sodomy was illegal and campness and flamboyance were the ways to be different. At least things were interesting then. Simon-Peter January 7, 2011 at 9:36 pm Mark: You may well be right there. I do find the whole area of identity politics a difficult one. I know that being gay has informed every aspect of my life from the minute I realized that I was “different”. ‘Gay’ wasn’t just a definition of what I wanted to do in bed (and on the common, in the park, gym shower, on the tractor etc.) but of the way I looked at the world, at society: the looking in as an outsider, the learning the ‘correct’ response in social situations, the being ‘other’. I’m aware that it’s just a label but it’s one that’s helped me understand myself. At the same time, more and more often. I’m getting fed up with the new connotations that seem to go with the Gay Label and hence the reason, I guess, that I’m finding this discussion so interesting. I think you’re right that the bisexuals I’ve been closest to (I just wrote closet to, Mr. Freud) haven’t really ‘identified’ as anything other than mainstream so I’m at a loss about all the gay issues surrounding it. Can’t we just shout “Oh, Grow Up!” at all those prissy gay boys, really loudly? Simon-Peter January 7, 2011 at 9:13 pm I bet you say that to all the boys. Mark S January 7, 2011 at 8:49 pm Simon: I always thought you were the type…. Perhaps your personal er, interest in bi and str8 men has innoculated you to the gay dissing/hissing that goes on around the subject. Though I would say that it seems much worse in certain circles in the US — perhaps because identity politics is more entrenched there. There’s also a quasi religious dimension to it over there – I think that Mr Savage, who has set himself up as a high priest of sexuality, treats bisexuality as a kind of gay heresy. Simon-Peter January 7, 2011 at 7:55 pm And, OK, yes, it probably was me who shagged their boyfriend… Simon-Peter January 7, 2011 at 7:51 pm I must’ve led a very sheltered life. I’ve never come across anti-bisexual feeling in anyone that I’ve been conscious of. I’ve endured anti gay stuff, physical and verbal, from people I assume are straight, but have never seen or heard anti bi stuff except – strangely enough – from a spurned woman who wanted to go shag my then gentleman. I started to read the comments on JoeBlogg but got depressed at the mundanity of their abuse. Who are these people? I’m grateful to QRG and Ann for making me think just a little bit more about things whereas these folk just seem to be having one of those pointless mobile phone conversations that one overhears on the bus or outside office buildings where people smoke. Those girls who want to do violence to the “slag” who slept with their boyfriend but who don’t seem to blame the aforementioned boyfriend at all…. I’ll shut up now. Sorry. Mark S January 7, 2011 at 3:53 pm ‘It Gets Better’ – Unless you’re bi, in which case Dan will bully you forever. Dave January 7, 2011 at 10:13 am I first saw this clip on the blog JoeMyGod and as you can read there from some of the comments from gay men they do show their bigoted sides when it comes to male bisexuality. Some gay men will flip out and claim that men can’t be bisexual or that there’s no such thing as a male bisexual identity, which only shows how fragile the gay male identity is. Or they seem to think that being bisexual is the exact same thing as being heterosexual when it is not. Or then they pull the “bisexuals can’t be monogamous!” excuse when most gay men are not in monogamous relationships, frequently date or sleep with lots of men before finding a husband and then wind up having an open relationship with him, or if they are monogamous they know other gay men who have had an open relationship. I liked one rebuke to an idiot there who said that bisexual men should somehow ignore gay men and stop hanging around and being friends/lovers with homosexual/gay men and just instead tell straight men about bisexuality, when in reality most straight men and women are fine with bisexuality and know that it exists. I can’t say the same for some gay men. http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/12/bizarre-world-of-bisexual.html I find Savage to be a hypocrite since he tells GLBT youth/teens that “hold on it gets better when you’re out of highschool and an adult”-As if GLBT youth/teens don’t already know that, but then Savage trashes Bisexual men and women who are adults and adult trans people. What a hypocrite! Simon-Peter January 6, 2011 at 12:33 am Do you really think bisexuality is still taboo, Ann? I remember in the 70s when I was at school, it was the done thing to say you were bisexual. I’ve lived with 2 women who were quite happy to have either men or women as lovers – monogamously – and didn’t really make any bones about it although both settled down with long term male partners so maybe that contradicts things….? I’ve never really come across anyone slagging off bisexuals, usually its the wistful “doubles your chances of pulling” rather than any real antipathy. Simon-Peter January 6, 2011 at 12:14 am You say it perfectly. However, don’t all sexualities overlap with infidelity really? I have to say, though, the “down low” stuff was all about macho black american culture, wasn’t it? (pace the novels of E Lynn Harris et al). Not even coming up with a euphemism that even attempted a nod in the direction of sexuality. Now there’s a fucked-up ‘culture’ if ever there was one! I wonder what they call it in Afghanistan? Throw me a stone? Ann Herendeen January 6, 2011 at 12:14 am Look at how many comments this topic has generated (or at least a conversation). Male bisexuality is one of the few sexualities that are still taboo or make some people uncomfortable. And by “people” I mean relatively sane individuals who don’t foam at the mouth at the idea of “non-procreative sex.” In response to one thread: I am an example of a woman who prefers a bisexual man. If I were to enter into a long-term relationship (unlikely, as I’m not at all sane) I would most like to be the “other woman” with a man who is “married” to a man. If I were involved with a “straight” guy, I would be annoyed (OK, furious) if he messed around with other women, but delighted if he wanted to have sex with men, or even have a serious relationship with one man, so long as it was in addition to me, not instead of. Is this “sexualizing” gay men? Yes, I’m talking about a man who is, theoretically, bisexual–but don’t we hear a lot these days about gay men who identify as gay but who enjoy sex with women? Or is this just part of the phenomenon of no one wanting to identify as bi? Simon-Peter January 5, 2011 at 10:56 pm Yes, I think you’re right. One of the reasons I’m against gay marriage is that straight marriage is defined in law by sexual fidelity. And us filthy queers find that almost impossible and really rather ludicrous. One way of straight couples dealing with infidelity is to pretend that, despite all evidence to the contrary, one partner doesn’t know about it. We all go along with the fiction too because it works (I can’t find how to put “it works” in italics, I would if I could). I’m sure the new Eastenders emotional diarrhea must have ended countless marriages. And on a personal note, I’m pretty sure that it was just just as you think. I’ve never subscribed to this stupid idea that the truth should always be told, that lies are always bad. Simon-Peter January 5, 2011 at 8:21 pm I should’ve guessed. My friend Leonie, who’s been well trained in a fair few lesbenatoria, wrote loads of Spock/Kirk homoporn and a wee bit of Harry Potter having his glasses steamed up. Just goes to show, we’re all hiding something. Or not. Mark S January 5, 2011 at 7:50 pm Simon-Peter: Thought so! Simon-Peter January 5, 2011 at 6:47 pm I realized I haven’t answered Mark’s question about my internal SatNav…. Very scarily, it’s a woman, with a very strict tone of voice with just a hint of disapproval. Oh god! Ann Herendeen January 4, 2011 at 12:16 am Point taken. How about “butch faggot”? Simon-Peter January 3, 2011 at 11:56 pm Manly gay guy? …. Simon-Peter January 3, 2011 at 8:23 pm Might all this just be a bit, well, over-analytical? Can’t some folk just like some bits that other folk don’t? Some like bits from ladies, some from gentlemen and some from both? Or is that not allowed? I’m quite happily a gay boy (well, not really a boy now, more a trying-not-to-wear-inappropriately-tight-t-shirts sort of bloke)and have never had a twinge of a hetero hardon but am perfectly willing to concede that the vast majority of menfolk do have these urges. It’s the football and lager I don’t, won’t, understand. (I mean, of course, the actual football, not the shorts, showers, legs and Beckham). Mark S January 3, 2011 at 5:07 pm Yes, and in the Case of the Hideously Repressed Homo I’m Exhibit A. Caroline Hagood January 3, 2011 at 1:39 pm Oh dear, am I to believe that my elaborate hats and fascination with leather trousers means that I’m guilty of making foul covenants? Oh my! Mark S January 3, 2011 at 1:11 pm As I put it in QUEEN: Straight men are repressed, that is their tragedy. Gay men aren’t, that is theirs. Though I’m not so sure about straight men still being repressed. Ann Herendeen January 3, 2011 at 3:00 am I think there’s bisexuality *in* all of us, but not that everyone *is* bisexual (or that there’s “a bisexual” in us–which would be a whole other kinky thing). And as a woman who fancies bisexual men (can an American woman “fancy” people–love that expression) I’m totally sympathetic to Mark S. in his desire to help straight men lose their hetero credentials. Keep up the good work, Mark! Given the stigma, I get it that people don’t like to identify or come out as bi–but when men have the guts to do it, I wish people who don’t identify as bi didn’t claim that bisexual men don’t exist. Mark S January 3, 2011 at 1:22 am Simon: What sex is the Sat-Nav in your head, when it says: ‘Recalculating!’? Simon-Peter January 2, 2011 at 9:40 pm I’ve been having an affair with a (not out) bisexual man. In any non-sexual situation I’ve found it fascinating and confusing that there is such a difference between him and the friends I’m used to. The points of reference, the social and verbal short-cuts, that everyone uses without noticing, are often completely different in homo- and hetero- circles. I find myself behaving like a mad SatNav… I get half way through a sentence, see the look of incomprehension on his face, pause, then, realizing I’ve taken a wrong turn: “recalculating”, and have to get to the point by a different route. He gets equally confused by my lack of interest in Julia Roberts’ tits and arse. Mark S January 2, 2011 at 3:58 pm ML: Nice mention in Interview. And what an acolyte you are! Mark S January 2, 2011 at 3:55 pm Ann: Lots of gay men believe devoutly in the power of cock, or their back bottom, over front bottoms. Bisexual men provoke a kind of jealousy and insecurity by their ability to move between the two (or three). Gay male sexuality too often refuses to acknowledge sexual difference even exists and tries to do away with the whole female sex. A bit like the TV adaptation of Nigel Slater’s ‘Toast’ that was on BBC TV t’other night. Which even I found very disturbing. By the way, I have your book on my beside table and shall be diving between its pages very soon. Ann Herendeen January 1, 2011 at 11:57 pm “Lesbianity?” Does it rhyme with insanity? Thanks for the warning. I survived those perils years ago. The thing about lesbians is, they’re so sure they’re better than men, they’re convinced that if a woman has sex with lesbian just once, it will cancel out any and all sexual encounters, interest in, or any other dealings with men for the rest of eternity. And no offense to Mark S. intended, but *some* gay men are like that too–so sure that a man who has sex with men has to be gay, not bisexual, because what man could ever go back to (eeeww) pussy once he’s had cock? I like (some) women. I like sex with (some) women. I like (some) men. I like sex with (some) men. I don’t like the word “bisexual” as a noun. But I guess it’s what I’m stuck with. Ann Herendeen January 1, 2011 at 12:54 am I’m with Mary Lynn here (’cause I want to tag along with whoever is coolest). I really enjoyed the cartoon and, as a bisexual woman, I appreciated someone finally daring to tell the truth about us bisexuals. We do have sex every day with someone of “each” gender and we love masquerading as straight or gay, depending on our mood, and ambushing innocent, unsuspecting monosexuals in bars. And yes, bisexual men have all made pacts with Satan because he is the Chief Bisexual. (Bisexual women are bi because…we’re women–no other sorcery required.) Happy New Year from NYC Mary Lynn December 31, 2010 at 4:45 am Once again, I have no idea what y’all are talkin’ about, but I enjoyed the cartoon. Anyways, I was kinda, sorta, featured in INTERVIEW Magazine . . . much to my surprise! So, I am an acolyte, an ACOLYTE! That’s okay, isn’t it? http://www.interviewmagazine.com/blogs/art/2010-12-30/fab-5-freddy-crystal-punch-cosmopolitan-1/ I am very honored to be mentioned and round up the article. Having the last word (even kinda, sorta) is always awesome. Mark S December 31, 2010 at 1:10 am ‘OK, maybe some bisexuals actually do exist and they’re not ALL really just a projection of my own inability to get past my own TEENAGE GAYNESS for TEN SECONDS. But they just USE me to have FILTHY SEX instead of making an honest woman of me by asking me to gay-marry them.’ Mark S December 30, 2010 at 7:05 pm Which is really naff. Oneditorial December 30, 2010 at 5:04 pm I think bisexual people are lucky that they can go both ways. But these days there is a new phenomenon with some people managing to opt for three ways: going for a woman, a man and a transgender at the same time. I don’t know how we should label these people. Maybe you can come up with a new term to identify them. Or we might simply call them greedy! Mark S December 30, 2010 at 2:45 pm Donna is such a lesbian sometimes. Comments are closed.