This weekly Saturday column "Ask Professor Foxy" will regularly contain sexually explicit material. This material is likely not safe for work viewing. The title of the column will include the major topic of the post, so please read the topic when deciding whether or not to read the entire column.
Hi Prof. Foxy,
Someone asked a sexuality question in the Feministing comments, and it got me thinking about my own sexuality. I'm trying to figure out what I am--bisexual or straight--and am having a hard time. When I think of a guy I find attractive (I'm an 18 yr old female), I think about being in a relationship with him, but I can't really imagine having sex with him. If I think of a girl I find attractive, I can't really imagine being in a relationship with her, but I can imagine the sex. Is that weird? Honestly, I don't have too much experience in hooking up with guys or girls, so maybe I just have to try and then see how I feel? Or is this something I can figure out on my own? Perhaps I am not straight or bisexual, but something else?
Thanks so much,
Confused
Hi Confused -
Glad to know the column is spurring you to think about your own sexuality. We live in a world obsessed with two things: either/or and labels. Regarding sexuality and sexual orientation, we are told we must choose: gay, lesbian, straight, or bi? Which one are you? YOU MUST BE ONE OR THE OTHER. Actually, no you don't. You can be queer, you can be non-identified, you can be attracted only to 5'9" tall redheads who play basketball but are either male or female, you can be all or none of these things.
Part of this may be figuring out that you check or don't check certain boxes during different parts of your life, by that I mean sexual desire, orientation, and identification is fluid. You may date men in your 20s, women in your 30s, both in your 40s. Your figuring it out may mean becoming comfortable with being attracted to a wide variety of genders.
As to only being able to picture yourself in a relationship with a guy, I question how much this has to do with sexual orientation and how much this has to do with what you see in the world around you. Where do we see healthy, stable same-sex relationships? Where do we see happy same-sex couples achieving in this world? Ellen and Portia? And the second one is. . . . . .
Or you may have serious relationships with men and great sex with women. What actually matters in this process is getting to a place where you feel comfortable with who you are. Take time to do this and there may never be a box you want to check. You may have a multitude of experiences and relationships that feel right.
If this all feels too loosey-goosey for you, focus on what you want in a partner regardless of their gender. Funny? Tall? Bookworm? Chocolate lover? And then focus on finding that. When people ask you what you are (cause they will ask), it is ok and fine to say "I don't know," queer, bi or you can say figuring it out. You can say these things for the rest of your life and be quite happy, which is actually what matters after all.
If you have a question for Professor Foxy, send it to ProfessorFoxyATfeministingDOTcom.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Ask Professor Foxy: How Do I Know If I Am Bi? Straight? Lesbian?.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12899
I had those exact same questions when I was in high school. It was until I met a girl in college that I had a crush on that I was able to come out to myself. Luckily, one of my best friends was gay so I could talk to him about it.
For me, it was definitely the lack of seeing same-sex relationships around me and in the media. I also grew up in the South and so although I was open to the gay community, I still didn't feel comfortable with the idea of a relationship with a woman.
It was funny that I had a few friends in high school who knew before me. A friend of mine said, "I think you're going to be a lesbian. or at least experiment." and I was in 9th grade. I thought it was funny because I didn't see myself that way. She was the second person I came out to as bisexual.
Totally agree with Dr. Foxy here. Sexuality is so much more than sex. And we as a society make it so hard for people who don't fits labels we've defined for them. Sexuality can be fluid for many people, and we treat those people as if they're dabblers or selfish or confused. So many people need to read this column, whether they are questioning or not-- it's just as important for people who feel their own sexuality is uncomplicated to realize the harm they can do in insisting someone else define themselves in a certain way. We love people, not types! I learned this personally when my boyfriend told me he dated had men for a period of time. Who did I love here? Did I love him because he was straight or because he was this wonderful human being, made up of all these great qualities and experiences?
Good luck working on being comfortable with your desires and may you love and be loved (in all senses of the word) by many incredible people!
The more we research people's sexuality -- particularly women's sexuality -- the more we're realizing that it's not neatly categorized into gay/straight/bi boxes. Many people identify in different ways at different times of their lives, or choose not to identify at all just for that reason.
This concept of a fluid, changing sexuality has absolutely been my experience, so it makes me sort of thrilled to see it validated. I had the same question as this person when I was in my teens, although mine was somewhat reversed (generally physically attracted to men, emotionally attracted to women). I eventually decided it just didn't matter what my label was, and then found myself almost exclusively interested in women for several years, though recently it's shifted to almost exclusively men. Currently I identify as queer (for a variety of reasons... it's not perfect but it fits the best).
I think this whole "female sexuality is fluid" thing is bunk.
I think that men in our society are taught that it's a basic part of life to be sexual, and that men are supposed to be active sexually and to seek out what we want.
So, most males very early on figure out what we want and who we want.
Which is why most American men are either definitely straight, or definitely gay, or definitely bisexual (a LOT of the latter two categories have to hide their sexuality, thanks to homophobia, but they know what they want, even if they can't be public about it or have to pretend to be straight).
Women are taught that sex is bad and nasty, that women aren't supposed to be sexual, and female sexuality is only socially acceptable if it pleases men.
We also have had another little wrinkle in the last 30 years or so (and you can thank straight male oriented porn for this) - the "lipstick lesbianism" phenomenon.
That is, women acting out sexually with each other for the amusement and arousal of men.
You see this a LOT in porn - and a lot of men try and get women to do this in real life.
Since, in our society, women aren't supposed to have an independent sexuality and are supposed to be reflections of men's sexuality, that's why you have a lot of women who aren't even lesbian getting sexual with other women.
I've also seen a phenomenon were young straight women who've had a bad breakup with a man end up going through a phase of dating lesbian women.
This is socially acceptable to young men because - lesbian sex isn't "real sex" because no penises are involved and - two women having sex aren't really having sex, they're just 'warming up' so they can both have sex with a guy and/or they can do sexual things for each other for a man's viewing pleasure.
I think a lot of women have internalized these ideas - and now there's even a label for it, that female sexuality is somehow "fluid" so women don't have a definite sexuality like men do.
I suspect that these women actually do have very definite likes and desires, that are probably as gender specific as a man's sexual desires are - they just haven't gotten to the point where they feel free to actually say YES to what they want and NO to what they don't want - because, in our society, women really aren't supposed to do that.
I suspect that "Confused" is actually a lesbian - but, she was brought up with the expectation that she would be married to a man someday. So, she has the problem of fitting her actual sexuality (lesbian) with the social expectations thrust upon her by society (heterosexual marriage to a man). And, of course, she's not allowed to actually go out and get what she wants (sex with a woman) because as a woman she's not allowed to be an independent sexual actor, only a passive recipient of some other (male) person's sexuality.
I'm sure that's true of a lot of supposedly "flexible" women - this is one case where I absolutely agree with anti porn feminists about how pornography has distorted American sexuality!
I'm sorry, but I don't understand how you're drawing the conclusion that fluid sexuality is bunk.
I follow all of your points about female sexual agency, but I don't really understand how you reach your conclusion?
What is it that makes you suspect that 'Confused' is a lesbian, and not bisexual? Is it that she can imagine what having sex with women would be like, but not men? I can't see that as being highly conclusive, and it's not strictly indicative of desire.
Do you not accept the existence of non-discrete gender, or just not the existence of fluid sexuality? If you accept non-discrete gender, but not fluid sexuality, why?
Why is a certain amount of socially accepted (but not completely) fluid sexuality in women supposedly pathological and patriarchal, but the socially accepted rigid sexuality for men isn't?
And by this, I mean that you seem to attribute the 'erroneous' women's fluid sexuality to patriarchy as determined through safe foreplay for the purpose of men's desire. But why haven't you considered that patriarchy may have decided that a man's sexuality needs to be rigid, one or the other. Bisexuality is much less acceptable for men than it is for women.
Perhaps all sexuality is fluid, and women are more allowed to be. For that fluid sexuality to be socially acceptable, it tends toward being sexually interesting to men, but at the same time, I think this declaration that sexuality is fluid has enabled many women to think about their sexuality beyond labels and outside the context of men's desire, too.
Sexuality is really pretty simple - you sleep with what you want. When we start applying identity and even philosophy to it, that's when it starts getting complicated. That's what is so fluid.
Perhaps men, because they are expected to go one way or the other, period, are the ones stifling their sexuality because they CAN'T be fluid.
Notice how I tack on a perhaps for much of this. I don't presume to know your sexuality. Maybe men ARE simply more rigid. I don't know. But I don't proceed to dismiss men's experiences. And the way you talk about women's fluid sexuality experiences, it sounds incredibly patronizing and dismissive.
I was always under the impression that 'lipstick lesbianism' was just a term for very femme lesbians?
personally i find this tendency to always view girls as experimenting because their sexuality is fluid makes it difficult to be taken seriously when you are actually a lesbian. . .
It is! That's the 3rd or 4th time I've seen a man on Feministing say that lipstick lesbians aren't really lesbians.
Yes, there are women who drunk kiss at bars for the benefit of straight men. They are NOT lipstick lesbians. Lipstick lesbians do identify as lesbian, but they're very femme.
You know, I would also argue that doing lesbian acts in front of men is, for some women, a "safe" way to explore their sexuality. It's not ideal, it's highly problematic. Thus said, it can be a way to try out things like kissing a girl in a way that won't be as judged. This can be important for girls who aren't ready for further, deeper investigation. I know a lot of girls who later realized that they were genuinely bisexual or lesbian after one of these faux-lesbian performances for the male gaze.
No, ideally women wouldn't hock their sexuality for men, but that doesn't mean that they're always totally emotionally and sexually removed from what they're doing. It can facilitate some exploration that would otherwise never happen.
This. And I would argue that, historically, fluid sexuality has been more the norm for men than for women (e.g., Ancient Greece, although there are more than a few misogynistic implications of their pederasty system, but...). I'm not at all certain why these roles shifted, but it's pretty clear that there is no correct or biological sexuality. We're all equally stuck in our respective cultures, whether we're women, men, gay, straight, bi, etc.
Its true that in many cases the behavior you describe is commonplace (males with definite sexual identities, and the katy-perry-style lesbianism-as-intended-for-the-male-gaze--i.e. lesbian in mainstream porn), but I think you are being unfairly dismissive of sexual fluidity in two ways:
1) the assumption that most men are definite about their sexuality because they understand it and have "figured out" what they "want." Since men are heavily socialized to fit themselves into a definite model of sexuality (even if that means bisexual), lest they stray too far from established norms (hence the obsession in popular culture with the "Oh shit, I just did something vaguely homosexual. Does that make me gay?" idea), this definite sexuality can develop from a willful dismissal or deliberate ignorance of sexual interests outside of their chosen model.
2) by the same token, the assumption that sexually fluid women are mostly confused. Could it be that remaining open to the vast array of possibilities regarding your own body's sexual interest can actually be more informed than the steadfast self-labeling encouraged by the patriarchy? Often, I think that is the case.
If one human being is attracted to both genders in distinct ways, that isn't necessarily a symptom of unresolved sexual identity. I think being generally emotionally attracted to males and mostly sexually attracted to females can constitute a viable, long term sexual identity.
Well thanks GregoryAButler, looks like you've got it all figured out. So your solution to society and porn telling us who to love is to have YOU tell us who to love. Now do me: who should I love???
So, lesbians are only gay to please men? Yea, I'm gonna have to disagree with you on that. I'm gay because I'm gay, meaning I don't like men, meaning.. why would I want to please them? Freudian phallocentricity has no place here, in my opinion.
It's an interesting argument, but I can't help but wonder about bisexual men.
The definition of bisexual is practically being "sexually fluid", and being able to go between all different groups. If they want to be with a woman, that's what they do. If they want to be with a man, they do that too. They might identify themselves as straight at one point in their life, but they might have some bisexual tendencies if they've been attracted to women before. Being bisexual doesn't mean you're attracted to an equal amount of men and women, it can mean you tend to swing one way but also are open to the other.
There are plenty of bisexual men out there, I personally know two. My point is that even men have that kind of "sexual fluidity". It's arguably less common likely due to societal constraints, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Soooo... I think sexual fluidity does exist, that it makes perfect sense, and that is typically labeled bisexuality.
Oh, and that's not to say that people can change their personal orientation as they grow. A bisexual woman who had relations with other women might later identify herself as straight because she is no longer attracted to women.
Very, very fluid.
Yep. I identified as bi in my early 20s, when I was suddenly really attracted to women moreso than men (I had previously been attracted to only men).
Then, in my mid-to-late 20s, I was attracted to mainly men...and it's stayed that way. I now consider myself straight.
As far as sexual/romantic attraction - I was mainly attracted to women sexually, but not emotionally, whereas I've always been attracted to men both sexually and romantically/emotionally.
Oh, and in addition people can change their personal orientation as they grow. A bisexual woman who had relations with other women might later identify herself as straight because she is no longer attracted to women.
Very, very fluid.
Okay, I'm gonna add myself on the train of responses to you... Hope your spirit hasn't been broken yet, lol.
I have a solid understanding of what I'm attracted to... Given that, I also know that my menstrual cycle also has a hand in dictating which sex I'm attracted to and when... During my flow, I'm much more attracted to women than men, pretty much to the point of not getting off unless I'm thinking about a girl in a bikini. But at other times, all I can think about is dudes. So based on what I've discovered about my body, I'd say that the 'female fluidity' is very true, at least in my own way.
But hey, I won't discount the fact that I think females generally have a harder time with sexuality than males do. The penis can pretty much send the signal on what a guy's attracted to... With females, it's a bit more complicated. So I can understand if a woman doesn't exactly know what she wants, and that it's an adventure of discovery. I think it's a lot more about the difference of the body than society, but I definitely won't discount the social factor... especially if a particular person is brought up in a strictly enforced way.
I kind of doubt that the person who wrote in is a lesbian. But I also don't really know what she is, either - only she knows what's in her mind. I think you were kind of off by guessing, since you've never met her, don't know her family or friends, and haven't really had a deep talk with her about her sexual interests or fantasies.
Me Too! I have long wondered if there were others out there like me. I have seen a correlation between my cycle and my attractions. Good to know I'm not the only one out there like this : )
And I too get tired of all the labels...why can't I just be attracted to whom I'm attracted, without being pigeonholed?
whoa. okay first of all, and "lipstick lesbians" are NOT just 'fake' lesbians who are doing it for men. i feel like you have used this term incorrectly before and have been called out on it so please refrain. i am femme and it is deeply offensive to imply that i am queer just so i can please men. ew. the thought of it just grosses me out.
also, i think it is completely unfair to say that sexuality isnt fluid. i identify as queer because i feel like it is so fluid. here is my reasoning: i believe that gender is fluid and if sexuality is about what GENDER you are attracted to, then it must be fluid as well.
i am not straight because i am not attracted to biological men. i am not a lesbian because i am not attracted to ONLY bio women. i am not bisexual because i dont believe that there are only two sexes and i am also attracted to trans people.
so where does that leave me? (heres a clue..there is no answer. because sexuality is FLUID.)
it perplexes me why there is such a push towards CHOOSING. the world is not either/or...nothing as complicated as sexuality can ever be boiled down to a just a few boxes that everyone must choose from.
The Wikipedia entry for "Lipstick Lesbian" refers to women being sexual with each other for male entertainment, but it also says "citation needed" and "the neutrality of this article is disputed." I have never heard or read of the term being used in this way before today.
I haven't either; I wonder if it could be some derivation of the idea that "lipstick feminism" is a flightier, somehow domesticated form of feminism?
That makes a lot of sense.
I've heard the term lipstick lesbian applied to more femme lesbian/queer women, somewhat in contrast to the more stereotypical images of butch lesbians. (Not that I have these terms or images nailed down--see my handle.) I've recently heard the term "club lesbian," which is suposed to describe women who don't identify as lesbian but occasionally "act" lesbian--for example, making out at a club after a night of dancing and drinking, or making out with another girl to turn a guy on. It seems to me that club lesbian is a more apt term for what GregoryAButler was describing.
And for what it's worth, I think virtually all of these labels and terms are unnecessarily limiting.
My best friend dubbed these women "party bi", which has been a pretty handy label.
My friends and I call them "barsexuals". I've always felt it was very apt.
Oh Gregory. First of all, you're really arrogant and offensive, but it's too early in the morning here on the west coast for me to be bothered getting pissed off right now.
You're so wrong. You just are. I know myself, I know what I'm attracted to when no one's looking, and it changes. A lot. As for social expectations, well, for sure no one I know is expecting me to be fluid. Currently I find myself straddling two communities--one straight and one queer--both of whom expect me to choose one, and I'm constantly fighting against that, because that's not me.
It's actually almost amusing to me that you think young women have internalized a false idea of fluidity. I always felt bad for the young men who internalized false rigidity. You're right in that men are expected to have a more rigid, aggressive, locked-in kind of sexuality. Gay and bisexual men are also (in my experience) far more ridiculed than women. That's all a huge obstacle to being able to understand your sexuality. On the other hand, when various sexual orientations are somewhat more socially acceptable, as they are for women, it's more possible to figure out exactly what your desires are. The group you think is the least sexually empowered here, I actually think is the most.
It's great to have a man be so defensive of women's rights, but don't stomp your feet over what you think they should be. Otherwise you're just a jerk.
I strongly agree with your post. I think that this person is POSSIBLY going through a phase that some people experience in order to finally accept being a lesbian. Our society puts a lot of pressure on women regardless of what their sexual orientation is. In many ways we are taught to be straight from very early on in our lives. From cartoons and stories about princes and princesses this is what we learn: Boys love girls. Girls love boys. Sexuality is so much more than just meeting some one and having many things in common with them. I understand what Dr. Foxy was saying when she brought up the example of how people might have something as specific as liking redheads who play basketball, but having a basic nonsexual attraction for something is entirely different then desiring sex with a person. Someone may have an obsession with mohawks but that does not mean they are going to be sexually attracted to every person with a mohawk regardless of their sex. I also agree that it's tiring hearing people say that sexuality is so "free and fluid". It is almost always people responding to women who are asking for answers on their own sexuality. These women need to find their answers inside themselves. As cheesy as it sounds, when you learn ways to release your fear of rejection from others it becomes less hard to think about what you truly desire sexually. Our society wants to make women out to be so different from men. Men usually identify as straight and gay pretty easily.(not to say that they are socially accepted or that this is easy for them to come out,but that is an entirely different topic)
I take offense to people always saying that there is room or possibility to fall for anyone regardless of their sex. This is not true for me at all. I am a lesbian. I get really annoyed when I hear people call themselves lesbians but how they might turn straight for the right person.Obviously they are bisexual and are not comfortable with accepting that label. Labels are neccessary in this society. Just like calling yourself a FEMINIST. When I tell some one that I am a lesbian I want them to understand that I am sexually attracted to women only. I do not want to hear some lame response like "oh really. well are there any guys you would be interested in?" The answer is NO. I rarely hear people ask straight guys these questions. But because I am a woman, I am somehow forced into finding males sexually attractive. For me it is not just about wanting emotional relationships with women, but yes SEX too. If people just shacked up with just anyone they found the slightest bit intriguing but not sexually attractive then are they really in control of who they are? We are sexual beings. This is part of life. A relationship where there is no sexual attraction is a friendship. I am sorry if I have offended anyone by saying that, but that is the definition of a friendship. That is why so many gay people are still in the closet or living fake lives because our society does not think it's important for a woman to be in control of her own sexuality.
I completely agree with this. I get irritated when I hear people say that being gay or bisexual or pansexual or fluid is about 'love'.
love and sexual orientation are two different things: love + sexual attraction = relationship, love - sexual attraction = bestest friends . . .
and maybe if you're so crazy about not 'labelling' yourself and 'putting yourself in a box' you're just not able to be comfortable with the idea of being gay or bisexual?
Maybe there's a reason people like to label themselves, and we're not all nebulous blank pieces of paper. labels help us to identify one another, to belong to a community. I'm sure plenty of people are attracted to both sexes and I'm also sure *some* people are homo or heterosexual. it strikes me that nearly everyone arguing that sexuality is super-fluid are people *with* that kind of sexuality. .. who can't seem to accept that some people DO have a fixed orientation.
I completely agree with everything you said.
I do not take the lesbian label because I am in a relationship with another woman. I take this label because it defines my sexual orientation. I would still be a lesbian regardless of my relationship status. It does not define my personality, but simply my sexuality. That is what I thought we were discussing here:Sexuality. Bisexuality,Homosexuality,Heterosexuality,
Pansexuality,and everything else is referring to sexual attraction and behavior.
These sexual orientations are not referring to platonic or nonsexual relationships with others. If you know you are sexually attracted to both sexes then why be afraid to call yourself bisexual? This reminds me of people who say they believe in equal rights for both sexes, but they do not want to call themselves feminists.Fear of labels.
Even if you believe you are pansexual you are obviously sexually attracted to the people you choose to have sex with otherwise why are you having sex with them?
Calling yourself a lesbian because you say you are 90% percent attracted to women, but only 20% attracted to men is ridiculous to me. How can someone apply statistics to their sexuality? How do you know it is 90% percent and not 87.6%? These are just numbers.
Whether or not you are more sexually attracted to one sex over the other does not change the fact that you are still sexually attracted to both.Bisexual.I cannot simply change my view of seeing someone as a bisexual because they do not want to use that label and rather be called "sexually fluid".
*To Zailyn
I did not mean to hurt you. I am aware of asexual people and I do not believe that their relationships with others are in anyway less or more then a sexual relationship. When I am in love with someone, I see her as these things: My love, my friend, and the person who I want to have sex with. If we both suddenly lost our sex drive but we still loved eachother, then yes she would still be my love and my friend. Friendship refers to respect,loyalty,affection and many other things we feel and I do believe that you can have a friendship within a love relationship.But because I am not asexual I could not enter a relationship with someone who I was not sexually attracted to.
We are sexual beings. This is part of life. A relationship where there is no sexual attraction is a friendship.
This may be the definition of a friendship for you, but other people distinguish and have romantic relationships distinct from friendships. People who are in a romantic relationship where one of the partners loses their sex drive for some reason also don't suddenly go back to being platonic friends just because of that. Which isn't to say that there's something wrong if you find that romantic love and sexual attraction are intrinsically connected for you, but this isn't universal.
Also, I'm aware this was probably just a throwaway comment but as an asexual I do find it hurtful when people say things like "we are sexual beings" in this kind of discussion. Most of us, yes. All of us, no.
Why can't we just realize that some people's romantic/sexual attractions are much more tied to gender than others', and some people's romantic/sexual attractions are much more fluid than others'? At one extreme we have people who really are exclusively attracted to one gender, at the other we have people for whom gender doesn't matter at all in a sexual/romantic partner, and in between we have people who are attracted more to certain types of gender presentation than to others but for whom it's not an absolute thing.
There are also people whose sexual orientation shifts during their life for a wide variety of reasons. I know a guy who just wasn't as into guys anymore after a boyfriend he was really close to died, and now identifies as basically straight. I identify as a 1 on the 0-6 Kinsey scale, and how close I am to totally straight or to clearly bisexual has varied over time. I don't doubt that the ex-gay movement puts a lot of people off the idea that sexual orientation can change, but sometimes it does genuinely shift somewhat for various reasons.
"...people call themselves lesbians but how they might turn straight for the right person.Obviously they are bisexual and are not comfortable with accepting that label."
By the way, I disagree with this. I suspect women like that most likely continue to call themselves lesbians not because they're afraid to call themselves bisexual, but because most of the time, "lesbian" is a more accurate representation of their sexuality than "bisexual" is. It could easily be considered misleading for someone to call herself bisexual just because she's occasionally attracted to a man, when the vast majority of the time she is really only into women.
I agree with you. Actually I identify as a lesbian, though I'm married to a man. I identified as bi from 18-ish until fairly recently when I came out as a lesbian. My husband and I agreed that we still very much love each other. We have children together. We really work together, but my sexual preference is for women. It's not that I'm "going straight" for him so much as that I've accepted that for me I can be a lesbian but still live with a man.
Forcing labels on others because *we* feel they don't fit with one of the prescribed notions of sexual choice is highly problematic for me.
I completely agree with your sentiment:
"If people just shacked up with just anyone they found the slightest bit intriguing but not sexually attractive then are they really in control of who they are? We are sexual beings. This is part of life. A relationship where there is no sexual attraction is a friendship. I am sorry if I have offended anyone by saying that, but that is the definition of a friendship."
That is why I would say this woman is a lesbian who has not yet fully accepted it. Or perhaps Bi. But regardless the judgement is made based on who you are sexually attracted to. I can get along with both sexes and even be best friends with people of both sexes. So in that sense I can have a relationship with either. But I'm only sexually attracted to one sex. That's how I know what my orientation is.
"Confused" says she has no experience hooking up with guys or girls. It's possible that you can't imagine have sex with a man because you've never done it, and their genitalia seems foreign or intimidating to you. What Professor Foxy says about your desire for a heterosexual relationship because of cultural norms is also possible.
Ultimately, I would wait until you are more experienced in sex and relationships before worrying about what to call yourself. Experience might shed some light on these questions.
This is SUCH a great answer! Thanks Prof. Foxy!
i'm eighteen and I've always wondered about being with a woman. I have never slept with either gender and the few sexual encounters I have had with men have been mostly unsatisfying. I do want to be a lesbian but i do see myself as bi.
I like Professor Foxy's answer. It took me a long time to come to grips with the fact I'm a lesbian, then realizing that as complicated as being a lesbian is in my life, my sexuality isn't even that simple! Finding a label for the kinds of things I like and am interested in is like trying to describe a particular piece of chocolate at a chocolate fair (okay, poor analogy). And I haven't even ever had any sort of sexual interaction in my life yet!
However, it's some of the comments so far that I'm finding incredibly patronizing.
It took me a long time to figure out my sexuality---for years I couldn't figure out whether I liked girls in a sexual fashion or just as an aesthetic appreciation of beauty and form (I am an artist). I had a long road to travel to see non-heterosexual orientations as something that could really apply to me---they were quite out there and inconceivable for the longest time, but when I did it turned out that the (rare) men I found truly attractive always had the same quality of aesthetic beauty that the women did. I had just been taught to expect men, and not women, to be attractive to me sexually.
Nowadays I can only really see myself in a serious relationship with a woman, mostly due to trust issues with interacting with someone raised by a sexist society to (consciously or not) think me subordinate to him. I don't like the inconvenience of dealing with ingrained sexism, and suspect I'd always be a little bit worried about domestic violence rearing its ugly head. Triggers come more frequently with a man for me too; things that don't bother me at all coming from a woman can make me deeply uncomfortable coming from a man.
However, when I get myself off I usually fantasize about two males interacting---I have a favorite fandom filled with beautiful, rich, complex characters, and my fantasy life deals mainly with that.
I'm not gonna even TRY to fit myself in a box, really. I'm of the firm belief that one's sexuality is a graph that gets plotted on a five-dimensional spectrum (or more), and is thus entirely unsuited to any mere mortal attempts at taxonomy and nomenclature thereof.
I know how Confused feels. I've been there myself, and I actually thought for a long time that the only way I would have a long-term relationship with someone would be with a woman. Now, I'm married to a man, so just because you can't see yourself in a particular situation doesn't mean it can't happen.
As for being "confused" or "having a fluid sexuality", I finally decided that I am attracted to who I am attracted to. Sometimes the only attractive people in my life are male, sometimes they're female, sometimes they are neither of the two named genderes, etc. But that isn't because my sexuality is changing, it's just because of the individuals included in my social environment. If I know a bunch of guys and one girl but am only attracted to that girl, that doesn't make me a lesbian; that just makes me not attracted to those particular guys! My sexuality hasn't necessarily changed at all.
This has probably been the answer that I've agreed the most with on behalf of Foxy.
I've known since puberty what my 'label' has been, but it doesn't mean everyone else does, or that they want to be labeled as one or the other. Labels serve a purpose, but they also lead to generalizations, stereotypes, insecurity, and strife.
I had a lot of these same feelings when I went through the process of identifying as bisexual. In fact, for a while I assumed I was straight because I thought I had to be either straight or a lesbian, and I was certainly attracted to men...
"As to only being able to picture yourself in a relationship with a guy, I question how much this has to do with sexual orientation and how much this has to do with what you see in the world around you. Where do we see healthy, stable same-sex relationships? Where do we see happy same-sex couples achieving in this world? Ellen and Portia?"
I struggle with this to this day; partly because I didn't identify as bi until after I was married to a man, and partly because of cultural norms.
Whatever you choose to identify with, Confused, I wish you the best of luck (and fun!) :D
Gregory intrinsically knows what motivates all women, and also how they really should be acting. He knows what's best. He can debunk your sexuality with a flick of his manly finger. He is only trying to help the porn-addled women who are sexually attracted to women; if it wasn't for society, they would KNOW they should like penis.
He is also aware of all internet traditions.
There are enough actual problems with Gregory's post that it's unnecessary to put words in his mouth.
Most of his posts are made of the same thesis: Masculinity is superior to femininity; women should act like men.
Sometimes, he's right. Often he isn't. Here is one example of male behavior being a poor example for women to replicate.
I can completely relate, in kind of the reverse way.
I'm physically attracted to both genders, but I only connect emotionally/fall in love with women. In high school I dated & slept with guys, and in college I was in two consecutive long term lesbian relationships. I've identified as bi, queer, and gay at different points in my life.
I ultimately want to settle down with a woman, but I think men are fun for casual dating when I'm not in a committed/monogamous partnership.
I have accepted myself and my complex desires. One problem - a big one - is how to explain it to potential partners. Not many people in my experience like to be told "I'm only here for the sex and I won't ever develop feelings for you" or conversely "I'm in love with you but I sometimes sexually fantasize about your male friends"
At least not yet.
Something that I think might be helpful would be to look at the two questions of who you're sexually attracted to and who you're romantically attracted to separately. These generally get completely conflated in our culture, but the asexual community distinguishes between them and I can't think of a reason why this shouldn't be the case for some non-asexuals (in fact, I've had two sexual friends who decided that their romantic and sexual orientations were probably different after thinking about it.) Which isn't to say that this has to be the case for you by any means, but it sounds as if insisting they have to be identical may not be helping you that much.
I sympathise, by the way; sexuality is a monstrously complicated thing sometimes, and can be pretty hard to figure out! I'm still not sure if I'm aromantic or homoromantic, which gets slightly frustrating.
This may be the case, but we must consider the impact of society. It is common for bisexuals to enjoy gay sex but end up in heterosexual relationships. I think this is a product of homophobic and heteronormative society. Many bis see gay sex and relationships as "fun", and hetero sex and relationships as "serious".
Is there actually any statistical evidence that bisexuals tend to end up different-sexed relationships more than same-sexed ones? And even if that were the case, why does that indicate that bisexuals tend to think gay sex/relationships are "fun" and straight sex/relationships are "serious"?
This seems like one of usual typical anti-bi stereotypes--that we somehow are traitors to the lgbt community or can never truly commit to a same-sex partner.
Most bisexuals do not want to give up heterosexual privilege, and I understand them. Heterosezuals have an easier life than homosexuals; most people like privilege and will do everything they can to maintain it.
I am a bisexual man, but I do not like the label. To whom I am attracted is minor relative to with whom I am in a relationship. If I, a cis man, am dating a woman, whom I can marry, kiss in public without getting stares, and introduce to my grandmother, I am hardly queer. And if I am with a man, I am treated just the same as any other faggot.
There may be some biphobia within LG community, but I understand why they might take offense to those who seem unwilling to relinquish their privilege. When I see bis claim to be victims of bigotry from gays, it makes me laugh in a way similar to cries of "reverse racism" from whites or "reverse sexism" from MRAs. We have it good, in many ways better than the monosexuals. Do not forget that.
questioning?, privilege is complicated. Please be careful throwing around generalization like "most bisexuals do not want to give up heterosexual privilege." The thing about privilege is that we can't just decide to give it up. We are assigned it by society. You are right that people who are bisexual or otherwise non-exclusive in their sexual attractions may or may not experience degrees of heterosexual privilege based on whom they are in a sexual relationship with. But are you saying that every non-exclusive person who ends up in a relationship with an other-sex individual has somehow selfishly "chosen" to enjoy the benefits of hetero privilege?
In my mind that disrespects the complex ways we fall in love and form relationships.
It's also important to remember that, even sans a current same-sex relationship people with same-sex attractions, even when they are non-exclusive, experience the pressure of heteronormativity and are marginalized or potentially marginalized because of past same-sex relationships, or in more subtle ways through the lack of acceptance of their same-sex attractions. Or, in the L/G community, ostracized for their opposite-sex attractions. We don't need to play oppression olympics here to acknowledge that marginalization happens--even for people who may, at some point, end up in a hetero relationship with all the social benefits that accrues.
Even if bisexuals do tend to end up in opposite-sex relationships more than same-sex ones, that could well just be because there are more people who are attracted to the opposite sex than people who are attracted to the same sex, and thus more opposite-sex potential partners than same-sex ones.
Thankyou for pointing this out, I was thinking the exact same thing. I am 20 years old, female and bi. I'm about equally attracted to all genders, however I've never had sex or a relationship with a woman, only with men. Simple statistics show that there are a lot more straight/bi men than lesbian/bi women.
Honestly, how anyone gets up the courage to ask out someone of the same gender (unless they are wearing a giant rainbow sticker or something) utterly astounds me. I see a lot of pretty girls I would like to get to know better, but chances are they're not interested. No girl has ever expressed interest in me either. It's a bit disheartening.
This may be the case, but we must consider the impact of society.
This is actually one of the reasons I suggested it. It's not that I think the OP must necessarily be a heteroromantic lesbian (although I wanted to point out it was possible just in case) and I definitely wouldn't advise going "oh, that must be what's going on then" and leaving it at that - but it's damnably hard to figure out either of those things with all the messed-up messages we get through society already, let alone when you toss them together like that. I got so focussed on trying to figure out whether I was sexually attracted to anyone that I didn't start wondering about romantic attractions until I'd come to terms with my asexuality and what that meant - and that was in my twenties!
Man, I don't agree with Gregory but he sure is getting crucified here...
I feel like anyone who starts out a comment with a phrase like "I think this whole 'female sexuality is fluid' thing is bunk" deserves some push-back.
As someone who strongly resonates with the basic 'sexual fluidity' model of attraction (I'm female; I don't necessarily care whether it's a gendered phenomenon--it just describes my experience most accurately) it's very offensive to have my experience discounted as 'bunk' and to be told that I just haven't matured enough to be able to be honest with myself. My desires are specific, but they just aren't strongly gendered. And I don't see why Gregory, or anyone else, should have a stake in saying the are or should be.
It means a lot to me that Professor Foxy's post did not insist on a gender-exclusive model of "true" authentic attraction.
Who's to say that I don't feel the same as you? The only difference is that I am not offended by someone for being ignorant. It's not their fault that they haven't had similar experiences.
It makes sense to disagree with them, but it's completely ridiculous to bash them. I thought they presented their opinion in an honest, non-confrontational way, and yet everyone reacted angrily to it instead of responding in an equally straightforward manner.
Well, scratch the "everyone". A lot of people were had straightforward responses. But there were some that were just unnecessary.
I've always had a hard time identifying my sexuality. I have had a conversation with many many friends about whether I am bi or straight.
I think for the most part I am attracted to men. But I am not opposed to hooking up with women, or even dating them if there is a connection. I'm just open-minded I guess. When people ask, I always say I am bi because that's the closest to what I feel I am if I have to label myself.
But I like Professor Foxys answer but living our society, "fluid sexuality" sometimes just doesn't feel satisfying because of how we've been brought up all our lives to have to choose which box we fit in. So I say, just tell people the label that feels the most right to you. Or don't. It's your life.
I am trying to look at the idea of sexual fluidity... walk around the concept, if ya will.
I am looking at the time dimension. Fluidity indicates that it is dynamic and changing overtime, and sometimes labels don't reflect the dynamic nature.
Hypothetical
Imagine/assume an individual that started off with heterosexual relationships, then moved into gay relationships, but at no one time was attracted to both sexes at the same time.
At no one instant did our assumed individual identify as bisexual, but over the course of their experiences, their behavior could be described as such.
Its kinda like differential calculus of sexuality, with instantaneous sexuality instead of instantaneous slope...
I don't think that made any damn sense...
For a good description of (female) sexual fluidity, check out Lisa Diamond's book. She concludes that women may have more sexual fluidity than men (at least current research suggest this may be the case), but I'd say the jury is still out . . . certainly on a case-by-case basis.
I'm so glad to see feministing posted this question!
I'm currently a 20 year old female, but at 18 I was in exactly the same place as Confused, only I could only imagine myself in a relationship with a woman, but was more sexually interested in men.
After involving myself in a supportive LGBTQA community and essentially eliminating socially normalized labels from my thought process, I realized I'm 20% gay, and 80% straight, which may not be a "real" orientation, but it's the orientation I am.
So, hang in there, Confused. It took me four years of soul searching and experimentation to figure it out, but I eventually found a sexual identity I'm comfortable with, and I'm sure you will too, even if that identity is "label-free" or no identity at all.
While I do like how Professor Foxy handled the question, I think we also need to take a more critical approach. What role does the media play in forming our sexuality?? Well the media tell us to love men, have loving complex relationships with men, and to have sex with women for the enjoyment of reduced images of male sexuality. I'm not saying that this is the answer, that confused can't possibly feel that way on her own. But I have felt very much the same way in the past, and I think you need to criticize what is influencing your desires. Homophobia around you might be keeping more strong lesbian desires silent. But media representations of female sexuality exactly as described could also be creating a desire to be something or feel something that might not be there biologically. I just think it's a lot more complicated that just fluidity. You need to experiment and spend some serious, quality time self-reflecting in order to understand your own desires and what influences them.
I agree that there needs to me more insight into how the media shapes and frames sexuality.
For example one day, out of the blue, I noticed that I would become a little aroused by looking at nude or suggestive picture of women. Fluidity?
But then what about the fact that I've never been sexually aroused by women in real life? Never in a locker room, at a beach, in a club, or out and about, never with a friend, nothing...zip, zilch.
So for me, I think to some degree in the back of my mind, I've been conditioned (for lack of a better word) to make a connection between nude and sexy pictures of women and sex. And if someone hooked me up to a sensor, while I watched this stuff, they might wrongly conclude that I'm sexually attracted to women.
This comment is just in good fun and is in no way supposed to be a debate/attack.
I never thought that the conditioning of society could lead to women becoming aroused to pictures of women, although that makes perfect sense.
If society's emphasis on the sexuality of nude women makes women more aroused regardless of their sexual identity, then I started wondering if the same effect should happen for men. Society surely conditions men to view sexy nude women as sexual objects.
Which makes this study really odd: In a study (Bailey, 2004) when self-identified homosexual and heterosexual women had their genital arousal patterns measured while viewing erotic images of men and women, they were both aroused by both male and female images. Self-identified homosexual men responded exclusively to erotic images of men and heterosexual men responded exclusively to erotic images of women, suggesting that women’s sexuality may be more fluid then men’s.
If conditioning were the case, you'd think the homosexual men would respond somewhat to sexy nude pictures of women, right?
Either way, your comment totally added something to my theory on this subject, thanks!
I'm glad to see that this question was posted! I myself am in the same sort of situation, although right now I'm in a relationship with a women. I have been self reflecting lately and I always picture the same sort of relationships. Being long term with a man, but not sexual and vise versa with a women. I think it's all a matter of who you meet and how you connect with them. Just be open to different experiences and meeting different people and I'm sure you will find someone. Just try not to think too much about what other people are thinking and do what makes you happy.
Interesting question. I've had similar thoughts in the past before I was involved in any sexual activity and then again after I had sex, but hadn't yet had any kind of relationship/emotional connection.
I've had sex with both men and women but only had a relationship/been in love with one person (a woman). During my teen years I felt attracted to men, fantasized about them, and had "crushes" on some male acquaintances. At the same time, I fantasized about women and felt somewhat attracted to them, but never felt any kind of emotional connection (never had a "crush" or anything like that). By late high school/early college I had sex with men and confirmed that I liked that. But I still felt like I didn't know if I was bi (or at least couldn't commit to that identity) unless I knew for sure that I liked sex with women too.
By the middle of college I had had sex with men and women (and liked both). For awhile I still felt a little unsure of how to identify. Because still I had never had any kind of relationship or emotional attachment to either a man or a woman. After awhile though, I figured that there are tons of straight people out there who identify as straight even if they haven't actually been in love/in a relationship yet. And I was completely open to dating/being in a relationship with a person regardless of sex. So I figured, okay that's bi enough for me.
Shortly after college I met my partner. We had what I thought would be a one-night-stand/fuck buddy type encounter and started to become friends. But it ended up that we fell for each other. So I still have never had any kind of real romantic emotional attachment to a man. So for me, what I mean when I say I'm bi is primarily about who I like to have sex with and only secondarily about who I might be in a relationship with.
My partner and I just recently had an interesting conversation about this. She identifies as a lesbian and has only been in relationships with women. But she has also had some (still pretty queer) sexual experiences with a man long after coming out as a lesbian. She also still has some interest in sex with men. What brought up our conversation was that we were watching an episode of Lost in which Richard Alpert ("eyeliner guy") was wearing a particularly tight pair of pants and she blurted out "Wow look at that package!" in a "I could have some fun with him" kind of way.
So I started teasing her about how that's such an odd thing for a self-identified lesbian to say and we talked about why each of us identifies differently when it's not clear that our sexual attractions/desires are all that different. (We both have the hots for Richard Alpert!)
What came out of our conversation was that GF doesn't feel that she'd develop a romantic attachment to a man even if she had a lot of fun sex with him. She also said that she just doesn't feel the butterfly type feeling when she sees a really attractive guy (even one she'd enjoy having sex with). So she takes her identifying as a lesbian to be about more than just who she might like to have sex with. I on the other hand don't experience butterflies for random people who I find attractive, so that marker definitely isn't one I would use.
Anyway, all this is just to say that in some sense there may not be a truth of the matter about what sexual orientation confused is. I mean, how can I be bi and my partner be a lesbian if we both find men attractive, both fantasize about them, and both have had fun sexual experiences with them and would be open to more in the future (if we weren't monogamous)? Sometimes it's not so much about finding out about what you really are as finding out what makes the most sense in how to think about and present yourself to the world.
Thank you, Professor Foxy. For the last two years, I've been struggling with my sexuality -- sometimes I'm more attracted to women and sometimes I'm more attracted to men. I don't feel like I'm bisexual (and I'm definitely not a lesbian) but I don't really feel like I'm straight either. It's nice to know that I don't have to pick and that I can just be attracted to who I'm attracted to. I really appreciated this post -- I think it validated so many of the emotions, from confusion about how to identify to anger that I have to identify at all, that I've been feeling over the last year or two. So thanks, Professor, for making me feel like it's okay to be who I am.
I felt exactly the same way. In high school, 95% of the people I found physically attractive were females. That being said, I wasn't completely sure I wanted a relationship with any of them. And it was never that I found men repulsive, or even the idea of sex with men. I just thought women were generally sexier.
Then the year after I graduated, this boy at work caught my eye. I was completely smitten from day one. I asked him out, and we clicked instantly. We slept together a few months later, and I loved it. It was like he was the exception to everything.
And isn't that what love is, anyway? It's finding someone that's the exception to everything. It's the person that breaks down all the walls you've put up and challenges the person you thought you were. We push each other to achieve things neither of us ever thought we could. That's love. It never mattered what kind of hardware either of us had.
Just be open. Even if you give it more thought and decide you're "pretty much straight", don't close your eyes when it comes to women. I don't know if you're looking for serious relationships, just sex, or anything in between, but it seems like the right situations and people always come into your life when and how you least expect them.
Yeah, awesome answer. I love that description of love--the person who is the exception to everything!
Awesome answer.
I enjoy a go with the flow view of sexuality. If you're attracted to someone, and they're obliged to you, go for it.
I'm a man. I guess I'm straight since I've never slept with another man, but I've never ruled it out either. Gay pornography does absolutely nothing for me, but I flirt with some of the gay men at my work. We're all aware it's just a fun game as I've no intent to lead someone on, but it's nice to feel sexy. I don't really fantasize about having sex with men, but sometimes I ask my wife to walk around with a cane and solve medical mysteries before we have sex. I do enjoy pointing out men I find somewhat attractive, but rarely any further than that.
I really don't know what it means, but I don't really care either. Sexuality is far more fun when you're comfortable with what you're doing, and I think that's the only thing that should matter to you.
Again do you actually have any evidence that "most" bisexual people do not want to give up the privilege available to them and make choices about who to date/who to commit to based on this? A close friend of mine does PhD research on bisexuality. I've read a lot of her research and your claims about bisexuals are what she would call one of the "stereotypes" or "myths" about bisexuals--you know, one of those things for which there is no actual evidence, but which lots of people believe to be true because of their own personal anecdotal evidence. So if you have actual peer-reviewed studies on this, please give me some citations--I'm sure they'd be very helpful for her research and obviously she has been unable to find them.
Of course *some* bisexual people choose to be with members of the opposite sex to reap the privileges. And *some* gay/lesbian people choose to deny their sexual orientation or stay in the closet or have a beard or marry a person of the opposite sex and then have affairs with people of the same sex. Why the jump from "some" to "most" in the first case but not the second?
And I hope you didn't intend to include myself when you say "*we* have it better than gay people" because I don't see any sense in which given my own personal history things would be any different for me if I identified as a lesbian. I have never dated or been in a relationship with a differently-sexed person. I have never experienced the ability to kiss someone in public without thinking of who's watching. (Actually, interesting my partner--who is a lesbian--has had that experience! She *did* date a boy in college and she did get to kiss him in public without worrying about who was watching.) And there's only one person I've introduced to my grandmother (or any other family member)--and it's my female partner. And since my female partner and I are committed to one another for the long-term, at least for the forseeable future I'm not seeing any possibility of reaping any privilege from being bisexual. (And even if we broke up/one of us died, my lesbian partner also has attractions to men. So while after a death/break-up it's possible I could end up in a male-female relationship, so could she.)
So what is this straight privilege you speak of that I must be privy to given that I am sexually attracted to both sexes? And how exactly do I have it "better" than my partner? And really, is there an oppression contest I wasn't aware of? Why does it have to come down to who is worse off or more oppressed? My earlier post did not make any claim about who was worse off/more oppressed. All it asked was that you provide some actual evidence for the stereotypes you were throwing around or that you stop using them.
Oops, my last comment was in reply to questioning earlier in the thread. I messed up with the reply function.
Society's obsession with labels for sexual orientation is triply bullshit because not only is there a great variety of types and qualities people are attracted to which could be based on gender or sex of the other person, or on something else entirely (or maybe they don't have a type, or maybe they are asexual), but there is great variability in gender identity and expression (again, you have to take genderqueer people into account, as well). And, last but not least, biological sex is expressed on a spectrum and there is a plethora of intersex conditions. And since so many people are either sterile or voluntarily forgo reproduction, I don't see why our whole social organization and culture have to be based on people's reproductive abilities. You'd think it would have faded away once contraceptives became widely available, and sexual dimorphism would only be relevant in science and medicine.
Great answer, Professor Foxy. I grew up in the midwest U.S. and never knew of any GLBT people, let alone happy or successful ones (though I'm sure, now, that they did exist, even in IA). It definitely colored my perception--I never knew there was more than one heternormative option. It took reading some fiction which had gay and lesbian characters for me to realize same-sex attraction was even possible. It took almost a decade for me to to realize--like the proverbial lightbulb--that I was attracted to other women. Wow, women were beautiful! And it was okay for me to think so.
But I immediately went into a severe depression, because the only images I had of lesbians were overweight, aggressive, beer-swilling, truck-driving, stone butch lesbians--not the sort of woman I was attracted to. (Important: there's nothing wrong with that sort of woman, in fact they are beautiful in their own right, but at that time, I was not attracted to them.) I could not imagine the sort of woman I liked--pretty, arty, intellectual, witty, feminine--ever being interested in me.
And yet it happened. We've been together for nearly a decade and it is still amazing, every day. Still breath-taking.
All of this is to say... portrayals in the media, in the day-to-day culture around us, can definitely impact what we see as possibilities. But those preconditionings can be overcome.
I used to think pretty similarly at one point---I don't know how you were raised, but I grew up a pretty religious kid. So at 18, I couldn't imagine sex with a guy because I'd been told repeatedly *not* to imagine it, but I couldn't imagine dating a woman because I'd not been exposed to out lesbian couples. After another 3 years I ended up finding my place as a person pretty equally interested in women and men for sex and relationships, but that doesn't mean you will, of course ;-)
I've been thinking a lot about sexuality labels recently and I'm so glad this was posted.
It is so imperative to remember that, ultimately, we fall in love with persona, not gender.
Except for those who claim to be attracted to one gender or another 100% of the time, our sexuality is naturally fluid, on a sliding scale. We need to remember that categorization is largely unnecessary.
Thanks for the great response Foxy.
I personally identify as pansexual/queer, sometimes I used to resort to "bisexual" to leave out further questions and explanations but now I am more than happy to explain the ears off of anyone who will listen. I am and have been attracted to men, women, people "in-between" (to varying degrees,) and people who are none-of-the-above. I have had sexual, romantic, and D/s relationships with men, women, and some who fall on the "in-between" scale. But it's taken me a long time to realize all of this.
Like a fair amount of my queer friends, I have grown up in the world of heteronormativity and I also have personally little experience in my local queer community. Over the years I have come to realize that yes, I am attracted to far more women far more often than I ever am with men. Part of this might be natural orientation, part of it might be from how I am inundated with the concept of sex = women from popular media and whatnot. Either way it is a part of me that I find impossible to separate out now. Despite all of this, the majority of my long-term relationships have been with men. Our culture really makes it easier, I have had to learn (and am still doing so) to swallow my fears of "what if she's straight?" when I try to, say, ask a smart and beautiful woman out on a date. These are fears I never experience with men -- even on the rare occasion they have turned out to not be attracted to women (and in one case was asexual, though romantically attracted to women) I still have not developed any similar fear. It is something I am working to overcome.
Currently I am in an open-with-specific-rules relationship with a heterosexual man, who is mostly sexually monogamous (I am also romantically and sexually polyamorous; what fun it has been figuring that one out.) I know that some women I encounter will take one look at the fact that I have a boyfriend and go running, but overall my experience with queer women in my local area has been positive and understanding. In this I am fortunate. Of course, I understand why some would be sceptical, why some will just assume I am going back to hide in heteronormativity, and so forth. But it is inaccurate, and such an opinion assumes so much about my life and feelings and urges -- wrong assumptions. Wrong conclusions. My boyfriend is a cisgendered male, but he does not fit into the societal "male" mould in more ways than one, and is rather androgynous in both appearance and behaviour. We also kind of blindsided each other, promiscuous me was fed up with sex and most men for almost five months, and he's been celibate for six years, neither of us were really -looking- you see but circumstances meant we interacted a whole bunch and the mutual obsession just grew. And finally, if I do meet a smart, beautiful, open-minded-to-polyamory woman who returns my interest, I know without a doubt that our relationship would be just as "real," dedicated, etc. as the one I am currently in. It would be based on itself, not secondary to whomever else I am currently involved in.
My sexuality has been very fluid throughout my life, but I have always personally attached outside explanations for various movements around the scale/etc. Trying to call myself "75% gay" makes little sense, especially with my sexual and romantic history, but it is generally how I feel a majority of the time. Personality is what really makes me sit up and take notice of someone, and that seems to happen completely independently from gender for me. But physical bodies, before I know them personally? Mostly women. In many encounters of casual sex, women make my body respond a lot faster, more powerfully, etc. than men. I rarely fantasize, even more rarely use porn, but when I do it is mostly women and women-friendly queer porn made by women for other women. Sometimes this gets more pronounced, such as times when I have had recent unpleasant experiences with men, but typically it has remained fairly constant throughout my life. The fluidity for me seems to happen more with regard to who I am attracted to romantically -- again, this can be anybody of any gender in my experience. That is, I might not be physically attracted to them at -all- until I am attracted emotionally/mentally, and then it is their physical body which attracts me as well, turns me on, is what I fantasize about, etc.
This entire thread has been really fascinating and eye-opening to read. I have a question for anyone on this thread who has said that they are attracted in various ways and for different reasons at different times to both men and women but are uncomfortable labeling themselves as bisexual.
What is the root of the reluctance to identify as bisexual? I have several friends who identify as such and I always though it just meant that you were attracted in men and women at different times for different reasons. Is there a social connotation that I am missing? Is the label "bisexual" restrictive in some way? Does it somehow imply an equating between how and when you like men and women?
Just curious to hear people's thoughts...
Agreed. I have never actually been in a relationship with a woman, but I consider myself bi because there is really no other way of explaining it. If I said I was straight, it would be wrong. If I said I was gay, it'd be wrong. So bi fits me the best.
I haven't settled yet (maybe never will?) into a single label that seems to describe my sexuality, but I do use bi along with non-exclusive, queer, fluid, etc. I don't think there's anything particularly negative about "bisexual," but I do have a couple of reservations. The first is that "bi" implies that there are two groups of people two whom one is attracted, and I believe sex and gender are more complicated than that. I also, personally feel that my attractions are much more person-based than gender-based, so using a label that highlights the sex or gender of those I'm sexually attracted to seems slightly off to me. Small quibbles. And if I was given three big boxes to choose from (lesbian, bi, straight) I'd choose "bi" without too much conflict.
I would never describe myself as bisexual even though at times I've been attracted to women because I would feel I was illegitimately co-opting the term.
It would be like saying, "Oh, I totally understand the struggles non-hetero people go through while figuring out their sexuality because I thought Ciara was totally hot in her 'Like a Boy' video" or "I totally understand the intolerance non-hetero people face every day because one time someone looked at me funny when I said Angelina Jolie was hot."
That doesn't mean that I personally understand my sexuality as fitting into the neat, little 'straight' box, but I feel that 'bisexuality' has political, personal, and social dimensions that I've never experienced and thus don't understand, so shouldn't claim.
For me, personally, I do not use "bisexual" because it is inaccurate. Just in my case, you understand.
Bi-sexual implies only two options, and I am definitely attracted to people who fall outside of the gender binary. From the cisgender individual who still appears rather androgynous, to a gender-queer person, to various other examples, I definitely notice a marked preference for those who fall outside of traditional gender lines. My preference has not been exclusively for these people, as some who take on the "pansexual" label experience, but it is still definitely a noticeable factor.
I think labels are fairly useless without context as well, someone else's experience of pansexuality is not necessarily going to be that similar to mine. But I like to use it as a starting point of discussion -- "pansexual" vs. "bisexual" opens doors to discussion of the gender binary and so forth. A personal way to take on some activism/raising awareness.
Thanks for all of these answers! It has definitely made me more aware of the limitations on "bi-sexual" as a label.
I agree ferocita72, this thread is really fascinating!
I don't identify as bisexual because it implies there are only two binary genders, which isn't true. I don't identify as pansexual, because "pan" means "all," and I'm not attracted to "all." I've begun to identify as polysexual, after identifying as heterosexual my entire life, because it implies there are more than two genders, yet it doesn't imply I am attracted to everyone and anyone.
I have some problems with how label-hungry our society is, but I feel comfortable labeling myself a polysexual. This is the only sexual orientation that I feel is most accurate to describe my sexuality. I am in a long-term, monogamous heterosexual relationship, but that doesn't mean I'm straight. As of now, I am sexually attracted to women, sexually and romantically attracted to men. That doesn't mean I'm a lesbian or straight, and that doesn't mean I have to identify as bisexual. Sexuality can be fluid for some people, but it can be easily and rigidly defined for others. I think sexuality for me is an intensely personal and liberating exploration that includes many discoveries over time, no matter what label you identify with.
Has anyone here ever gotten the "When are you going to have a boyfriend?" question? That same old patronizing "You'll change your mind" about marriage and children?
Yeah. I most certainly have. It annoys me how limited a cornered woman like me can feel when everyone I know asks me if I'm dating a guy yet. It's interesting that everyone assumes I'm straight, and as I've gotten older, I'm wondering if they're starting to think that I'm a lesbian, as I'm twenty-one, and I still have yet to have a person that I can consider boyfriend/girlfriend material. Around these people, I feel like I have to be one or the other (the "alternative" being less than desirable if I were to choose)
I mean, why can't I "choose" both, or better, neither! Didn't anyone ever stop to think that even at my age, I still have neither a boyfriend or girlfriend simply because I'd rather be doing other things than sharing time with someone else? I do wish that I could be left alone. And much to my dismay, I have recently learned that if I were to date men or women simultaneously, my father probably WOULDN'T approve. Isn't THAT nice? At least he'll accept me if I liked women instead of men (though he obviously won't be accepting if it does turn out that my younger brother likes guys after all, but I think that he's just like me: not interested in a romantic relationships; I don't care otherwise if he's gay, straight, neither, pan, etc.)
Although you wanna hear something I consider cool? My mother, the only SMART member of my family, has actually stated to me on more than one occasion that she thinks that I'd probably be happier with a woman than a man (as I hate most of the men I know), but she otherwise hadn't tried to gear me toward neither.