NFs on Sexuality

[Christian the Heretic]

...and more specifically, sexual orientation (but that's too long to put in the title, you see?).

So I've always been extremely interested in human sexuality, and for a long time considered being a sex therapist.
A song recently caused me to seriously rethink some things.
'I Kissed a Girl' by Katy Perry has been controversial because apparently, she does not consider herself bisexual.
That led me to wonder what Nerdfighters think about a bunch of sexual orientation-related stuffs.

So, my questions for all of you are as follows:

1) Bisexuality: Another stop on the train to Gay Town?

2) Relating to the song, is it possible to feel a physical attraction to your own sex as well as the opposite, and not be considered bisexual?

3) What about the argument I've heard stating that once a person chooses their life partner, they are no longer bisexual? A girl who had just graduated was visiting my high school and told me, "I used to be bisexual before I got married."
Now, I eventually got her to see that she is, in fact, still bisexual (because she's still attracted to girls), but do you think it's possible to just let go of that attraction to one's own sex?

4) Do you think that bisexuality can be boiled down to bicuriousity? I've surveyed the students at my school, and one boy thinks that bisexuality doesn't exist and that it is, in essence, an infatuation with sex. Greedy double-dipping, if you will.
Tila Tequila, anyone?

5) What about pansexuality? Do you think it's really possible to be gender-blind?

6) Are bisexuality and pansexuality the same as being gay in that (my opinion, of course), one is born with that sexual orientation (or lack thereof)?

7) What about looking at sexual orientation from a scientific perspective? Does it come down to genes? Do you think it's possible that being gay is a recessive gene or do you think it's a genetic mutation deviating from the norm of being straight (an argument with some heft, I might add)?

8) Do you think that society will ever truly embrace other sexual orientations besides 'straight', considering the fact that it's no longer crucial for every person to contribute to the effort of perpetuating our species?

9) Do you think it's possible that as the need to have kids lessens, we will have less sex and in time, our sexual drive to procreate will slowly dissipate, causing sexuality to become the new 'vestigial organ'? A little sci-fi, but what's the harm in speculating?


And everyone, for the love of science, please, PLEASE, don't drag "God" into this discussion unless "He" is your response/explanation for Question 6.
Other than that, answer all, answer some- I just want to hear some opinions.

One More Thing:
People, curse in here if you want. I couldn't give a rat's ass if you say 'fuck' or 'shit' etc. Don't be offended unless someone says something like, "Fuck you!" or similar.
So let's not be too oversensitive, ya dig?
(that one was for you- yeah, you)

[Decepticon]

1) It is its own bustling metropolis, where people settle down and live happily, but it's on the highway between Straightsville and Gay Town.

2) If you're sexually attracted to both genders than you are, by definition, bisexual.

3) Is it possible to just stop (or start) liking chocolate ice cream or burgers? Preference, whether sexual or not, isn't a (conscious, at least) decision, and can't be turned on and off at will. Oh how wonderful the world would be if it could...

4) No. That's stupid. Historically, physically, and sociologically speaking, there is, most definitely, a real thing called bisexuality. I don't know where people get these ideas, but they should be punished for them.

5) I don't see why not. Asexuality exists, and that's a lot harder for me to grasp than pansexuality.

6) They are the same in that it's not a conscious decision. There's not enough data one way or the other to tell us what the behavioral or genetic contribution to homo- and bisexuality is, or whether you are truly born with it. However, I'm not sure that it even matters whether people are born with it. One can not change what one wants to fuck, regardless of the factors leading up to their preference.

7) See above. There's not enough data one way or the other to tell where it comes from, and it shouldn't matter, anyway. It's not as if it's something that should, or needs to, be cured.

8) The Greeks, Romans, and various Mesopotamian city states would say that, yes, it is possible to accept homosexuality. It's just a matter of beating it into the fundies. Preferably with sticks. Large ones.

9) Sex for procreation is already mostly phased out. Now it's mostly sex for fun, with procreation as a consequence. So, in other words--no, fucking is too much fun to go away.

[Christian the Heretic]

"Asexuality exists, and that's a lot harder for me to grasp than pansexuality."

*shakes head*
I...I just don't understand asexuality.


"Sex for procreation is already mostly phased out. Now it's mostly sex for fun, with procreation as a consequence."

Very good point you bring up. But do you think that if/when the world gets completely overcrowded people will start to abstain from it?
Or will we literally fuck ourselves over?

[Decepticon]

Probably the latter.

But the planet can still hold many more people, if we'd just man up and industrialize some third world countries, so we shouldn't have to worry about it in the near future.

And, even when it happens, it will probably result in things like what... oh was it India? I don't remember so well anymore, but there's a country currently giving legal benefits (in this case, gun ownership, where the normal procedure is lengthy and trying) to men and women who get snipped, due to over crowding.

Perhaps even mandatory fixing once a sample of semen and/or eggs has been collected which could then be used to create a number of children necessary to sustain genetic diversity/population and no more.

[Christian the Heretic]

"...if we'd just man up and industrialize some third world countries..."

So then do you lean more towards sterilization or just industrializing third world countries?


"Perhaps even mandatory fixing once a sample of semen and/or eggs has been collected..."

That sounds ridiculously sci-fi and completely plausible at the same time.

[Decepticon]

"So then do you lean more towards sterilization or just industrializing third world countries?"

Industrialization of their agriculture, done properly, would increase the amount of food they could create by epic proportions, and help feed not only all the starving of today, but help this planet support many more people.

So that.

"That sounds ridiculously sci-fi and completely plausible at the same time."

We have the science, it's just a matter of the need to stop making babies over coming many people's need to have the freedom to procreate as they wish.

[Christian the Heretic]

But if we start/continue expanding the industrialization of their agriculture, then we'll keep growing.

Most people don't take to this too kindly, but people need to die.
Why not let a shitload of them die-off and then support that new number?
Too insensitive?

[Decepticon]

Because there's no need to.

So long as the planet can support humanity--which it can without too many troubles with improved agriculture, there's no need to kill anyone off.

Even once we start getting to the point that we might have actual issues, it'd be easy enough to just control procreation.

And, besides, I don't really care if the planet is here in 200 years. I'm not one to care about future generations.

[Christian the Heretic]

Hmm...I'm not satisfied with that answer.
I don't feel that agriculture is the only thing holding us back from overflowing the earth.
What about other factors?
Waste? (landfills, shit in oceans, dead bodies, etc.)
Government control? (being able to handle such large populations)

And I know you don't care about future generations.
That's what makes you special.

[Decepticon]

There's a lot more room than we realize on this planet. And cremation of bodies, and recycling of waste could take care of a lot of the problems with how much space we inhabit.

Government isn't too much of an issue, either. It'd just require taking power from the Feds and giving it to the states (and foreign equivalents), and even townships to help to increase diversity in law and keep everyone happy--or creating new and smaller countries.

Plus, I'm still rooting for space travel and colonization.

[Christian the Heretic]

Meh, I don't really see space travel anywhere in the immediate future.

I mean, we went to the moon in 1969. ::growls::
It's ridiculous, and somewhat pathetic that we haven't returned or even put up anything of true significance up there yet.

[Decepticon]

I'm still allowed to root for it.

[Christian the Heretic]

Yes, and I'm allowed to root for the seeking of psychiatric help for many Twilighters, but that doesn't mean that it's gonna happen.

They'll always be crazy fangirls.
Just like those Jonas Brother-lovers...only kinda worse because those characters are fictional.