NationStates Jolt Archive

In light of the homosexuality/heterosexuality threads, does anyone think that sexuality isn't black or white, but is more of a spectrum with people gravitating more toward one but possibly a little bit of the other side as well?

Yep. (sorry for brief answer)

Well, as long as there's an opinion...

I don't think there's any other way to look at it.

Sexual orientation isn't just like flipping a switch. Hell even if you are "straight" or "gay" you'll still prefer feminine or masculine features in a prospective partner.

No.

A spectrum is at best two dimensional.

Sexuality is four-dimensional, at the very very least.

No.

A spectrum is at best two dimensional.

Sexuality is four-dimensional, at the very very least.

What do you mean?

What do you mean?

1) Tastes change over time, usually.

2) Tastes vary massively by morphism. Bisexual people may like different features in different groups.

3) Some people have sexual cravings that are outside of the species.

4) Some people have impossible cravings.

5) I have to run. Tah.

1) Tastes change over time, usually.

2) Tastes vary massively by morphism. Bisexual people may like different features in different groups.

3) Some people have sexual cravings that are outside of the species.

4) Some people have impossible cravings.

5) I have to run. Tah.

Well, then I agree. And also, goodbye!

Incen hit it right on the head. Viewing sexuality as something else is just a matter of indoctrination.

Yeah I'd have to agree, that sexual orientation must be at least 2 dimensional, if not more likely more. I can think lotsa straight friends who like traits of their own sex in the boyfriend/girlfriend,,, hell even a couple who like the other sex and wanna emulate that sex even. Soo that simplified look at it would suggest at least 2 dimensions (sexual preference in S.O. and traits associated/wanting for oneself(
r_f//mh

Not only is sexual orientation a spectrum, but often, there is a healthy dose of sexual disorientation too. :)

Human sexuality is quite complicated with most observation showing that a spectrom would make perfect sense. However there is the important question, how much of this spectrum is choice, enviornment, and genetics?

Which brings up another question, is sexuality primarly due to evolution and natural selection, or is it primarly due to the randomness genetic mutation?

Concerning question one, I believe from viewing the evidence that genetics plays the greatist role in determining sexuality and the second greatist determinent is enviornment (child-hood expierence, positive or negative transference). Choice is dependent upon ones genetic profile and expierences incured in enviornment

Concerning question two, I'm to tired to get into it at the moment...

the old thespark.com had a gay test where you could find out your 'gay percentage'

Sexuality is simply a biological function, it isnt orientated towards anything...

This biological function is expressed differently, it has nothing to do with how you dress, or how you speak, this is a byproduct of social identity and is the result of defining people based on thier sexuality.

Expression of sexuality (for arguments sake lets call it sexual orientation) is a result of development, and nothing else... Arguably a homosexual cannot become heterosexual, while in many cases this is true that does not make it a scientific fact... orientation 'can' change allthough 99 times out of 100 it will not.

Choice? There may be a degree of choice involved, but for shizzle sexual orientation is partly a 'result' of choices as much as it is a result of environmental stimuli... perception plays a large part also.

No one ever sat there and asked themselves 'shall i be gay' without having homosexual tendancies, though it is likely that many people with homosexual urges choose to repress them.

You can only understand homosexuality by taking it out of context, in your mind create a sexual utopia where sexuality is irrelevant and not character defining. If sexuality wasnt an issue of the gravity that it currently is, would sexuality be such a lifechoice? In theory people could express thier sexual urges towards anyone without having to think about it too much, would it then be any less a choice than chosing which chocolate bar to buy? Since in this hypothetical situation, chosing who to sleep with does not define your character or how people see/treat you people really could 'chose' who they want to sleep with, while it may still be based on innate sexual orientation (innate based on development not biology) people would be free to chose without fear of stigma or alienation.

Even if homosexuality becomes accepted by the majority, defining people by their sexuality is wrong and carries all of the problems that we percieve as being byproducts of homosexuality.

Human sexuality is quite complicated with most observation showing that a spectrom would make perfect sense. However there is the important question, how much of this spectrum is choice, enviornment, and genetics?

Which brings up another question, is sexuality primarly due to evolution and natural selection, or is it primarly due to the randomness genetic mutation?

Concerning question one, I believe from viewing the evidence that genetics plays the greatist role in determining sexuality and the second greatist determinent is enviornment (child-hood expierence, positive or negative transference). Choice is dependent upon ones genetic profile and expierences incured in enviornment

Concerning question two, I'm to tired to get into it at the moment...

I will have to apologise in advance, for being so blunt... but just no...

Genes do not define sexual orientation, period. They play a part of course, however these same genes in a different context or environment would do something different, consider how these genes would affect the development of a person who had been kept in a box since birth?

I have another view on this as well.

People have three aspects of themselves relating to human sexuality (some say 4, but I don't quite remember what that is):

1. Gender: The body to which they were born into: Male, Female or ambiguous
2. Sexual Preference: Are you attracted to the Opposite Sex, Same Sex, Both? Neither?
3. Sexual identity: How do you identify yourself. Are you born into the correct body? Are you male and supposed to be female? Perhapse the other way around?

These are all on a sliding scale. Society would love to fit everyone into a neat little box...the problem with that is that we are all individuals. No two people are the same. It would make sense that no two people's sexual prefrences would be the same either. It's like a spectrum of light. We see it as white light, but if you use a prisim to break it dow, light actually has millions of colors in it. Just because you are "red", it doesn't mean that you are the same shade of red as the person next to you.

I hope that makes sense.

Gender is defined differently to biological sex, and would better fall under the 'sexual identity' option

Maybe I should have said biological sex instead of gender. My husband is a MtoF transexual. He is the one who told me about the 4 different aspects of human sexuality. I am only trying to remember what it is that he said. *grin*

well in that case you are making an accurate observation about different aspects of our personalities... however calling them sliding scales while being descriptive of just one aspect of how our personalities may change, you ignore the fact that we dont ever sit at a single point of these spectrums...

Your forgetting duality, sexual repression for example which may sit people at two opposite ends of the spectrum at the same time. The 'spectrums' is a good way of articulating the concept to a layman, however its simply 'not as simple as all that'

Im not disagreeing with you as such, just pointing out that there is a lot more to it


I would like to add, if Sexual identity were seperated from sexual prefference (as biological sex and sexual prefference/sexual identity have been seperated) then the homosexuals would not find themselves so alienated, sexual choices would not be associated with life changes of the magnitude that they currently are and people could make actual choices based on WHO THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH without having to worry about the pros and cons of such a lifestyle choice

If so, what does that make Captain Scarlet?

A fictional character with a significantly bad dress sense

well in that case you are making an accurate observation about different aspects of our personalities... however calling them sliding scales while being descriptive of just one aspect of how our personalities may change, you ignore the fact that we dont ever sit at a single point of these spectrums...

Your forgetting duality, sexual repression for example which may sit people at two opposite ends of the spectrum at the same time. The 'spectrums' is a good way of articulating the concept to a layman, however its simply 'not as simple as all that'

Im not disagreeing with you as such, just pointing out that there is a lot more to it


I would like to add, if Sexual identity were seperated from sexual prefference (as biological sex and sexual prefference/sexual identity have been seperated) then the homosexuals would not find themselves so alienated, sexual choices would not be associated with life changes of the magnitude that they currently are and people could make actual choices based on WHO THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH without having to worry about the pros and cons of such a lifestyle choice

I agree with you. The problem is that society in general does not see these aspects of "personality" (as you say) as seperate.

Also, I agree that there is a lot more too it. I used the analogy I did simply because I often have to deal with people who have no idea or have the wrong impression of the GLBT community. Using laymens terms makes it easier for people to grasp the concept.

In light of the homosexuality/heterosexuality threads, does anyone think that sexuality isn't black or white, but is more of a spectrum with people gravitating more toward one but possibly a little bit of the other side as well?

I agree. Sexuality is a lot more complicated than many people try to paint it (most often for the sake of comfort, it seems). If you look at animals, the "natural" state of being is to be bisexual, though I suppose most animals, like most of us, lean more to one side or to the other.

i understood that is what you were doing, i just like to add stuff that people dont understand so i sound intelligent... carry on :D

but seriously, yes, society does not see these things as seperate, but it needs to.. this is the whole point of my argument. It would help greately if homosexuals themselves would seperate these aspects of thier character, by that i mean it would help them make choices based on what they want and not what other people want (which i assume is the number one cause of sexual repression)

If so, what does that make Captain Scarlet?

Ok, ok. I will use my husband as an example here. As I said... he is a M to F transexual. He was born in a male body. From the age of 5, he has felt like he didn't belong in the male role. He tried to conform, but he always failed. His gender is Male, but he thinks of himself as female. He (or more correctly, she) is new at this, but she tried to appear as female as often as she can. She, however, still loves women. She has no desire to be with a man.

As a Man, she was very sad, lonely and depressed. She lived life simply because her body breathed and her heart beat. Her life was very empty. As soon as she started to appear as her perceived gender, her life became fuller and happier. The people at our church now say that they have never seen her so happy as they do now. It really is a change.

i understood that is what you were doing, i just like to add stuff that people dont understand so i sound intelligent... carry on :D

but seriously, yes, society does not see these things as seperate, but it needs to.. this is the whole point of my argument. It would help greately if homosexuals themselves would seperate these aspects of thier character, by that i mean it would help them make choices based on what they want and not what other people want (which i assume is the number one cause of sexual repression)

Yep, yep, yep. At least we are on the same page here. ;)