Sexuality is a Bell Curve

Like virtually everything else sexuality is a bell curve. On the extremes there are very very few who are either absolutely gay or absolutely straight but most of us are somewhere between the two extremes. At various times in our lives we will move along the curve in either direction but the act of having gay or straight sex does not in itself make one either gay or straight - which brings us to the actual truth of the matter...

Sexuality itself is a bell curve. You are either sexual or you are not. Sexuality can be expressed in countless ways, gay, straight, bi, or any number of fetishes. Most people who are sexual beings will experiment with a variety of different ways of having sex because sex feels good. What is acceptable in sexual expression is really more a matter of local politics than genetics.

Having gay or straight sex is no more genetic than choosing to dress goth. In one culture it may be considered appropriate to wear a swastika and in the same culture it may be considered inappropriate to wear a Polo shirt and whenever it becomes trendy to wear either, you will have more people wearing the shirt that is trendy.

The thing that needs to be remembered about the expression of sexuality is that it is no more than a fashion statement or a form of entertainment, as long as it doesn't cause harm to another person. People should be judged not by their differences, but by the similarities that we have in common, this is what binds humanity. The desire for love, the desire to express individuality, the desire to express care for those who are in need of a sympathetic friend and the desire to be cared for - these are the things that truly matter.

Originally posted by EssenSieMich
but most of us are somewhere between the two extremes.

huh?

You sound like you are confused about your sexuality and are attempting to project your insecurities onto others.

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


The labeling itself is the act of insecurity. One who is centered and confident has no need to run to either group or wave any banners.

while i agree about the social end of this, i suspect very strongly that some are just born to desire a particular gender. sex was intended for procreation. humans would pro-create less if it didnt feel good. sex is the act to procreate, desire is the motivation.

gay or straight is not the question. those are indeed labels. we have been programmed with labeling since we were young enough to categorize differences. round, square, triangle. now take that and expand upon it. physical categories such as circle, eventually become others like tall, short, wide, etc.

when things like that are established, once we get past physical categories, we will learn these categorizing techniques in non-physical, hot, cold, warm, luke-warm.

eventually we learn social categories, as we advance past the simpler things.

now whose ideas was it to associate categories with something good or bad, in connotation?

good thread, i just wanted to add some value to it.

reply to post by EssenSieMich

Like virtually everything else sexuality is a bell curve. On the extremes there are very very few who are either absolutely gay or absolutely straight but most of us are somewhere between the two extremes.

So, you are essentially saying bi-sexuality is a norm? Do you know that the top of a bell-curve is an average?

Sexuality itself is a bell curve. You are either sexual or you are not. Sexuality can be expressed in countless ways, gay, straight, bi, or any number of fetishes.

If it is a bell curve, then one might be in the middle of the bell curve (average) or vary from being sexual or asexual...depending on circumstances...

For instance, I didn't feel like "making love" right after having babies, or I don't feel like it during the monthly visitor, ( TMI, however, that's the truth) but does that make me asexual? I think not....

The thing that needs to be remembered about the expression of sexuality is that it is no more than a fashion statement or a form of entertainment, as long as it doesn't cause harm to another person.

B Chite! There is a difference between "sexual expression" and "making love."

I'll be the first to say it. It's ok if you are turned on by Santa's Elves. Just leave the one who wants to be a dentist alone.

Sorry, I'm just joking .

reply to post by EssenSieMich


Great points and I agree completely, although not sure of the bell shape. I've always said that our sexuality (sexual preference) is along a continuum. Link Very few are at the extreme ends and very few are right smack dab in the middle. I think most of us are toward one end or the other making not a bell shape, but two humps, with 'mostly gay' and 'mostly straight' being the pinnacle of the two humps.

Good subject though!

If sexuality is a bell curve, then this guy is certainly ahead of it!

Playboy's Hugh Hefner engaged to 24-year-old former playmate

Hugh Hefner, the 84-year-old Viagra-popping founder of Playboy, is tying the knot for the third time. This time the lucky gal is 24-year-old Crystal Harris, December 2009 playmate of the month.

Hefner told the New York Times magazine in July that he uses Viagra – which he called "God's little helper" – a couple of times a week.

wrong thread!!

Let me say two contradictory things to start off:

1. I think the OP is onto something, and I agree.
2. I don't think there is anything genetic about homosexuality.....ever.

I think the Bell Curve the OP speaks of is a bell curve of perversions.

I am not homophobic, and I have nothing against homosexuals, but I will never believe it is "natural" or "genetic" because it makes no sense. Mother nature hard-wired us for procreation.

On the other hand, although I am 100% heterosexual, I am way down the curve on perversions, and I could be "convinced" to do almost anything. I am not attracted to other males in the least little bit, but my sex-drive is very high, and an attractive female could probably convince me to do some homosexual stuff, as long as she was involved.

My buddies and I have joked about taking home an attractive female and getting extremely "involved" before discovering she isn't altogether female.....would we stop? After much discussion, we came to the unanimous conclusion that none of us would stop! We are all straight, but we would all be willing to finish the deed with a tranny if it came to that.

So what does this mean? I think it means that (at least in my circles) we are all perverted to various degrees, up to and including homosexuality, and there is nothing wrong with that. Why not enjoy these bodies while we are in them? I don't know what happens after we die, but I know that I intend to experience everything life has to offer while I am here, and sex happens to be the most enjoyable thing I have found so far! We should all throw away stereotypes and preconceived notions and let ourselves experience everything life throws at us. We might not enjoy 100% of the things we experiment with, but we won't know until we try!

reply to post by getreadyalready


I know ATS is a majority of male populants, but sure all of you *real* men out there wouldn't go for this:

My buddies and I have joked about taking home an attractive female and getting extremely "involved" before discovering she isn't altogether female.....would we stop? After much discussion, we came to the unanimous conclusion that none of us would stop! We are all straight, but we would all be willing to finish the deed with a tranny if it came to that.

Please tell me that you don't all think with your "lower" head?

reply to post by sonjah1


LOL! I don't think you are going to find them any more "real" than me and my buddies! We are talking Division I football players, rednecks, bikers, etc. This has been an on-going topic of conversation for a couple of years now, and the first knee-jerk reaction is "I would kick their arse!," but after some calming down and real discussion, I haven't met anyone yet that isn't curious enough to give it a shot. Most shockingly, it got a couple of my friends curious enough to actually seek out a tranny!

On a similar note, many men have no problem with groupsex involving multiple males and one female, and often involving unintentional touching. That is not very far off from homosexual acts.

I could also refer to the American Pie scene where the two woman convince the three "boys" to touch one another in order to get them to reciprocate, and lastly I can refer to Ron White,

[about his cousin Ray having made a homophobic remark]
Ron White: I said "We're all gay, buddy. It's just to what degree are you gay." And he goes, "That's bull#, man. I ain't gay at all." And I go "Yeah, you are. And I can prove it." He goes "Fine. Prove it." I go, "All right. Do you like porn?" He says "Yeah, I love porn. You know that." I said, "Oh, and do you only watch scenes with two women?" And he goes, "No, I'll watch a man and a woman makin' love." And I say "Oh, and do you like the guy to have a flabby, half-flaccid penis?" And he goes "No, I like big, hard, throbbing cock..."
[he trails off]
Ron White: "I did not know that about myself."

reply to post by getreadyalready


Wow. I really liked that post! I rarely agree with you but the honesty in your post speaks volumes and I am truly impressed.

Just one thing about it being 'natural'... I'm sure you know that some animals, when faced with overpopulation in their area start to change in strange ways so that they no longer reproduce at such an accelerated rate. Same sex behavior happens in nature and has been observed in MANY species. To me, it seems only "natural" that it would occur in human beings, too.

Of course, I don't know your definition of the word natural. If, as the dictionary says, it's:

: being in accordance with or determined by nature

it seems homosexuality is the epitome of natural.

MW

In the paper, it was explained how courting, attempted mating or mounting and even co-parenting of the offspring may be traits that are shaped via natural selection. However, the process of same-sex behaviour may also serve as an impetus for selection in and of itself. In essence, same-sex behaviors could be the force that alters reproductive success within the population.

Read more: www.digitaljournal.com...

reply to post by getreadyalready

LOL! I don't think you are going to find them any more "real" than me and my buddies! We are talking Division I football players, rednecks, bikers, etc. This has been an on-going topic of conversation for a couple of years now, and the first knee-jerk reaction is "I would kick their arse!," but after some calming down and real discussion, I haven't met anyone yet that isn't curious enough to give it a shot. Most shockingly, it got a couple of my friends curious enough to actually seek out a tranny!

Well, I must admit that one of my *university* guy friends approached a tranny in front of me, and I thought he/she was female at the time. He/she was believable and he went home with him/her.

But that was in youth! Maybe this thread isn't intended for those 30+.......

I could also refer to the American Pie scene where the two woman convince the three "boys" to touch one another in order to get them to reciprocate, and lastly I can refer to Ron White,

Ermmm.....here you give yourself away as you worship the pop culture intended to create chaos/lower moral standards for the world.....


You, are obviously a youngster, what about the REAL MEN out there?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Thanks BH! I am quite liberal in some regards. Not usually the popular ones though.

One of these days I will start a thread with my entire "platform" and see if it gets enough support to convince me to run for some type of public office. I am all about individual rights and responsibilities. I am quite open and honest about my own feelings and opinions, whereas some people are better at "filtering" themselves. I like to throw it all out there for what it is worth, LOL!

reply to post by sonjah1


Missed me again. Definitely not 'pop' culture. Barely even have a television. Definitely wish I was still under 30, but alas 40 is looming very, very near! And I have a hard time "worshipping" anything. I am religious, and I randomly attend church, and I often entertain my church's pastor over at my house for lively debate. I describe myself as more of a "deist" than a Christian, and I like to debate the pastor that the majority of his flock is closer to deism than christianity. I am also a Freemason, a Shriner, a husband, and a father.

I am as "real" as you are going to find. May I suggest that the men you are seeking the typical knee-jerk reaction from are less real than myself? Their bravado would lend itself more to low self-esteem and younger age than my honest answers I think.

Edit to add:
I opened with "let me first say something contradictory." Truth be told, I am patently against homosexuality. I wouldn't want it for my sons. On the other hand, I am all for sex in all of its forms and glories. See....contradictory! Maybe I should elaborate, I do not understand an emotional relationship between two men. I could not and would not ever enjoy "cuddling" alone with another male in front of a cozy fire! But, in the presence of an attractive female or two, I would probably do just about anything.

While my buddies and I can laugh and talk about sex with a very feminine male or tranny, and have on occasion participated in group activities, we are also still clumsy at giving big "bro hugs" to one another.

Maybe there is a difference between "physical homosexuality" and "emotional homosexuality?"

reply to post by getreadyalready


Balash, OK, I guess, in a way, I do respect your honestly to be "real"......

However, :

While my buddies and I can laugh and talk about sex with a very feminine male or tranny, and have on occasion participated in group activities, we are also still clumsy at giving big "bro hugs" to one another.

At least tell me in all your contradictory honesty--that you have discussed with your wife (and if age-appropriate) your sons--....what you have done?

Ummm....STDs....are the first possible risks you have put your family under.....for self-motivated, hedonist purposes????

reply to post by sonjah1


My wife is well aware of my promiscuous past. We have been married 5 years now. I was married to my first wife for 10 years, but I could never really get her out of her shell. I am "mostly" monogamous, and I am paranoid about STDs. When I was a teenager, I had a couple of scares, but never any lasting damage. I had a very scary situation when Tommy Morrison (the boxer, Rocky V) was diagnosed with HIV, but I got lucky. Since then I have been OCD about protecting myself! And for the record, I do NOT have sex with men, and I never have. I am just saying that I won't entirely rule it out, depending on the situation, and I won't judge others that choose to do those things.

This makes me wonder where I would be placed in all this.
What an unusual thought.

reply to post by ChaosMagician

This makes me wonder where I would be placed in all this.
What an unusual thought.

OK, youngster, fess up!