Aha. We are talking about 2 different studies. The most recent one required men claiming to be bisexual to have had romantic relationships at least 3 months long with members of either sex, not just sexual relations, which may have made it easier to sort the true bisexuals from those who claim to be bi for social reasons. They also recruited from a bisexual site, rather than a gay site.
The authors said "The current study establishes that some bisexual men have bisexual arousal patterns. Accepting the centrality of sexual arousal patterns in understanding male sexual orientation, this suggests that indeed, some men have a bisexual orientation. It does not, however, establish whether all, or even most, bisexual-identified men have arousal patterns that correspond with their sexual identity."
Another study from March 2011 found "A sample of 59 men (19 homosexual, 13 bisexual, and 27 heterosexual) were presented with a series of 4-min sexual videos while their genital and subjective sexual responses were measured continuously. Bisexual men did not differ significantly in their responses to male homosexual stimuli (depicting men engaging in sex) from homosexual men, and they did not differ significantly in their responses to heterosexual (depicting two women, without same-sex contact, engaged in sex with a man) and lesbian (depicting women engaging in sex) stimuli from heterosexual men. However, bisexual men displayed significantly higher levels of both genital and subjective sexual arousal to a bisexual stimulus (depicting a man engaged in sex with both a man and a woman) than either homosexual or heterosexual men. The findings of this study indicate that bisexuality in men is associated with a unique and specific pattern of sexual arousal." In this study the men rated themselves and there was no requirement for romantic relationships.
Reiger in 1995 (also from Northwestern) may not have seen a response because recruitment was from gay papers and an alternative paper.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
I recently read about a research study testing the validity of the "5 second rule". Why anyone would do that, I don't know. Was there someone who really believed that the 5 second rule was true? Who would think there are no bisexual men? The healthcare profession certainly knows there are bisexual men. There are oodles of research reports referencing bisexual men.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
Nobody here has said there are no bisexual men. People here have said a lot of gay men claim to be bisexual while they are coming out. A lot of those who claim that ARE gay men who know exactly what they did. Statistically, women are more likely to be bisexual and men are more likely to be either/or. "More likely" and "statistically" do not mean black and white.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
HEre is the thing, like less than two weeeks ago the "scientists" declared that there IS such a thing as a bisexual man. See about two weeks ago the wisdom was that there really was no such a thing as a TRUE bisexual man or if there were such a thing they were so rare as to be statisticaly irrelevant. A bisexual man was probably just a gay man. YOu probably noticed some of the same articles out there too. If I am shocking you I can probably find a link or two for you.
That is not true. Men tend to be one or the other, but can be bi. However, claiming to be bisexual is also a common stepping stone to men who are coming out to themselves. Have you studied statistics?
They had done these studies where they took all these men who claimed to be bisexual and hooked sensors up to their penises and showed different kinds of porn to see what truly got them arroused (fun study). They discoverd that the "bisexual men" did not have bisexual penises, meaning you probably guessed they only went up for the gay male porn.
That is not true. They were homophobic "straight" men. Maybe you ought to read the study? I have.
Again, the scientists two weeks ago said they were wrong, that bisexuality in men does exist. In July they were saying that if it does exist it is statisticaly irrelevant because it is too small a number
Now that they know better how they did it wrongly they are more able to see clearly and know that "true" (their term) bisexuality does exist in men and it is relevant.
Clearly I am the only one who read the study. And I read the same study and had the same conclusions that the bisexual advocates did. In fact, the bisexual advocates and I have the same take-away. So I DID READ THE STUDY.
Again, my point to bringing this whole minor event up at all is to portray how superficial our understanding of sexuality is at certain points. It is so shallow I don't think we can run around declaring that people who have a homosexual past but claim to be heterosexual now as liars or self-hating homosexuals.
HEre is the thing, like less than two weeeks ago the "scientists" declared that there IS such a thing as a bisexual man. See about two weeks ago the wisdom was that there really was no such a thing as a TRUE bisexual man or if there were such a thing they were so rare as to be statisticaly irrelevant. A bisexual man was probably just a gay man. YOu probably noticed some of the same articles out there too. If I am shocking you I can probably find a link or two for you.
That is not true. Men tend to be one or the other, but can be bi. However, claiming to be bisexual is also a common stepping stone to men who are coming out to themselves. Have you studied statistics?
They had done these studies where they took all these men who claimed to be bisexual and hooked sensors up to their penises and showed different kinds of porn to see what truly got them arroused (fun study). They discoverd that the "bisexual men" did not have bisexual penises, meaning you probably guessed they only went up for the gay male porn.
That is not true. They were homophobic "straight" men. Maybe you ought to read the study? I have.
I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize what you heard was not what I meant...
The finding is not likely to surprise bisexuals, who have long asserted that attraction often is not limited to one sex. But for many years the question of bisexuality has bedeviled scientists. A widely publicized study published in 2005, also by researchers at Northwestern, reported that “with respect to sexual arousal and attraction, it remains to be shown that male bisexuality exists.”
That conclusion outraged bisexual men and women, who said it appeared to support a stereotype of bisexual men as closeted homosexuals.
I like what the bisexual lady in the article said:
Sexual arousal is a very complicated thing,” she said. “The real phenomenon in day-to-day life is extraordinarily messy and multifactorial.”
Especially the part about sexuality being MULTIFACTORIAL
I will give you that many gay people do question bisexuality (not all mind you, but a good number). The reason behind that is so many gay people claim bisexuality before accepting themselves as gay.
Most people do not see the world as it is. They see it as they are.
Ummm, NO I am quite sure you are very wrong about this. But hey why don't I stick around a bit longer so you and your friends can make shitty, assholeish comments about what a homophobe I am? Sounds like a blast to me!
The SCIENTISTS DID declare bisexuality in men to be mostly an untruth - hence the more recent follow up study that over-rode the "findings". And according to penty of articles I read the homosexuality community tended to go along in lock step with it
From the article:
Bisexual men won't likely be surprised — or feel particularly validated — to learn that a new scientific study confirms that their sexual attraction to both men and women is real. But the findings may help enlighten those who still subscribe to the stereotype that bisexual men are just closeted homosexuals, or simply confused.
And I can find only one study from 2005 that ever came close to suggesting bisexuality didn't exist. Hardly something to hang "scientific wisdom" on. Although properly done studies can be important, if they are not repeatable, then the scientific community doesn't pay much attention to them.
And please, clean up your language if you wish to debate with me. I do not use foul language, I find it offensive and I generally don't debate with people who do not respond to me in kind. Furthermore, I've only made one statement that could possibly be considered derogatory to you. I said "grow up", which was prompted by your behavior, not your opinions.
Most people do not see the world as it is. They see it as they are.
The finding is not likely to surprise bisexuals, who have long asserted that attraction often is not limited to one sex. But for many years the question of bisexuality has bedeviled scientists. A widely publicized study published in 2005, also by researchers at Northwestern, reported that “with respect to sexual arousal and attraction, it remains to be shown that male bisexuality exists.”
That conclusion outraged bisexual men and women, who said it appeared to support a stereotype of bisexual men as closeted homosexuals.
I like what the bisexual lady in the article said:
Sexual arousal is a very complicated thing,” she said. “The real phenomenon in day-to-day life is extraordinarily messy and multifactorial.”
Especially the part about sexuality being MULTIFACTORIAL
Here is a good quote for you from The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has stated, "some people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person's lifetime".[31] The APA also says that "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation".[32] "[F]or some ["people"] the focus of sexual interest will shift at various points through the life span..."[33] A community may change over time.[34] In a joint statement with other major American medical, psychology, educator, and religious organizations, the APA says that "different people realize at different points in their lives that they are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual".[35] A report from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health states, "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time".[3
Sounds to me like what I have been saying in this thread. What you identify with as a teenager might not be the same thing as a young adult or a mature adult. So a kid might feel he is gay and form gay relationships and latter as a young man might not feel the same way. Sounds to me like sexuality is not etched in stone at birth - for everybody anyway.
Willful is not the term I would use in regards to this kind of change. It is not something I would advise people change like a habit like quitting smoking or making a radical change to an established diet. Like going from eating a rich diet of fast food to radicaly switching to a raw food diet based on will alone.
In my thinking it is more a function of perhaps they are moving in that different sexual orientation more organicaly. A person probably would not even need to "change" if society was not so big on labeling people based on sexual orientation. I think so often in our society people feel compelled to declare themselves as a sexual orientation and in other societies this kind of thing does not really occur. The point is the idea of changing a sexual orientation or tendancy as the case may be is not a thing people had to worry about. I believe alot of our societal labeling as gay, hetersexual and bisexual is artificial.
I know the reeducation programs can be terrible, I would not advocate those groups. If someone is confused about their sexuality the most I would advise is some gentle therapy to work out their thoughts. Never a program to FORCE a preference. However the emotional issues around changing is not the point on this thread as much as the ABILITY to do so.
Then we have been talking about 2 different things. Stephen Bennett - claims he chose to be straight. "Ex-gays" claim the change was through will. Basically saying to gay youth who are struggling: "your faith isn't as strong as mine" or "God loves me more than he loves you." He also claims he was gay because of his upbringing, which is totally outdated junk psychology. The only places that still use those theories are reparative therapy organizations.
What I have been talking about the entire time is that people cannot chose to change their orientation. I believe it may be possible, for a small minority, there could possibly be a shift in physiology that may cause a slight shift in orientation (not from straight to gay or gay to straight, but a slight move in bisexuality or even a shift from totally gay to slight bisexuality.
But that's not what I've been discussing. If someone is unhappy being gay - they need to work at self acceptance, that is possible; changing their orientation by will is not.
Below are some quotes from the APA website. The source is linked below.
"efforts to change sexual orientation through therapy have been adopted by some political and religious organizations and aggressively promoted to the public. However, such efforts have serious potential to harm young people because they present the view that the sexual orientation of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth is a mental illness or disorder, and they often frame the inability to change one’s sexual orientation as a personal and moral failure."
"Furthermore, anecdotal reports of “cures” are counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm."
"In the last four decades, “reparative” therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm."
"The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior''
- American Academy of Pediatrics - American Association of School Administrators - American Counseling Association - American Federation of Teachers - American Psychological Association - American School Counselor Association - American School Health Association - Interfaith Alliance Foundation - National Association of School Psychologists - National Association of Secondary School Principals - National Association of Social Workers - National Education Association - School Social Work Association of America
As I said, NO real evidence that ANYONE has WILLFULLY changed - EVER. And when many kids hear they can - they want to believe and they do believe they can. After all, their parents tell them it's possible, their church tells them it's possible, some friends tell them it's possible, they hear people discussing it who say it's possible and they WANT it to be possible.
I know you said that you don’t recommend reparative therapy organizations, but rather, a therapist to help. Well, ethical therapists (according to that APA) will help them accept themselves, but will not work with them to change. And if they can’t get what they want from a therapist, where do you think they will turn? [From the same source listed above. “… the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm.”]
---------------------
I used to believe that it would be absolutely fantastic if people really had control over their orientation. On the surface, it seems like it would prevent so many tragic deaths – be they suicides or the result of gay-bashings. And it would prevent approximately 25% of gay youth from Conservative Christian families from being thrown out on the street. But the fact is, sexual orientation does not cause any of those problems, bigotry does. To change something that, in reality, is a neutral trait, to appease bigots is, IMO morally wrong. The bigotry needs to be eradicated. People need to come to terms with who they are, period; no matter what minority they belong to. In addition, don’t you think if people could, really change their orientation, the bigotry would be much worse? I think there would be many more bashings and a much higher percentage of Christian gay youth would be homeless. If people actually could chose their orientation, then those who were not self-hating and those who did come to accept who they were, would be even more of a target for those who are bigoted against GLBTs.
Edited from original:
formatting added typos corrected link added some wording and grammar corrected
Free,
I wanted to take a break from the thread, I am sure you can relate.
Maybe we are off talking about more than one thing? HEre is the thing, like less than two weeeks ago the "scientists" declared that there IS such a thing as a bisexual man. See about two weeks ago the wisdom was that there really was no such a thing as a TRUE bisexual man or if there were such a thing they were so rare as to be statisticaly irrelevant. A bisexual man was probably just a gay man. YOu probably noticed some of the same articles out there too. If I am shocking you I can probably find a link or two for you.
They had done these studies where they took all these men who claimed to be bisexual and hooked sensors up to their penises and showed different kinds of porn to see what truly got them arroused (fun study). They discoverd that the "bisexual men" did not have bisexual penises, meaning you probably guessed they only went up for the gay male porn.
All this came out just a very, very short time ago - they discovered they were doing the studyies WRONG and now they have to thier surprise learned that there indeed is such a thing as a TRUE bisexual male complete with bisexual penises.
This as you can imagine is highly validating to men who have been declaring all along that they are bisexual even though everyone thinks they are being phony about it. Lots of follow up articles where bisexual men describe how they were treated poorly by people who felt they were deluded posers or insincere/untrustworthy jerks. Evidentaly people went along with the scientists and choose to believe that men who claim to be bisexual are deluded or insincere.
So in light of all this I find the people discussing sexuality on this thread in such absolute terms to be well, a bit arrogant. We DONT seem to have it all figured out, not by a long shot. And the thing is we don't even know enough to know what we don't know. Which is fine, discovery is a journey right? But I still don't get the ugly hostility here, just because you think you know it all and I don't think you do I am reduced to some sort of homophobe? YOu are probably a nice person to dialouge with on other boards.
Do you read articles or headlines? The headline was sarcasm. The study done does not combate "wisdom" it combate STEROTYPES. The scientific community never denied bisexuality, society did. Just like society, at large, denies that sexual orientation is biological, and immutable and not a matter of choice or will.
Ummm, NO I am quite sure you are very wrong about this.
The SCIENTISTS DID declare bisexuality in men to be mostly an untruth - hence the more recent follow up study that over-rode the "findings". And according to penty of articles I read the homosexuality community tended to go along in lock step with it
Here is a good quote for you from The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has stated, "some people believe that sexual orientation is innate and fixed; however, sexual orientation develops across a person's lifetime".[31] The APA also says that "most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation".[32] "[F]or some ["people"] the focus of sexual interest will shift at various points through the life span..."[33] A community may change over time.[34] In a joint statement with other major American medical, psychology, educator, and religious organizations, the APA says that "different people realize at different points in their lives that they are heterosexual, gay, lesbian, or bisexual".[35] A report from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health states, "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time".[3
Sounds to me like what I have been saying in this thread. What you identify with as a teenager might not be the same thing as a young adult or a mature adult. So a kid might feel he is gay and form gay relationships and latter as a young man might not feel the same way. Sounds to me like sexuality is not etched in stone at birth - for everybody anyway.
Willful is not the term I would use in regards to this kind of change. It is not something I would advise people change like a habit like quitting smoking or making a radical change to an established diet. Like going from eating a rich diet of fast food to radicaly switching to a raw food diet based on will alone.
In my thinking it is more a function of perhaps they are moving in that different sexual orientation more organicaly. A person probably would not even need to "change" if society was not so big on labeling people based on sexual orientation. I think so often in our society people feel compelled to declare themselves as a sexual orientation and in other societies this kind of thing does not really occur. The point is the idea of changing a sexual orientation or tendancy as the case may be is not a thing people had to worry about. I believe alot of our societal labeling as gay, hetersexual and bisexual is artificial.
I know the reeducation programs can be terrible, I would not advocate those groups. If someone is confused about their sexuality the most I would advise is some gentle therapy to work out their thoughts. Never a program to FORCE a preference. However the emotional issues around changing is not the point on this thread as much as the ABILITY to do so.
Then we have been talking about 2 different things. Stephen Bennett - claims he chose to be straight. "Ex-gays" claim the change was through will. Basically saying to gay youth who are struggling: "your faith isn't as strong as mine" or "God loves me more than he loves you." He also claims he was gay because of his upbringing, which is totally outdated junk psychology. The only places that still use those theories are reparative therapy organizations.
What I have been talking about the entire time is that people cannot chose to change their orientation. I believe it may be possible, for a small minority, there could possibly be a shift in physiology that may cause a slight shift in orientation (not from straight to gay or gay to straight, but a slight move in bisexuality or even a shift from totally gay to slight bisexuality.
But that's not what I've been discussing. If someone is unhappy being gay - they need to work at self acceptance, that is possible; changing their orientation by will is not.
Below are some quotes from the APA website. The source is linked below.
"efforts to change sexual orientation through therapy have been adopted by some political and religious organizations and aggressively promoted to the public. However, such efforts have serious potential to harm young people because they present the view that the sexual orientation of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth is a mental illness or disorder, and they often frame the inability to change one’s sexual orientation as a personal and moral failure."
"Furthermore, anecdotal reports of “cures” are counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm."
"In the last four decades, “reparative” therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm."
"The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior''
- American Academy of Pediatrics - American Association of School Administrators - American Counseling Association - American Federation of Teachers - American Psychological Association - American School Counselor Association - American School Health Association - Interfaith Alliance Foundation - National Association of School Psychologists - National Association of Secondary School Principals - National Association of Social Workers - National Education Association - School Social Work Association of America
As I said, NO real evidence that ANYONE has WILLFULLY changed - EVER. And when many kids hear they can - they want to believe and they do believe they can. After all, their parents tell them it's possible, their church tells them it's possible, some friends tell them it's possible, they hear people discussing it who say it's possible and they WANT it to be possible.
I know you said that you don’t recommend reparative therapy organizations, but rather, a therapist to help. Well, ethical therapists (according to that APA) will help them accept themselves, but will not work with them to change. And if they can’t get what they want from a therapist, where do you think they will turn? [From the same source listed above. “… the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm.”]
---------------------
I used to believe that it would be absolutely fantastic if people really had control over their orientation. On the surface, it seems like it would prevent so many tragic deaths – be they suicides or the result of gay-bashings. And it would prevent approximately 25% of gay youth from Conservative Christian families from being thrown out on the street. But the fact is, sexual orientation does not cause any of those problems, bigotry does. To change something that, in reality, is a neutral trait, to appease bigots is, IMO morally wrong. The bigotry needs to be eradicated. People need to come to terms with who they are, period; no matter what minority they belong to. In addition, don’t you think if people could, really change their orientation, the bigotry would be much worse? I think there would be many more bashings and a much higher percentage of Christian gay youth would be homeless. If people actually could chose their orientation, then those who were not self-hating and those who did come to accept who they were, would be even more of a target for those who are bigoted against GLBTs.
Edited from original:
formatting added typos corrected link added some wording and grammar corrected
Free,
I wanted to take a break from the thread, I am sure you can relate.
Maybe we are off talking about more than one thing? HEre is the thing, like less than two weeeks ago the "scientists" declared that there IS such a thing as a bisexual man. See about two weeks ago the wisdom was that there really was no such a thing as a TRUE bisexual man or if there were such a thing they were so rare as to be statisticaly irrelevant. A bisexual man was probably just a gay man. YOu probably noticed some of the same articles out there too. If I am shocking you I can probably find a link or two for you.
They had done these studies where they took all these men who claimed to be bisexual and hooked sensors up to their penises and showed different kinds of porn to see what truly got them arroused (fun study). They discoverd that the "bisexual men" did not have bisexual penises, meaning you probably guessed they only went up for the gay male porn.
All this came out just a very, very short time ago - they discovered they were doing the studyies WRONG and now they have to thier surprise learned that there indeed is such a thing as a TRUE bisexual male complete with bisexual penises.
This as you can imagine is highly validating to men who have been declaring all along that they are bisexual even though everyone thinks they are being phony about it. Lots of follow up articles where bisexual men describe how they were treated poorly by people who felt they were deluded posers or insincere/untrustworthy jerks. Evidentaly people went along with the scientists and choose to believe that men who claim to be bisexual are deluded or insincere.
So in light of all this I find the people discussing sexuality on this thread in such absolute terms to be well, a bit arrogant. We DONT seem to have it all figured out, not by a long shot. And the thing is we don't even know enough to know what we don't know. Which is fine, discovery is a journey right? But I still don't get the ugly hostility here, just because you think you know it all and I don't think you do I am reduced to some sort of homophobe? YOu are probably a nice person to dialouge with on other boards.
Do you read articles or headlines? The headline was sarcasm. The study done does not combate "wisdom" it combate STEROTYPES. The scientific community never denied bisexuality, society did. Just like society, at large, denies that sexual orientation is biological, and immutable and not a matter of choice or will.
Most people do not see the world as it is. They see it as they are.
