• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

More USAians engaing in homosexual experimentation.

People have been having whatever kind of sex turns them on, since there have been people.

These days we hear about it more often, in a more vocal fashion, with reports about interesting and unique incidents coming forth more quickly.

(Which, I guess, is how most people want "others", to think about "their" sex lives.)
 
No bubbling beakers in my sexual experiments. Broken glass around exposed body parts in a bad idea.
Not into the Mad Scientist/helpless victim game then?

Personally, I'd expect underreporting to decrease as the stigma decreased. Either way (actual sex or reported sex) the numbers would be expected to be rising, as they are.
So the actual proportion could be even higher?

This is good. Hopefully as experimentation on homosexuals increases, the price will drop. Worked for rats.
Half my grant budget goes to ordering and caging the homosexuals nowadays.
Stick to pigeons, my sister used to catch them on the roof of the Psychology department.

Did anyone phonetically read the accidental spelling error in the thread title?
Oh bugger.

Why is it when I think of something (vaguely) amusing, someone has beaten me to it? :)

I was going to ask if there was a typo in the title, and had he meant to type "engaying"?
:rolleyes: You could use your DA powers and fix it...

Was this some sort of, "She Blinded Me With Science", role playing exercise?"
Kinda like that, complete with Igor, dry ice, Jacob's Ladder and exam table.
 
@OP: All I can say is, people who want to experiment can go suck my.... hey, wait a minute!

[Escorted out, exeunt stage rear. Noise.]
 
Stick to pigeons, my sister used to catch them on the roof of the Psychology department.

They're called "marks" now. And police wise up too quickly these days if you keep taking them from the same place.
 
From the OP:

...and some surveys show almost a third of young Americans are bisexual to some degree.
This doesn't say a thing and I'm seriously skeptical of the claim. What questions were they asked which led the surveyors to determine this? Which "some surveys"...? Most surveys don't but some do? Meaningless.

As long as humans have been on this planet our sexuality has been pretty consistent, in that there has always been some homosexuality and other types, but it has never been prevalent. I don't see why that would suddenly change now, simply because some people feel we are more enlightened than ever before (which is, btw, a hilarious concept).

A country as prudish as the US (for example) may consider itself enlightened, but the rest of the world may disagree. I know I do. It's sadly hilarious watching all the self-righteous these days.
 
Last edited:
That has been true for quite a long time.

Not to mention that there were many times and places in history where male homosexuality was illegal (and brutally punished), but female homosexuality was not.

That's not necessarily because of some supposed tolerance on part of society. If anything it's more often than not rooted in societal ignorance of female sexuality.

A (relatively) recent example is back in the 40's when Sweden decided to repel the legal prohibition on gay sex. The legislators justified the fact that they put the effective "age-of-consent" for male-on-male sex higher than for male-on-female and female-on-female (18 years old compared to 15 years old) by saying that lesbians were basically far more uncommon and moreover they were less likely to "corrupt" youths and keep them from developing a healthy and decent sexuality.

Same argument has been made in plenty of countries with people keeping far, far more attention to male "sex deviants" than female ones.
 
I suspect that as the cultural stigma of homosexuality fades, this will increase. Perhaps a generation or two down the line the common attitude to homosexuality will be less "Ewww, that's gross!" and more "Tried it a few times, didn't care for it much" or "Well it's okay I guess, but I prefer opposite sex when I can get it."

Seems like a good thing, to me, if so.

That ought to be a wonderful society. Can we at least admit it's a choice?
 
That ought to be a wonderful society. Can we at least admit it's a choice?
Under no circumstances.

I made a choice to experiment with having sex with a man. I did not make a choice to not enjoy it as much as I did having sex with a woman.
 
Under no circumstances.

I made a choice to experiment with having sex with a man. I did not make a choice to not enjoy it as much as I did having sex with a woman.

Just checking.

If you enjoyed sex with a female, wouldn't you know you wouldn't have enjoyed it with a male?
 
And it's my anecdotal experience - take it for what it's worth - that there has never been a dearth of straight guys willing to engage in "help a buddy out" situations, without regarding themselves as being gay. The ancient dictum of the young is that if you keep your eyes closed while receiving gratification it doesn't matter who your benefactor is. The population of straight men who will turn down a free beej is smaller than most people assume. Probably because they don't talk about it afterwards.

I think the term now is "bro job".
 
A country as prudish as the US (for example) may consider itself enlightened, but the rest of the world may disagree. I know I do. It's sadly hilarious watching all the self-righteous these days.

One thing I don't understand is that I frequently read about what is happening "these days" with prudishness, or religious moralists taking over the country, or a vast wave of intolerance that has sprung up in the US.


It's kind of crazy. Traditional sexual mores are now in full retreat. The conservatives lose every battle they fight. When gay marriage bans were being passed in the last decade, their passage was cited as proof of a growing right wing push to control our lives, when in fact what was happening was that they were getting around to codifying something that everyone before had just assumed was a given. Today, the same thing is happening with transgender locker rooms.

Meanwhile, directly to the topic of this thread, not only has chastity outside of marriage been relegated to a quaint topic of yesteryear, so has the notion that any sort of consensual sex could possibly be bad. As a result, young people are trying out every possible kind to see what they might like.

And, just in case anyone wonders, I'm ok with that. Count me in among the people that thinks what you do with your own body or, with permission, someone else's body, is your own business, and if everyone involved likes it, it's an actual positive things.

But to say that somehow "these days" are prudish just doesn't make much sense to me. What little of traditional morality we still see is a faint minority trying to reclaim power that they once held. Those days are done, and there's no indication they are coming back.
 
Just checking.

If you enjoyed sex with a female, wouldn't you know you wouldn't have enjoyed it with a male?

Strangely quite a few people come to this kind of unwarranted conclusion by refusing to even toy with the idea that they might be sexually attracted to members of their own sex.

Basically they work backwards to justify their present sexual identity (and not their actual sexual orientation): "I'm heterosexual therefor I'm not sexually attracted towards men/women." compared with the empirical/rational method of deduction: "I am sexually attracted towards members of the opposite sex and, because i have yet to be sexually attracted towards anyone of the same-sex (despite conscious attempts to find someone that is sexually appealing), that would make me heterosexual and not homo/bisexual."

Moreover the latter approach is, unlike the former, actually open to the mere possibility that they might be sexually attracted towards another of the same-sex but they have yet to meet them. Many people like to see their person as being stable and rigid yet in reality people do change often quite subtlety over time.
 
<snip>

But to say that somehow "these days" are prudish just doesn't make much sense to me. What little of traditional morality we still see is a faint minority trying to reclaim power that they once held. Those days are done, and there's no indication they are coming back.


A fact which I view with great satisfaction. My life so far has spanned some wondrous changes. Generally for the good.

But that's no reason to let our guard down, to stop trying to improve even more, or be oblivious to efforts to reverse the progress we've managed to make.

There's still plenty left to be done.

And I think it is wise not to underestimate that "faint minority. Aside from the rest of the world and the issues which continue in places like Central and South America, Africa, and the Middle East, that "faint minority just got Donald Trump the GOP nomination to the most powerful political position in the world.

Yeah. There's still plenty of 'em out there.
 
Last edited:
<snip>

Moreover the latter approach is, unlike the former, actually open to the mere possibility that they might be sexually attracted towards another of the same-sex but they have yet to meet them. Many people like to see their person as being stable and rigid yet in reality people do change often quite subtlety over time.


I expect that's the biggest issue right there.

The weight of opprobrium which has traditionally accompanied such behavior is more than enough to drive most people to reject even that possibility.

Any perspective which might in any way intimate that they too might have some attraction to their own sex, no matter how small that chance may be, has to be eliminated.
 
Last edited:
I was brought up to believe (within a religion that tightly restrains what sexual behavior is moral) that sexual attraction is largely malleable. Not in the moment, mind you, but in the mid to long term. You condition yourself to be attracted to the things you want to be attractive and to negatively reinforce anything else.

So, for me growing up, the idea "what is your sexuality" was kind of a silly one. I knew I wanted to be married to an opposite-sex adult partner, so I conditioned myself to be attracted to adult women. Any attraction I felt for men, children, animals, or anything else received negative feedback. I always attributed my heterosexuality to a long-term conscious process.

We have pedophiles in the family (genuine pedophiles, not priest-taking-advantage-of-a-fifteen-year-old types but I-get-an-unwanted-erection-whenever-I-see-a-five-year-old types). So part of this attitude may be an acknowledgement that leaving one's attraction to nature can lead to significant problems.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom