It occurred to me that sexuality is pretty poorly defined and sprouting random imprecise terms for stuff all over the place. The Kinsey scale tries to help a little with the classification, but it's rather inadequate. Asexuals have an undefined place on it, for example, and similarly, it takes no consideration of the strength other groups' desires, which I'd say is a pretty important factor.
I was just going to be lazy and suggest adding a strength of attraction scale to it, but a friend had a better idea (one that handles asexuals properly, for example). Split out the attraction to males and females (the Kinsey scale basically looks at the ratio of the two), and give them separate axes. The side benefit to this is that it removes the impression that it's one or the other. This way fewer people would be likely to think that being attracted to other girls makes you love your boyfriend less or some such nonsense. So, we agreed that just having two separate axes one for male, one for female would be best (and people, if you're attracted to some third gender, just say you like both females and males, 'cause your selection will be limited otherwise anyway =P). To top it all off, a gender identification axis was added. No one cares what gender you are, but it's nice to know which one you identify with or like to act.
I think this model works well for how people in the real world actually work and feel. Hell, you could even split the attraction into sexual attraction and romantic attraction because 3 dimensions is never enough.
So going off a model like this, yes, you could be "kind of" homosexual, having a sexual attraction to the same gender of around .5 or so (this being a percentage, to 1 is completely attracted, 0 completely unattracted). Also, you could hypothetically have 0 attraction to the same gender, although this seems unlikely unless you're asexual or have a psychological fear.
For example, being a fairly typical male I'd be about:
fs: 1
fr: 0.9
ms: 0.2
mr: 0.5
gi: 0.8
Bleh, perhaps 5 dimensions is a bit much, but you get the idea. Throw out romantic attraction if you want a sexy graph.