The Sexual Orientation Spectrum: Alfred Kinsey's indication of the nature of humanity

[Demyx26]

To be blunt, the relegation of sexual orientation to that of a fixed belief system is repugnant. Human Sexuality is something that is part of our base identity, and Alfred Kinsey over half a century ago created the most apt tool to measure orientation. In our modern society, it seems that we have made it black or white concerning the sexual orientation. But as humans we represent many belief systems and ideologies, so it is not within our power to solely preach one ideal, this applies to human sexuality as well, it would be ignorant of us to state that we are only hetero, or homosexual, when we embody a mixture of their proponents. But return to this spectrum, it applies to different times in our lives, and as such can move back and forth without restriction, or with chastity. Our modern society has placed too much power in the declaration of sexuality, when in truth we are humans and can never in total certainty by either, however fixed you may be in your ways. "In 1948 and 1953, Alfred Kinsey reported that nearly 46% of the male subjects had "reacted" sexually to persons of both sexes in the course of their adult lives, and 37% had had at least one homosexual experience". Once again, this is not an attack, and is not accusatory either. It is simply to spark awareness of the ever changing continuity of human sexuality, and to question the nature of an attack on homosexuality as a sign of insecurity or denial.

http://www.iub.edu/~kinsey/research/ak-hhscale.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_Reports

Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, p. 656 (Alfred Kinsey)

 

[manic_depressive13]

For some reason whenever someone brings up Kinsey I hear Avenue Q in my head.

"Everyone's a little bit homo sometimes."

 

[xshadowscreamx]

pual from the movie pual touched on an interesting subject..there alien race dont have a problem with bi sexuality.its all for the pleasure.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

Overcomplicating things that aren't complicated is a sign of too much free time and not enough shooters to occupy that time with.


There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

And what if you're neither of the three? Not attracted to any gender?

Anyway, Alfred Kinsey's tool kinda brings up my own theory of humanity's overall sexuality. Humans are a naturally bisexual race, but through societal pressures, humanity tried to make itself 'naturally' heterosexual.

 

[CrimsonBlaze]

I think that claiming that sexuality fluctuates between straight and gay is a little ridiculous. If you know yourself, you will know what your sexual orientation is and if you don't, you need a little self searching to do.

Saying that a percentage of individuals have had a homo/heterosexual experience in their lifetime does not conclude anything (some people were simply duped or extremely horny). Getting someone to do something does not imply anything (only that they exude too much curiosity and are extremely gullible). The reason any of us engage in sexual intercourse is through our sexual urges; because some straight person engaged in homosexual intercourse, does not mean that they have switched sides.

It's like anger; we all have it (some of us more so than others). Within us is the capability to do harm to others (physically, emotionally, spiritually, etc.) and this often occurs when we are angry. By injuring someone, through accidents or purposefully, it does not make us violent or dangerous. It sure as hell doesn't default us as attempted murderers. ONLY the degree, nature, and level of severity through our actions is what determines who we are.

 

[Konatacalypse]

Overcomplicating things that aren't complicated is a sign of too much free time and not enough shooters to occupy that time with.


There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

And what if you're neither of the three? Not attracted to any gender?

Then something's wrong. The desire to mate is genetically programmed into every living thing that reproduces that way. There should be something there. Perhaps it never got activated, perhaps it's broken, perhaps it's just a matter of you not meeting the right person, but there's something not right if you don't have any sexual urges at all past puberty.

One can have a sex drive and still find both genders repulsive.

Anyway, Alfred Kinsey's tool kinda brings up my own theory of humanity's overall sexuality. Humans are a naturally bisexual race, but through societal pressures, humanity tried to make itself 'naturally' heterosexual.

And this sums up everything else I was going to post. Thank you Lord for saving me some time.

 

[Loner Jo Jo]

I think that claiming that sexuality fluctuates between straight and gay is a little ridiculous. If you know yourself, you will know what your sexual orientation is and if you don't, you need a little self searching to do.

Saying that a percentage of individuals have had a homo/heterosexual experience in their lifetime does not conclude anything (some people were simply duped or extremely horny). Getting someone to do something does not imply anything (only that they exude too much curiosity and are extremely gullible). The reason any of us engage in sexual intercourse is through our sexual urges; because some straight person engaged in homosexual intercourse, does not mean that they have switched sides.

It's like anger; we all have it (some of us more so than others). Within us is the capability to do harm to others (physically, emotionally, spiritually, etc.) and this often occurs when we are angry. By injuring someone, through accidents or purposefully, it does not make us violent or dangerous. It sure as hell doesn't default us as attempted murderers. ONLY the degree, nature, and level of severity through our actions is what determines who we are.

I don't understand your argument because your analogy to anger is the exact same thing Kinsey was trying to show about sexuality. You can still be straight and have romantic or sexual feelings or actions with someone of the same sex and vice versa.

In Kinsey's scale there is places where a person is mainly straight but has had some homosexual thoughts or encounters and there is a place where a person is gay but has had heterosexual thoughts or encounters. I'm a straight woman and have had romantic and sexual encounters with men only, but I find some women to be extremely attractive, even in sexual terms. To say that I'm completely straight would be inaccurate, so I'm place a little to the side of straight. The same could work for straight men; I know guys who would "go gay" for someone even if only non-serious terms. I have also known a lesbian who was married two years ago because she fell in love with a man.

I guess to sum up my post, I'll just quote Ron White: "
I told him, "We're all gay, buddy. It's just to what extent are you gay." He says, "That's bullshit, man, I ain't gay at all!" I said, "Yes, you are and I'll prove it." He says, "Fine, prove it." I said to him, "All right- do you like porn?" He says, "Yeah, I love porn, you know that." I said, "Do you only watch two women together?" He said, "Naw, I watch a man and a woman make love." I said, "OK, do you want the guy to have a tiny, half-flaccid penis?" He said, "Naw, man, I like big, hard, throbbing co- (stunned pause) ...I did not know that about myself.""

 

[Zack Alklazaris]

Thats quite fascinating, I can see how things would change now days where people would want their sexual orientation cemented into their personality. Its a tough time for anyone who wishes (if even for fun) to have a relationship with the same sex.

I often wondered how many people who say they are so straight have had feelings towards the same sex.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

Overcomplicating things that aren't complicated is a sign of too much free time and not enough shooters to occupy that time with.


There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

However when you find people dont fall so naturally into these categories, like for example someone straight with very slight homosexual tendencies, a slider isnt very complicated at all. Is this complicated?

It doesnt look that complicated to me? It fits society better than one of three options and covers every base while being just as simple?

Anyway, Alfred Kinsey's tool kinda brings up my own theory of humanity's overall sexuality. Humans are a naturally bisexual race, but through societal pressures, humanity tried to make itself 'naturally' heterosexual.

SO bisexual people have managed to break the pressure? Are they just stronger? Im sorry but im not attracted to men. And no amount of societal pressure has made this so. Im very liberal when it comes to sexuality, im very secure when it comes to my heterosexuality and perosnally i think its just awesome sexuality varies. However when i read this all i heard is my annoying bi friend who likes to tout that "everyone who isnt bi is closed minded" and as such got my goat.

 

[chaosyoshimage]

I'm a 5...what? I thought that's what this thread was, another "What's your number?"

 

[Antitonic]

There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

Actually, there's (at least) four. Even the Kinsey scale accounts for this. 0 for 100% straight, 1-5 for anything in-between (which you could technically classify as bisexual), 6 for 100% gay, and X for asexual.

 

[MammothBlade]

On a scale of 1-6, I come in as a 3. Kinsey makes a lot more sense than the hetero-homo-NO BISEXUALS dichotomy.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

SO bisexual people have managed to break the pressure? Are they just stronger? Im sorry but im not attracted to men. And no amount of societal pressure has made this so. Im very liberal when it comes to sexuality, im very secure when it comes to my heterosexuality and perosnally i think its just awesome sexuality varies. However when i read this all i heard is my annoying bi friend who likes to tout that "everyone who isnt bi is closed minded" and as such got my goat.

Nah, bisexual people haven't managed to 'break the pressure' as you say. Just that general humanity shows interest in both genders, even if it's a guy having a dream in which he screws a guy/girl or both or vice versa with a chick. If you're truly a woman's only person, then you're one of the true actual heterosexual humans that is attracted to those of the female persuasion. Nature and genes helped develop you that way, so you got the right to raise that straight flag and go 'Everyone can fuck whoever!'

And your friend sounds quite a lot like those 'straight' people that exclaim there's no such thing as non-heterosexual orientations, and for that, I'm sorry you gotta deal with that.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I don't really see why this is an issue. Pigeonholing people is popular, but long recognised as not being that useful.

People will want to have sex, or not, with who they will.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

Overcomplicating things that aren't complicated is a sign of too much free time and not enough shooters to occupy that time with.


There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

However when you find people dont fall so naturally into these categories, like for example someone straight with very slight homosexual tendencies

They would fall under 'bi'. No need for any sliders or any of that nonsense, what we already have is more than adequate. You're either straight, gay, or bi. Pick one, stop screwing around with silly slider nonsense.


'Tis another little nit I'd like to pick with the Escapist, why they have to overcomplicate simple shit like this.

Pretty much agree. Trying to define your sexuality any more than straight/bi/gay is only going to be inaccurate, and also completely meaningless.

 

[Something Amyss]

Human Sexuality is something that is part of our base identity, and Alfred Kinsey over half a century ago created the most apt tool to measure orientation.

Assuming you assume sexuality is linear, which is an outdated and outmoded concept. It may have been the "most apt tool" at the time, but it disregards decades of development in terms of sexuality and gender identity.

I don't know why Kinsey is lauded as though he is still relevant.

There's three options: Gay, Straight, Bi. If you're not strictly gay and not strictly straight, you fall into Bi, otherwise, you're one of the first two.

Actually, there's (at least) four. Even the Kinsey scale accounts for this. 0 for 100% straight, 1-5 for anything in-between (which you could technically classify as bisexual), 6 for 100% gay, and X for asexual.

The question, of course, to most people is why one needs all the points between the two. Bisexuality is kind of bisexuality regardless of whether you prefer your own sex or the other.

And if you're going to differentiate, why not include other elements of sexuality? Kinsey to come extent covered sexual fluidity, but sexuality as a concept has a tendency to be fairly complex, and a linear scale of 7 points is always going to be a gross simplification. In that sense, it's no different from a 3 point scale (four if you include assexuality, which would make the Kinsey scale technically 8 points). No upping the sensitivity of the scale will overcome its inehrrent problems, so why not 1-3?

(Captcha: Limiting DFurtsb)