Ironically, the data here undercuts the argument. If 66% of young people identify as pure straight or gay, and 93% of older people do, this suggests that bisexuality is actually a temporary anomaly -- a choice. It would also be more transparent if the 66 and 93 were further broken down into straight and gay. One can also say that 99% of humans are either gay or like cookies.
8
Miley is NOT a radical voice in this conversation, and she's certainly not revolutionary. Do a little research and pick better heroes.
18
Like uptight Victorian society this new 'anything goes' thing is just another example of sexual obsession. Really it's the same compulsion to be overly concerned with our drives. It's not a liberation any more than that repressive era was.
17
Miley Cyrus as a role model? For anything--even music? What a concept.
To my mind she seems the prodict of a dysfunctional family, acting out her unhealed psychological wounds by saying/doing anything that will provoke notority--anything to get attention. This month it's "pansexuality;" what will it be next month?
Charles, surely you could have found a better exemplar for your cause?
To my mind she seems the prodict of a dysfunctional family, acting out her unhealed psychological wounds by saying/doing anything that will provoke notority--anything to get attention. This month it's "pansexuality;" what will it be next month?
Charles, surely you could have found a better exemplar for your cause?
23
sometimes too many choices, in any arena, can be overwhelming and confusing
I think we have crossed into territory that causes people to overly question their own choice of sexuality.
this creates more confusion and tension, particularly for younger people
I think we have crossed into territory that causes people to overly question their own choice of sexuality.
this creates more confusion and tension, particularly for younger people
9
Wow, this article and what it advocates are excellent examples of "emotivism": the idea that individuals' feelings and desires—and nothing but these individual feelings and desires—are ultimately self-justifying. If there is a desire, then that desire is something to be affirmed by virtue of the fact that someone experiences it.
Of course, anyone who wants to be consistent with this line of reasoning will finally have to dismiss any criteria external to a given individual. What then happens when (i.e., not if) disagreement arises? Do you appeal to goodness? To justice? To tolerance? If so, then you're appealing to criteria external to individuals' feelings and desires. When all is said and done, the line of thinking in Mr. Blow's article is self-defeating nonsense.
Of course, anyone who wants to be consistent with this line of reasoning will finally have to dismiss any criteria external to a given individual. What then happens when (i.e., not if) disagreement arises? Do you appeal to goodness? To justice? To tolerance? If so, then you're appealing to criteria external to individuals' feelings and desires. When all is said and done, the line of thinking in Mr. Blow's article is self-defeating nonsense.
14
It always amazes me how the mind of a human being is so enslaved by the body's genitalia. Blow is one of them. Stop talking so much about it and just do what you have to do. Nobody really cares. At least I don't!
19
I have to say that I'm more impressed and encouraged by your admission of bi-sexual preferences than by anything Miley Cyrus has to say. Anything that a celebrity such as Ms Cyrus says has to be vetted by the self-promotion police before any such statements can be taken seriously.
17
Freedom is worthy, and "fluidity" is to be tolerated if not always desired, and that includes the freedom to fluidly act stupidly in public, but one does not subscribe to the New York Times in order to read about the antics of "stars" whose fame is mainly based on flaunting their own egos. Nor are such antics, or public opinion polls for that matter, generally reliable sources or models for thoughtful reflection, or even generally viable approaches to cultural awareness or societal insight. This column is yet another in a long series of shallow, biased trivializations poorly packaged as social commentary. Why is this writer featured in the op-ed pages of this newspaper, or even in this newspaper at all?
15
When anything in life is an absolute requirement for your happiness and self-worth, it is essentially an ‘idol,’ something you are actually worshiping. When such a thing is threatened, your anger is absolute. Your anger is actually the way the idol keeps you in its service, in its chains. Sex is no different - Hetero, homo, bi, pan - sex is a gift and adds to human flourishing when enjoyed in the way it was designed- within a monogamous relationship between husband and wife. Everything else is counterfeit money.
5
I'm sure even a monogamous relationship has the quality of an "idol." I'm also sure that sometime, a long time ago, longer than the supposedly 6000 years, two apes had a relationship (whether it was monogamous, we'll never know) on the their way to becoming human beings, and you can think you sweet buns that they did....otherwise you wouldn't be here
OOps Tom, I hear an unexpected 'Ashley Madison' revelation coming across the airwaves. Be careful--divorces, sex, lies & videotapes can bite our Puritanism when we think we are undetected and getting away with it. Just ask Governor McDonnell!
4
It´s not designed. Nobody designed it. Who is this designer you are thinking of?
4
Gee - I hope it is still OK to be straight. And really, Miley Cyrus?!
19
She is only saying that to make herself interesting.
5
There was not one statement in the column that in any way suggested that it's not "OK" to be straight. The bigger question is why you feel threatened by Mr. Blow's discussion that sexual preference might not be an either/or proposition. Be straight. Don't be straight. No one really cares. Just don't expect others to give up their freedom to choose because their choice makes you irrationally uncomfortable.
12
btw, Miley and Caitlyn and Madonna and Cher's daughter and Jodie Foster and all the rest are helping with this transition and I respect the contribution they all make, no matter how garish the form it might take. So thank you sincerely, all of you.
6
I identify as trans-mission. My acceptable pronouns are 'automatic', 'semi-automatic', 'manual', and 'continuously variable'. Thank you very much xir.
9
As Grandpa used to say: Humans are born along a linear surface that stretches from horizon to horizon. And on that surface humans born at one end are the ultimate males, while humans born at the other end are the ultimate females. But few humans are born at the extremes of this surface. Most are born closer to the middle of the line and are neither all male nor all female. And some cross the mid-point of this human linear surface and become sexually whatever happens. In fact if humans ever get a reliable count of how many people are gay or straight, we may discover that being straight is in the minority.
Thanks, Grandpa.
Thanks, Grandpa.
10
Yeah, 5000 years of recorded history (European, Asian, African, oral histories from N&S America, Africa, etc.) is just chock full of trans, pans and bis with very few straights. Enough of the PC pandering. There has always been a spectrum of sexual preferences but straight has always been dominant. The past does not always conform to today's PC sentiment.
3
Long overdue article debate frankly. There are more bisexual people than gay people yet we are invisible or derided. Its also very confusing. Is polygamy the way forward? The Op-Ed piece on these pages by William Baude in July of this year titled "Is Polygamy Next?" received overwhelmingly negative comments from readers including many homosexuals. As a bisexual man living in the UK there certainly is more tolerance but there is no simple way of forming intimate long term relationships which allow us to be free in our sexuaity. Our relationships are regulated by social norms which by and large center around monogomous relationships either heterosexual or homosexual, even though there are more of us. When someone asks me whether I am gay, which happens once or twice a year, I always say no, but I never go out of my way to explain I am bisexual. It also changes, there are sometimes years where I am exclusively heterosexual in my behaviour or homosexual - mainly because its just easier. But, those relationships don't ever last more than a few years. There simply is no avenue for long term bisexuality, for me, forcing myself to make a choice doesn't work. I welcome more debate, and hope more people like Mr Blow are forthcoming and stimulate this debate forward. Right now there seems to be more focus on transexuals than bisexuals. If more men in particular could be comfortable with loving others we would have a more peaceful society overall, that is clear.
12
Y'know how when you buy a new car, suddenly you see you exact same model everywhere?
Well the number of those cars didn't change, your awareness changed.
Well the number of those cars didn't change, your awareness changed.
8
Love is not sex. Love is what happens in all the hours one is not having sex. Love is that person who sticks with you when times are bad, when you are sick broke, scared and lonely.
And mature, thoughtful people are actually comfortable in their sexuality, and don't shove it in your face and say 'hey look at me'.
They don't act like they are auditioning for a side show and calling it liberating themselves. And they know the difference between being laughed at and having people laugh with them.
And mature, thoughtful people are actually comfortable in their sexuality, and don't shove it in your face and say 'hey look at me'.
They don't act like they are auditioning for a side show and calling it liberating themselves. And they know the difference between being laughed at and having people laugh with them.
21
mr blow - really? you find ms cyrus revolutionary. funny stuff, sex, influence, power, money, media, fame, if it makes someone who wants to be thought of as a serious thinker say something like that. i like her because when I feel like fantasizing about a boyish looking young woman, she works for me under the 'girl' category, and when I feel like fantasizing about a boyish looking young woman under the 'boy' category, she works for me.
human sexuality is like that - fluid for most people, or most of us who give ourselves permission to be sexual in some way, even if it is only in fantasy, that wonderful world of where real sex takes place, the mind. it always has been fulid that way, you know, mr. blow.
so, there is nothing revolutionary about that, or her, or your article. sorry. please write about something we haven't known forever.
human sexuality is like that - fluid for most people, or most of us who give ourselves permission to be sexual in some way, even if it is only in fantasy, that wonderful world of where real sex takes place, the mind. it always has been fulid that way, you know, mr. blow.
so, there is nothing revolutionary about that, or her, or your article. sorry. please write about something we haven't known forever.
4
Miley Cyrus is just another talentless product of the "Amoral Entertainment Complex" that dominates America even better than the military Indurtiral Complex. Of course she is "pan sexual" it sells more of her auto tuned entertainment products. It's all no the way of business, like like am Anglican bishop saying he believes in G-d. But now say one these wretches came out as actually believing in a socially conservative value, that would mean something.
8
Thanks, Charles, for sharing this! You are part of the change...Best wishes.
8
I don't know. I guess I just don't "Get it". I was born a certain way, "Straight". Always have been, always will be. Not sexually attracted to the same sex, although I find them attractive emotionally, intellectually and as friends. But do I want to "do them?" No. Sometimes I think young people just want to be different, like lots of tattoos and piercings to alleviate the emptiness in their lives. They think that experimenting will assuage all of that. They're wrong, and I wish them the best. I'm glad I know what side of the fence I'm on.
13
The real point is, there is no fence.
5
I remember my first crush on a girl in 1st grade. My second was an "older woman" of 12 from across the street. I remember how beautiful she was just walking, "poetry in motion" but before the song came out.
I have seen men who are really good looking but although I have sometimes wished that I had 1 or more of their physical traits - I was never attracted to them sexually. Look at Michelangelo's statue of David! Wow. But ... attracted?! Never crossed my mind.
I am not at all "mucho macho" and feel exactly zero attraction to other men. It is as foreign to me as hanging upside down by the tail that I do not have.
I have seen men who are really good looking but although I have sometimes wished that I had 1 or more of their physical traits - I was never attracted to them sexually. Look at Michelangelo's statue of David! Wow. But ... attracted?! Never crossed my mind.
I am not at all "mucho macho" and feel exactly zero attraction to other men. It is as foreign to me as hanging upside down by the tail that I do not have.
5
just reading a few of the comments in reaction to this fantastically hopeful, loving column of charles m. blow's sadly reveals how uncomfortable and awkward and sex-phobic (never mind homophobia, so many people still treat sex like it's some kind of disgusting thing!) so many people are...please, enjoy your body!
14
It is anomalous that after 100,000 generations, humanity would go through a quick evolutionary process that altered sexuality, neurophysiology and sexual endocrinology in a generation or two. Sociopolitical acceptance of polymorphous sexuality is insufficient to explain the rapid shift.
Some hypothesize that increasing pollution and endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the environment are behind the increase in people identifying as bisexual or other non-normative sexual identities. Pollution and polymorphous sexuality appear correlated on the same gradient.
Some have posited that the movement away from normative heterosexuality, male-female pair bonding and reproductive sex results from Nature's desperate efforts to curtail runaway human overpopulation.
Miley Cyrus is no revolutionary. Indeed, she fits quite well the pornified nympho sex-object view of women that patriarchal culture promotes. American boys start using pornography and learning its misogynistic lies about women at the average age of 10 --- no wonder by 18 they are bored and cynically seeking new kicks.
Progress in the acceptance of non-normative sexuality is indicated by US laws making it a hate crime to attack, beat or rape a gay person. Tellingly, however, the epidemic of misogynistic of rape and murder of women is considered normal everyday and do not constitute hate crimes when the victim is a hetero woman. Not much progress there.
Where will children find stability in a sexual free-for-all?
Some hypothesize that increasing pollution and endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the environment are behind the increase in people identifying as bisexual or other non-normative sexual identities. Pollution and polymorphous sexuality appear correlated on the same gradient.
Some have posited that the movement away from normative heterosexuality, male-female pair bonding and reproductive sex results from Nature's desperate efforts to curtail runaway human overpopulation.
Miley Cyrus is no revolutionary. Indeed, she fits quite well the pornified nympho sex-object view of women that patriarchal culture promotes. American boys start using pornography and learning its misogynistic lies about women at the average age of 10 --- no wonder by 18 they are bored and cynically seeking new kicks.
Progress in the acceptance of non-normative sexuality is indicated by US laws making it a hate crime to attack, beat or rape a gay person. Tellingly, however, the epidemic of misogynistic of rape and murder of women is considered normal everyday and do not constitute hate crimes when the victim is a hetero woman. Not much progress there.
Where will children find stability in a sexual free-for-all?
5
Earthling - paragraph 5 - Yes indeed as evidenced by the thousands of backlogged rape kits never processed across the country...
3
Charles, I read your memoir and accepted the openness and humility with which you described your search for sexual identity in the context of having been sexually abused by another male.
But I'm disappointed that you're now jumping on the "everything goes" bandwagon espoused by Miley Cyrus and her worshipers. Sexuality will always exist within a context of cultural norms, but I don't think acting on every sexual impulse represents progress for our society and for our children.
I urge you to use your gifts to greater good.
But I'm disappointed that you're now jumping on the "everything goes" bandwagon espoused by Miley Cyrus and her worshipers. Sexuality will always exist within a context of cultural norms, but I don't think acting on every sexual impulse represents progress for our society and for our children.
I urge you to use your gifts to greater good.
12
I guess the heart want what the heart wants. I'm good old fashion completely heterosexual. I've always just liked it the way it seems it was planned, a man and a woman. I know nature has made a way for those who differ and I'm glad they are finally free to say who they are. I just wish those on the right fighting change would realize none of this is new; people are just tired of living in their small secluded closets.
9
I'm an old guy that grew up in the 40's and 50's when only heterosexual behaviour was thought to be normal. That wasn't a problem for me because I've never been attracted to other men, but over the years I've learned to accept that there are infinite variations in the human condition. Now it seems some people that prefer to experiment with their sexuality are hypercritical of those of us who prefer to have our intimate relations with people of the opposite sex and don't find promiscous sex relations very satisfying. How the world has changed.
9
"Opposite Sex" has become an oxymoron.
2
Totally agree with this open minded philosophy. I wish people would not pick on certain couplings, like Asian and White, or Black and White, and so on -- rather to let people love each other!
4
I'm astonished at how you condone such a shallow and crude conception of the most intimate experience two people can share.
7
there is a difference between "feeling" attraction to others, and then acting upon that attraction physically. The survey does not take into account people's reactions to experimental experiences that may further alter their understanding of who they are on the bi-straight spectrum. Our bodies may not be as openminded as our intellect.
2
I'm really disgusted by many of the comments here. There are usually a lot of progressive voices in NYT articles but they seem to be sorely lacking here. I think it is because the very idea of bisexuality challenges social norms, perhaps more so than homosexuality and transgenderism. I think the reason is because bisexuality and its variants challenge the traditional view of gender and sexual attraction being things that are set at birth. The point should be "why should is matter?" But alas it does matter quite a bit to many people. I think that those who are so offended here are not nearly as enlightened as they think they are.
5
I have a problem with the word "identify" or worse "self-identify". First it's a weasel word. It's a way of avoiding making a categorical statement about who and what you are. Second it implies choice. Gays have been telling us for decades that being gay is not a choice therefore, if they are right, you can't identify as gay, you are gay. if they are wrong then all bets are off and transsexuals who undergo surgery are merely making a choice like getting a tattoo or a nose ring; reality goes out the metaphorical window and relativism and solipsism take its place.
Personally I self-identify as a golden retriever. Woof.
Personally I self-identify as a golden retriever. Woof.
7
Attraction is not a choice, response is not a choice. Declaring an identity is. So yes, there may be people who are predominantly same-sex oriented who do not identify as gay. Similiarly, many who identify as straight may have some amount of same sex attraction. Therefore, "identify" is a useful word with a clear application.
Assuming she's telling the truth and not just an ambitious publicity hound trying to out-Madonna Madonna, Miley will probably be wondering what she was thinking by the time she's about 30 and settle for one nice, kind of boring but steadily reliable guy--just like those pretend lesbians I knew in college who once needed men like fish need bicycles.
5
I agree with most of what is in this article. I think it's also important to notice that these premises play havoc with most of the arguments used to justify Gay marriage to the straight community. Over and over we hear "Being Gay is not a choice, so let gay people marry each other." That was, for example, Jon Stewart's argument for why accepting Gay marriage does not entail accepting polygamy. It's always seemed to me that Gay people should be allowed to be gay whether it was a choice or not, and that these arguments implicitly denied them that right. For bisexuals, it clearly is a choice. Are we going to start arguing that bisexuals should not be allowed in gay marriages because they could marry members of the opposite sex?
I'm not saying these are unsolvable problems. On the contrary, they are problems that must be solved if we are going to make moral sense out of the world that is evolving before our eyes.
I'm not saying these are unsolvable problems. On the contrary, they are problems that must be solved if we are going to make moral sense out of the world that is evolving before our eyes.
3
Why is being bisexal clearly a choice? You jump to that statement without providing any reasoning for it.
Yes, it is not a choice, and neither is heterosexuality or bisexuality or shifting sexuality. The fact that there is variety and fluidity doesn't mean those responses are chosen. Unchosen emotional shifts are common.
Liberation is nice, but logic is important too.
The problem is that if sex were really an objectively positive thing, then rape wouldn't be a crime, it would be a surprise gift!
The fact is that sex can be very harmful, in a number of physical, emotional, social, and spiritual ways, which is why there are laws and social norms regulating it. It's not just because some shady sect of withered gnostics decreed it.
Those harms are not entirely limited to the people engaging in the deed, either. A lot of social and emotional damage can be done to others as well, so I would challenge the "consent is everything" concept on those grounds, at least.
It's fine and reasonable to say that the government should not get involved in deciding people's sexual behavior for them. But that does not mean that it's all a wash. It just means that the public has some hard decisions to make for itself.
The problem is that if sex were really an objectively positive thing, then rape wouldn't be a crime, it would be a surprise gift!
The fact is that sex can be very harmful, in a number of physical, emotional, social, and spiritual ways, which is why there are laws and social norms regulating it. It's not just because some shady sect of withered gnostics decreed it.
Those harms are not entirely limited to the people engaging in the deed, either. A lot of social and emotional damage can be done to others as well, so I would challenge the "consent is everything" concept on those grounds, at least.
It's fine and reasonable to say that the government should not get involved in deciding people's sexual behavior for them. But that does not mean that it's all a wash. It just means that the public has some hard decisions to make for itself.
5
Seriously? I'm over 50, under 60, and bored to absolute death with every Tom, Dick, and Miley espousing their private inclinations. Shut up about your private life and go help someone in need. Or better yet, how about a page devoted to charitable and volunteer organizations, what they do, and to join up with them. Please!
7
Mr. Blow: wonderful, beautiful, insightful, wise, moving. Thank you. (I'm a 65-year-old WASP hetero man.)
2
I accept that some people are wired as homosexual and some as heterosexual. Not making a choice though is just hedonism.
1
" It took a happy-go-lucky sledgehammer to the must-fit-a-box binary ..."
Charles, you missed a perfect opportunity there to use "wrecking ball" as the tool of choice!
;)
Charles, you missed a perfect opportunity there to use "wrecking ball" as the tool of choice!
;)
Mr. Blow--Seen any French movies, or other European movies of late? The Europeans have seemed much more comfortable with behavioral spectrums compared to binary categorizations. Now let us see how today's young people evolve over their mid- and late-lives when most of us move to being more conservative and yearn for absolutes.
1
From personal experience, gay folks are not very tolerant of bisexuals. They expect tolerance from straight folks, but don't extend it to bisexuals, accusing them of sitting on the fence.
3
One thing is looking at a same-gender person and thinking, "hmm, attractive". The other thing is actually going the distance and having intimate relations. I suspect that quite a few people may experience the former, but have no tendencies to the latter.
5
It sounds like you are walking back the claim that sexual-orientation is innate. I guess that was probably all false-science form the beginning.
2
People must define their own sexuality, despite the categories others would impose.
fair enough. But I absolutely refuse to share a restroom with those who possess the sexual organs of the opposite sex. No if, and or buts.
fair enough. But I absolutely refuse to share a restroom with those who possess the sexual organs of the opposite sex. No if, and or buts.
2
Liberals continue to believe that sexuality is simply a constructed phenomenon. Their failure is to have any ground for why consent is a nessary characteristic of sexual ethics. Liberals are just making it up as they go along, the younger generation has been fooled by this myth, and sooner or later the realities of sexual construction will come roaring back with a litany of social and health problems. Sexual ethics based on the 7th commandment and found in every major world religion will be vindicated. Liberal ethics are hollow. Time will show this to be the case.
2
I think a good deal of the acceptance of gays and lesbians in our society started with the realization that some people are "born that way." And particularly for people who had to struggle to come to that realization, encountering bisexual or transgender individuals somehow muddies the water. For the time being at least, "born that way" only goes so far. But the same question, "given all the hostility it arouses, why would anyone choose to be gay?" would apply equally to the transgender.
1
Christians are supposed to love one another regardless of sex. But they also are supposed to act within the limits established by God . People don't like limits. Driving against the traffic on a one way street is unwise. Doing so may cost the lives of the neighbors we should love. There are good reasons for following rules both on the road and in life.
1
Miley Cyrus is trying very hard to overcome her earlier incarnation as Hannah Montana. We've seen her display her body as much as the weather will allow. This statement of hers is in line with her very desperate attempt to prove to the world that she is sexual. It seems to be a prolonged period of adolescence. Isn't it time she moved into maturity? Maybe therapy would help.
Seeing her quoted as some kind of valuable expert in a piece in the NY Times is really scary.
Seeing her quoted as some kind of valuable expert in a piece in the NY Times is really scary.
7
My best friend, who's a guy, refers to me as a "gold-card carrying heterosexual". And I've always been attracted to certain types of women. I don't feel like its a problem.
It's sad to see Mr. Blow endorsing this attitude. It's one thing for a young person to experiment with sex. It's another thing for an adult to give her, and us, the impression that she has found the ultimate truth about sex and that there is nowhere to go from here. I certainly hope that Mr. Blow has found something more meaningful in his love life than this. Unfortunately, if he had, then he probably would not be saying what he has in this column.
5
Kudos to the younger generation for further liberating themselves (and us) from the harmful mental and emotional shackles of artificial gender expectations.
1
I think that a lot of gays and lesbians have the same reaction to self-described bisexuals or pansexuals that many blacks had to Raven Symone declaring that she was "tired of being labeled" and was just "an American" rather than an African-American. On a gut level, it feels cavalier and privileged to those who have fought hard and suffered greatly. But maybe society and binary labels are wrong, not the people who dare to break barriers.
I've experienced this. As a gay teen in the early 90's, I was punched, kicked, spat on, and pummeled with daily epithets. I finally managed to get into a hippie-ish high school where I was accepted and allowed to live in peace! But when I looked around for LGBT allies, I found people who "didn't want to be labeled" and described themselves as "pansexual." I was disillusioned. They looked down on me for being "too stereotypical." I wanted to say to them, "Well, guess what. You're lucky. You can 'pass.' I'm effeminate and grew up in a bigoted place, and there was nowhere to hide. I didn't come out of the closet; I was dragged out by sneering, macho bullies who assaulted me every day because I wasn't a 'man.' And now I see you in your little enclave, pronouncing that you're free, that you've somehow 'transcended' my plane." On the one hand, I thought them smug. On the other hand, I envied their freedom and ease.
I still believe that breaking down boundaries is the way to go. But it's hard. Humans seem to have an innate drive to categorize.
I've experienced this. As a gay teen in the early 90's, I was punched, kicked, spat on, and pummeled with daily epithets. I finally managed to get into a hippie-ish high school where I was accepted and allowed to live in peace! But when I looked around for LGBT allies, I found people who "didn't want to be labeled" and described themselves as "pansexual." I was disillusioned. They looked down on me for being "too stereotypical." I wanted to say to them, "Well, guess what. You're lucky. You can 'pass.' I'm effeminate and grew up in a bigoted place, and there was nowhere to hide. I didn't come out of the closet; I was dragged out by sneering, macho bullies who assaulted me every day because I wasn't a 'man.' And now I see you in your little enclave, pronouncing that you're free, that you've somehow 'transcended' my plane." On the one hand, I thought them smug. On the other hand, I envied their freedom and ease.
I still believe that breaking down boundaries is the way to go. But it's hard. Humans seem to have an innate drive to categorize.
4
No longer is the motto "Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll" but now "Drugs and Anything Goes"....
I think the day may come when we will realize that most identity labeling - sex, race, etc. - is inadequate to describe the great variation in human beings. At the moment however, we have sociologists who make a living by inventing labels.
2
Odd, there was a time when control of one's sexual urges, even sublimating them for a loftier purpose, was a mark of maturity. Now indulging whatever combination of animal drives leads to a rush of endorphin is celebrated. There is very little that would improve in the world with more amorphous sexual behavior. Maybe we could learn to control ourselves? It is hardly news that sexuality exists on a continuum.
8
I would propose that sexual fluidity is more often a product of a person's youthfulness, NOT the age s/he lives in...although, of course, more social acceptance of bisexuality makes such experiences more possible. When I was still finding myself as an 18-29 year old back in the 1970s and 80s, I--like many young people today--would have fallen into the 29% who placed my sexuality in the "varying degrees of bisexuality" category. By the time I was 35 and heterosexually married, though, that window had firmly closed. Now I fall into the 93% of 65-year-olds who consider themselves utterly heterosexual...although maybe my earlier openness was a plus in that it predisposed me to be completely nonjudgmental of LGBTs at my advanced age in 2015.
3
I never understood why attraction to another human being had to be circumscribed or limited by gender.
When I was told, Well, if you are a guy you can only be attracted to women, I thought, What a stupid and totally limiting belief.
Why would anyone deliberately limit themselves to 50% of the human race?
It just makes no sense.
I still think that way.
When I was told, Well, if you are a guy you can only be attracted to women, I thought, What a stupid and totally limiting belief.
Why would anyone deliberately limit themselves to 50% of the human race?
It just makes no sense.
I still think that way.
2
I guess folks view their sexuality to trying on clothes. One day your straight and another day one is gay. Bisexuality is akin to having it both ways.
1
I have zero problems with people and their sexuality, although in my country, the macho group profess that love is between one gender and the other, period. Whatever (I think their days are numbered though).
I also do not mind the nudging from our brothers and sisters in the West for us to be more accepting. By all means, bring it on. Let's be a more open, understanding and welcoming society. In any case, who someone loves or chooses to be with is none of mine (or your) business.
What I would also expect then, from the West, is to be more tolerant and accepting of our ways of loving. Polygamy in particular. I am not and will not be a polygamist but have many relatives who are. None of which was a girl slave or underage bride or anything else that gets spewed out. That is something I would like the rest of the world to also be more understanding about.
I also do not mind the nudging from our brothers and sisters in the West for us to be more accepting. By all means, bring it on. Let's be a more open, understanding and welcoming society. In any case, who someone loves or chooses to be with is none of mine (or your) business.
What I would also expect then, from the West, is to be more tolerant and accepting of our ways of loving. Polygamy in particular. I am not and will not be a polygamist but have many relatives who are. None of which was a girl slave or underage bride or anything else that gets spewed out. That is something I would like the rest of the world to also be more understanding about.
1
Ok, but would you also accept polyandry (one woman, more than one man)?
1
Why is fluidity of sexual attraction an important issue worthy of a column? Whatever happened to the notion (from my generation) that one’s sexual orientation is a private matter and of no interest to anyone else except individuals of one’s own choosing? But sadly today, it is ever the “in thing” to “come out” as gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender. If I am one of the above, it is no concern to anyone outside of my realm of friends. The Times is increasingly obsessed with sexual orientation issues. What purpose is served? If one wants to identify as belonging to a sexual group, then that’s fine. But do not obsessively force the issue. The Times would have us believe that the only good and decent gay is one who is out and in the open, and you are an anomaly if you are not open about sexual orientation. If you are not open about it, then you are branded as closeted” and subject to the guessing game. Is she or is she not.
2
Why should my sexual choices be limited to what is "safe" and "honest"? Why put any parameters on love or intimacy?
All you ever see in another, in any relationship is what resides within yourself. And a lot of it needs transmuting. And yes, you may experience an attraction to almost anyone, but it takes wisdom to know when to (or if you should) act on it. Very little wisdom in this column I'd say.
2
Why in the world would I care about what Miley Cyrus thinks about this topic? There are actually more reliable sources of information than the lowest common denominator identified here.
4
M.C.'s younger daughter in Brooklyn, NY. I really hope my comment gets approved. Mr. Blow, I know that you're not discussing the long overdue SCOTUS ruling in favor of gay marriage, but this is somewhat related. THANK YOU for the subject of your column today. The timing of your discussion of your embrace of your bisexuality is uncanny and a relief, considering your colleague Mr. Ryan Anderson's defense of Ms. Davis' illegal and bigoted actions in KY. Mr. Anderson could learn a lot from you.
The words that stand out the most and resonate with me are from "People must be allowed to be themselves, ..." to "Attraction is attraction, and it doesn't always have a label." Concise and perfect!
@ Evangelical Survivor in Amhurst, MA. I agree with you about the threat of ANY fundamentalist extremism; I'd just add that the un-Christ like so-called Christian fundamentalists in this country are just as dangerous as the Islamic fundamentalists.
We're all supposed to be in this together.
Peace and positive vibes.
The words that stand out the most and resonate with me are from "People must be allowed to be themselves, ..." to "Attraction is attraction, and it doesn't always have a label." Concise and perfect!
@ Evangelical Survivor in Amhurst, MA. I agree with you about the threat of ANY fundamentalist extremism; I'd just add that the un-Christ like so-called Christian fundamentalists in this country are just as dangerous as the Islamic fundamentalists.
We're all supposed to be in this together.
Peace and positive vibes.
1
Having read this column, I decided to do some research. I know that heterosexual porn works with me and so does lesbian porn. But what about gay porn? I decided to investigate and watched some. Yep, it works. I guess I’m more towards the middle of the scale from heterosexual to homosexual than I had previously thought. And I have to admit, sex is pleasurable. Nevertheless, I do keep in mind the four kinds of concealed suffering that is part of Buddhist tradition. In particular, I keep in mind the third kind of concealed suffering that especially is applicable to sexual pleasure: Something, while pleasant, ties us still further to conditions in which a great deal of suffering is inevitable. And from my own experience, I’ve found this to be true. Sex is always bound up with suffering. And on balance, the suffering outweighs the pleasure. And so, I’ve decided to remain as I am—a closet celibate. Please don’t tell my friends.
2
Bisexuality has been around since ancient times. However, there are also people who may identify as bisexual, but actually have a condition called Borderline Personality Disorder, that involves an unstable identity. These people may decide they are bisexual, but in reality they can switch to feeling heterosexual or homosexual at other times because their identity isn't stable. Sadly BPD also involves other issues that can be highly problematic, such as impulsivity, mood swings and substance abuse.
3
Does mean that us trans individuals are sexually accepted to a pansexual? Also what difficulty would a bisexual have having a sexual relationship with a trans person since the genitals do not seem to be an issue, why should it matter how the genitals are packaged. As a transsexual woman, I am a woman period, end of discussion. What physical changes I make to my body depends upon my lifestyle choices and have the finances to make changes to my body. But my romantic choices can get me killed and my romantic hookups deny definition. As a woman with male private parts if my partner is another woman is it a lesbian relationship or a heterosexual relationship? While I may see the relationship as a lesbian relationship my partner may see it as a heterosexual relationship. My partner may be violently offended to see the relationship the way I do. The point is, does a pansexual's fluidity include transsexual and transgender partners? Just how fluid is fluid?
1
So, now we're past the stage of 'all forms of sexuality is equally acceptable" to "heterosexuals are rigid and antiquated."
This passage in Mr. Blow's essay is offensive, not to mention ludicrous: "And yet, the idea that one can have a physiological response to something other than gendered physicality seems to some antithetical to their rigid, superannuated notions of attraction, or even heretical to it."
Why is being heterosexual "rigid and superannuated?" And why is labeling it as such considered appropriate by the New York Times? What an Orwellian nightmare this post-politically correct world is becoming, when having sex the way that has propagated the species for hundreds of thousands of years is viewed as a deviancy.
This passage in Mr. Blow's essay is offensive, not to mention ludicrous: "And yet, the idea that one can have a physiological response to something other than gendered physicality seems to some antithetical to their rigid, superannuated notions of attraction, or even heretical to it."
Why is being heterosexual "rigid and superannuated?" And why is labeling it as such considered appropriate by the New York Times? What an Orwellian nightmare this post-politically correct world is becoming, when having sex the way that has propagated the species for hundreds of thousands of years is viewed as a deviancy.
45
You certainly engaged in some cherry-picking there, and misstated what the article said. He said, "... the idea that one can have a physiological response to something other than gendered physicality seems to SOME antithetical to their rigid, superannuated notions of attraction ..."
He did not say ALL heterosexuals. Feeling threatened, are you? I suggest you hone your reading skills. Ignorance is a much greater threat to our species than "other than straight normative" sexual preferences.
He did not say ALL heterosexuals. Feeling threatened, are you? I suggest you hone your reading skills. Ignorance is a much greater threat to our species than "other than straight normative" sexual preferences.
1
@Don
Don't you know what quotation marks mean? Let me help:
"And yet, the idea that one can have a physiological response to something other than gendered physicality seems to some antithetical to their rigid, superannuated notions of attraction, or even heretical to it."
Homework: Find the word heterosexual within the quotation marks.
Don't you know what quotation marks mean? Let me help:
"And yet, the idea that one can have a physiological response to something other than gendered physicality seems to some antithetical to their rigid, superannuated notions of attraction, or even heretical to it."
Homework: Find the word heterosexual within the quotation marks.
3
He is not saying that heterosexuality is "rigid and superannuated". He is saying that about bigotry against non-heterosexuality.
1
The young people are our hope! Diversity of so many kinds does not faze them, perhaps due to their elders' forgetting to teach hate. You have to be carefully taught to hate.
11
The desperate rear-guard action of the homophobes being fought by the likes of Kim Davis, the clerk in Kentucky who won't follow the law and issue marriage licenses to same sex couples not withstanding, more nuanced forms of sexual attraction and association are rapidly becoming common.
I do know at first hand the intensity of the loathing for this seen in the elderly. It is uppermost on their minds even as a political issue, and it's a mistake not to be aware of their feelings and the trouble they can cause.
But, happily, as the chart in this article shows, their views are doomed to extinction within a generation.
As a BT person ( I am two out of the four LGBT ), I feel safer and safer in our country, but I still watch my back late at night in the parking lot.
I do know at first hand the intensity of the loathing for this seen in the elderly. It is uppermost on their minds even as a political issue, and it's a mistake not to be aware of their feelings and the trouble they can cause.
But, happily, as the chart in this article shows, their views are doomed to extinction within a generation.
As a BT person ( I am two out of the four LGBT ), I feel safer and safer in our country, but I still watch my back late at night in the parking lot.
10
Some elderly are relieved and delighted!
Unfortunately it seems more acceptable these days to be a heterophobe. Why can't we just accept people as they are and stop demonizing those who don't see the world as we do?
1
Women watch their backs all the time, aware of the ubiquitousness of male violence and sexual predators.
2
Enlightenment? The only "enlightenment" is this: What you do sexually is not my business, unless you're trying to get me involved. Beyond that, all is just opinion and inclination. I don't care what you're doing. I don't want to hear about what you're doing, just like you don't want to hear about what I think about what you might be doing. Do whatever, unless your inclination is to involve minors or use force.
22
Refusing to label your sexuality is not inherently a problem. But it becomes pernicious in a world where most people end up in opposite-sex relationships. People need to be aware of the danger of sending the message that same-sex attraction is frivolous, solely sexual, or something you grow out of.
3
Long ago, pre-Facebook, & cable modems, about a dozen of us had a long email discussion as to whether women were more naturally bisexual or more willing to accept that aspect of themselves. We never found a final answer if we explored the parameters of sexual identity!
I will say, certainly, young people today identify as Gay/Lesbian even Transgender at an earlier age, the sexuality of MANY young people is more fluid. I don't know what we label that if we "label" it at all. I'm always amazed & amused at the choices on the statistical forms we complete at Pride Center functions. It boggles my mind. Choices go beyond LGBT even "Questioning."
Perhaps, Charles is right: we define ourselves as we wish. There are people like moi who understood at age 5, in kindergarten, so fixated on the cutest boy in class, I blew it asked to count to 100! But I also sensed, in that dinosauric era, this was something to keep secret. I accept that some people are bisexual, if I cant imagine anything other than being attracted to GUYS. Some people's sexuality is more fluid. We define ourselves.
I will note, Charles, the founder of SABIL, Sisters And Brothers In the Life an organization of LGBT "People of Color noted being Gay & Black or Hispanic was a "double closet." SABIL has evolved into a formal organization, In Our Own Voices, its numbers growing, as Black & Hispanic LGBT folks "come out." Maybe, Charles, "Labels are for CLOTHES!
I will say, certainly, young people today identify as Gay/Lesbian even Transgender at an earlier age, the sexuality of MANY young people is more fluid. I don't know what we label that if we "label" it at all. I'm always amazed & amused at the choices on the statistical forms we complete at Pride Center functions. It boggles my mind. Choices go beyond LGBT even "Questioning."
Perhaps, Charles is right: we define ourselves as we wish. There are people like moi who understood at age 5, in kindergarten, so fixated on the cutest boy in class, I blew it asked to count to 100! But I also sensed, in that dinosauric era, this was something to keep secret. I accept that some people are bisexual, if I cant imagine anything other than being attracted to GUYS. Some people's sexuality is more fluid. We define ourselves.
I will note, Charles, the founder of SABIL, Sisters And Brothers In the Life an organization of LGBT "People of Color noted being Gay & Black or Hispanic was a "double closet." SABIL has evolved into a formal organization, In Our Own Voices, its numbers growing, as Black & Hispanic LGBT folks "come out." Maybe, Charles, "Labels are for CLOTHES!
1
The idea that the great majority of people are not exclusively heterosexual or homosexual, as Alfred Kinsey has shown, is something that in recent years has not just been mocked and dismissed. It was also held to a most politically incorrect position to hold because it was an argument, in a sense, that most gays had a choice in their becoming gay.
However in dismissing Kinsey, they are doing allot of harm to those reaching the age in which they are making the determination of whether they are gay or not. They are under the impression that if they have an attraction for the same sex then they must be gay, and because of this belief they reject in their minds any attraction they may have to the opposite sex.
And so because of this mistaken and ignorant belief that one must be either gay or straight, people at a very young age conclude that they are exclusively gay and that this is the basis of a determination about their very identity that has far reaching and serious consequences for all sorts of aspects of the rest of their lives.
As such the determination over whether one is gay or not is one that requires expertise, and should be based on the understanding of an expert. And that is to explore whether they are in fact exclusively gay, or perhaps not at all and that they can just as easily engage in a heterosexual relationship.
relationships. And a parent who asks of their child to speak with such an expert may in fact be acting in the best interest of their child.
However in dismissing Kinsey, they are doing allot of harm to those reaching the age in which they are making the determination of whether they are gay or not. They are under the impression that if they have an attraction for the same sex then they must be gay, and because of this belief they reject in their minds any attraction they may have to the opposite sex.
And so because of this mistaken and ignorant belief that one must be either gay or straight, people at a very young age conclude that they are exclusively gay and that this is the basis of a determination about their very identity that has far reaching and serious consequences for all sorts of aspects of the rest of their lives.
As such the determination over whether one is gay or not is one that requires expertise, and should be based on the understanding of an expert. And that is to explore whether they are in fact exclusively gay, or perhaps not at all and that they can just as easily engage in a heterosexual relationship.
relationships. And a parent who asks of their child to speak with such an expert may in fact be acting in the best interest of their child.
3
Well when you have a generation that is exposed to nearly every form of sexual conations and acts almost everywhere they turn everyday, from free hard core pornographic content online to stunts like those of M. Cyrus and other media formats, this would not be surprising that this many want to be like the "Jones" but in this case "Cyrus" ....
6
The more I read your columns, the more I have come to respect and admire you, in so many ways. You are a careful groundbreaker--always thoughtful and measured, and yet extremely forward thinking and unafraid to be honest, potentially controversial, and constructively confrontative. Thank you NY Times for publishing your work.
8
Great work. Very inspirational. Very, I think, human-positive.
5
Our culture is on a huge downward spiral right now and people like Miley Cyrus who celebrate virtually every manifestation of "difference" and get rewarded for it are a big part of the problem.
9
Since we share most of our DNA with bonobos and chimps, species that are far from binary on the Kinsey spectrum, it's good to see pop stars and columnists outing themselves as perfectly normal primates.
7
These days you literally cannot look anywhere without LGBT poking you in the face, insisting on being acknowledged. OK, I get it - now it's trendy and hip even for grey ladies. When it comes to the youngsters, however, it has been hip for a long long time - just ask any Vassar graduate :)
9
What you are saying is nonsense.
These immature people are looking for the one thing every human being seeks above all else: LOVE.
When they think they cannot find it from their own kind they expand the pool by adding in homosexuality, hoping to increase their odds. They do not care what the other's sex is they just need LOVE.
But the catch is: sex does not equate love. They have sex with any human, male or female, hoping against hope - maybe this will be THE ONE.
In the meantime they lose all self respect to the point that no one can love them. The very thing they want the most.
These immature people are looking for the one thing every human being seeks above all else: LOVE.
When they think they cannot find it from their own kind they expand the pool by adding in homosexuality, hoping to increase their odds. They do not care what the other's sex is they just need LOVE.
But the catch is: sex does not equate love. They have sex with any human, male or female, hoping against hope - maybe this will be THE ONE.
In the meantime they lose all self respect to the point that no one can love them. The very thing they want the most.
8
Ok here it goes.
First, what do you mean by "their own kind?" I'm guessing you mean "fellow straight people," as though everyone is straight until they can't find an opposite-sex person who will love them.
I fell in love with another guy before realizing I was gay. You're talking as though non-heterosexuality is strictly sexual, and it's not. It's not like I tried to court a bunch of women and then failed and said "shucks, I better try dudes." Just...there are too many things wrong with what you said to bother going any farther.
First, what do you mean by "their own kind?" I'm guessing you mean "fellow straight people," as though everyone is straight until they can't find an opposite-sex person who will love them.
I fell in love with another guy before realizing I was gay. You're talking as though non-heterosexuality is strictly sexual, and it's not. It's not like I tried to court a bunch of women and then failed and said "shucks, I better try dudes." Just...there are too many things wrong with what you said to bother going any farther.
'...There was something about the casual, carefree-ness of the statements that I found both charming and revolutionary...'
Seriously?
This is the publicity stunt by a young woman with nothing else to sell but her attempts to shock people with her vulgar fake sexuality, all of it planned by her publicist.
It is not 'revolutionary' in any way, but depressing, as yet another generation of talentless young women pandering to the fantasies of middle aged men.
That said, other consenting adult's sexual practices are no one else's business and the weird homophobia of the African American community needs to be called to task, so good for Mr Blow!
Seriously?
This is the publicity stunt by a young woman with nothing else to sell but her attempts to shock people with her vulgar fake sexuality, all of it planned by her publicist.
It is not 'revolutionary' in any way, but depressing, as yet another generation of talentless young women pandering to the fantasies of middle aged men.
That said, other consenting adult's sexual practices are no one else's business and the weird homophobia of the African American community needs to be called to task, so good for Mr Blow!
17
Life is short. Find love and pleasure where you can.
7
Life can also last quite an age - another good reason to find love and pleasure where one can.
Yes. Remember Kinsey. I remember when (on the 0 - 6 scale) men who were at 3 & 4 went "0" because of AIDS.
7
Glad to see this piece! Reasonable regarding the older respondents: B/not B is just less of an issue.
The Kinsey scale, still ignored by many, provides incredible insight into the complexity of human sexuality. We all have feelings (and some people have behaviors) that range widely. The biggest issue confronting our culture is not that these feelings exist (they do), but what to do with them? Is it wise to act on every feeling? Indulge every dot on the Kinsey matrix? Every romantic possibility and combination? Personally, I think not. Prudence suggests monogamy and faithfulness to a spouse. If you want children, natural reason (and perhaps economics) suggests a heterosexual marriage. The offshoots of this undoubtedly would produce more stability and trust...things our world needs more of now. What we all need is REAL LOVE, not especially really hot sex.
11
No longer are couples restricted to heterosexuals only to bear and raise children. It is a form of bigotry to ascribe faithfulness and dependability ONLY to straight couples. With a divorce rate of approximately 50%, heterosexuals do not have a monopoly on long-term relationships.
'Normal' is a setting on your clothes dryer. Let's go out and live and love, and not tumble around in a sea of self-righteousness.
10
Choose honesty, consideration for the best interests of the other person, and safety.
6
In an essay published in Time magazine on August 31, 1970, "What Would It Be Like If Women Win," Gloria Steinem wrote about same-sex marriage in the context of the "Utopian" future she envisioned, writing:
What will exist is a variety of alternative life-styles. Since the population explosion dictates that childbearing be kept to a minimum, parents-and-children will be only one of many "families": couples, age groups, working groups, mixed communes, blood-related clans, class groups, creative groups. Single women will have the right to stay single without ridicule, without the attitudes now betrayed by "spinster" and "bachelor." Lesbians or homosexuals will no longer be denied legally binding marriages, complete with mutual-support agreements and inheritance rights. Paradoxically, the number of homosexuals may get smaller. With fewer over-possessive mothers and fewer fathers who hold up an impossibly cruel or perfectionist idea of manhood, boys will be less likely to be denied or reject their identity as males.
What will exist is a variety of alternative life-styles. Since the population explosion dictates that childbearing be kept to a minimum, parents-and-children will be only one of many "families": couples, age groups, working groups, mixed communes, blood-related clans, class groups, creative groups. Single women will have the right to stay single without ridicule, without the attitudes now betrayed by "spinster" and "bachelor." Lesbians or homosexuals will no longer be denied legally binding marriages, complete with mutual-support agreements and inheritance rights. Paradoxically, the number of homosexuals may get smaller. With fewer over-possessive mothers and fewer fathers who hold up an impossibly cruel or perfectionist idea of manhood, boys will be less likely to be denied or reject their identity as males.
5
Wow, the old saw about "gay men are created by domineering mothers and distant fathers" -- I thought that died out long before 1970 even.
When I suggested to CB than he try to find other subjects to write about besides racial inequality,I did not think that he would choose a topic so superficial as androgenous entertainers like Miley Cyrus or GAGA. I expected him to do some serious investigative journalism in the tradition of Jimmy Breslin, Murray Kempton, Carl Rowan and others. Instead, we get a piece that could be found between the pages of PEOPLE magazine, US, HOLA or PSYCHOLOGY TODAY. Mr.Blow, all the time time is passing, or, as CAMUS would say,"un jour de moins, un jour de plus."Time is running out for you to begin writing in depth stories about subjects that really matter : the influence of the mob in the real estate industry on Long Island, the organized crime syndicate that originates in Kingston but whose tentacles extend to the US, or biographies of some of the race panderers among us like Sharpton, Farakhan and Jackson:just some suggestions. But please, no more pieces about bisexual pop stars. We are inundated every day by propaganda from the homosexual community about who has come out of the closet and who has not."Nous en avons le ras bol!"A writer just has so many years of creativity in front of him. Don't squander the time remaining.Use it wisely and well,
22
Oh poo... grow up. The rest of us aren't up to your warp speed. This was a solid article about Big ideas that are very much swept under the rug today in the hear and now.
Miley Cyrus as sage, prophetess, avant-garde social critic, political revolutionary, and high priestess of sex! Only in America.
6
Excellent article
I am surprised at the numbers.
I wonder if data is available by gender.
I would think that the majority of bisexuals are females given their gentler nature and chances of being turned off by by males.
I am surprised at the numbers.
I wonder if data is available by gender.
I would think that the majority of bisexuals are females given their gentler nature and chances of being turned off by by males.
1
Blow as spokesperson for fluidity makes sense. You can be whatever you want to be, and everybody else should be sensitive to that, unless you want to be a white heterosexual male, in which case you needn't voice an opinion on anything. You can be fluid in your sexuality, your finances and your criminality. For instance, you can take a loan and sign a bunch of papers affirming your understanding of the agreement and then not pay it because you didn't understand the terms. Or, you can father a child, and abandon it, because you don't really want the responsibility. Or you can rob a bodega and attack a police officer and then become a civil rights hero in the same day. The only thing that matters is your freedom to choose whatever you want to do or be without consequence. Personalize the privilege and socialize the costs, and while you are at it, be sure to let gender norm people know they are horrible for being so normal. Society must not rest until the 0.1% of transgender people feel "appreciated" for their fluidity.
19
Your response is so lacking in any empathy not to mention common sense. You throw in criminality, privilege, social costs, etc. into a rant that is mainly anti LGBT. I really don't care about your or anyone else's sexuality, but I am willing to read and empathize with the experience of others, too bad you cannot do the same
1
Freedom without responsibility is anarchy. To sum up what you just said.
2
This is BRILLIANT and BITING satire. But I fear it will go over the heads of most readers.
2
Foolish me, thinking that biphobia is gone just because this article was written. One look in the comments clearly disproves that. Let me clear this all up.
Middle of the spectrum identities are not "phases" and people who identify as middle of the spectrum are not greedy. Guys who are bisexual, or pansexual, will not eventually turn gay. There are times in the gay community when a person will call themselves bisexual because they see it as easy, which is why people assume all bisexuals are gay. They're not.
If somebody tells you they're bisexual, or gay, or straight, it's not your place to tell them they aren't. It's your job to be supportive. And if they come back a few years later and tell you that they're now a different sexuality, it's still your job to be supportive. You should never judge them.
Middle of the spectrum identities are not "phases" and people who identify as middle of the spectrum are not greedy. Guys who are bisexual, or pansexual, will not eventually turn gay. There are times in the gay community when a person will call themselves bisexual because they see it as easy, which is why people assume all bisexuals are gay. They're not.
If somebody tells you they're bisexual, or gay, or straight, it's not your place to tell them they aren't. It's your job to be supportive. And if they come back a few years later and tell you that they're now a different sexuality, it's still your job to be supportive. You should never judge them.
10
One can be neutral on the subject too.
I agree if some says their bi, gay or straight no one should tell them they are not! But is it really our job to only be supportive? What if the all of those lifestyles are bring harm to the person? Out of love (full of grace and truth) intervene and try to bring change of whatever sort? I think so! It's ok to disagree with someone and still love them. Everyone make judgements and that we must do as long as it is not to condemn! My job is not to support but point to a superior person! Namely Jesus!
I've never known a bisexual guy who doesn't eventually come out as gay. Many gay men in the past and likely still today manage to lead ostensibly heterosexual lives complete with a wife and children.
It's aways struck me as compelling that even gay men can become aroused enough with a woman to create children. Ask a straight man to become aroused by another man and it's just not going to happen.
It's aways struck me as compelling that even gay men can become aroused enough with a woman to create children. Ask a straight man to become aroused by another man and it's just not going to happen.
I'm going to go out on the limb and label myself. I'm a female heterosexual. I'm not attracted to anything but male. I might look at another woman with envy at her rounded bosom or slim figure. But in terms of sexuality and attraction, I don't feel it.
I do know or have met people who are attracted to people of their gender. I've known folks who are attracted to people who like to go in for tri or more sexual partners at one time. I'm not going to down them for 'doing their thing' as long as the others involved are 'down or up' with it. Maybe they know or feel something I don't know, it's just that I don't personally care to know.
But the interesting that in our day and age we become alarmed about sexuality when it's obvious that this has been going on for decades.
We talk about sex like it's something that was just discovered in the past hundred years or so. We talk about homosexuality as if is something that people just started doing, even as it is reference in the Old Testament. We talk about abortion as if it is something that just appeared in our lifetime. I suspect abortion has been around at least as long as the world's oldest profession. Maybe we should just start minding our own business and start with ourselves if we have a problem with something. Maybe in trying to act like folks in the Bible, one should go back and really read the Bible from a historical point of view and not a religious one. If you like something, do it.
I do know or have met people who are attracted to people of their gender. I've known folks who are attracted to people who like to go in for tri or more sexual partners at one time. I'm not going to down them for 'doing their thing' as long as the others involved are 'down or up' with it. Maybe they know or feel something I don't know, it's just that I don't personally care to know.
But the interesting that in our day and age we become alarmed about sexuality when it's obvious that this has been going on for decades.
We talk about sex like it's something that was just discovered in the past hundred years or so. We talk about homosexuality as if is something that people just started doing, even as it is reference in the Old Testament. We talk about abortion as if it is something that just appeared in our lifetime. I suspect abortion has been around at least as long as the world's oldest profession. Maybe we should just start minding our own business and start with ourselves if we have a problem with something. Maybe in trying to act like folks in the Bible, one should go back and really read the Bible from a historical point of view and not a religious one. If you like something, do it.
15
Thanks for your post! You very last words had me contemplating. "If you like something, do it". What if I like to steal, kill or rape all of which took place in biblically history. Is that ok? I don't know you but I would think you would say that I shouldn't do that! We know something outside of us to help us navigate what is going on inside of us! It's impossible to not read the bible from a religious point of view because it gives us rails for righteousness (determining what's right and wrong and why). How about love The God of the bible and do whatever you want?
Everything has changed or evolved and sometimes it takes a "Miley" to get that across to us. The only thing that stays the same is change. The planet and our places upon it constantly change and evolve. Humans seem to think that everything will be as it always was birth to death. We tend to look for stability, a certain static continuity. The same way that the "Markets" don't like uncertainty. The major traumas in our human lives involve change: Birth, Death, Marriage, Divorce, Moving, Job Loss or Job Change. Unfortunately even though this is our lot, humans don't handle change very well. It is the challenge of our existence. That is the problem with America and perhaps the entire world right now. America wants to cling to Colonial Williamsburg and the Founders' vision and structures for the nation. That vision and those structures are outmoded, failed and now dead. We need an entirely new kind of country operating with an entirely new and different kind of government and governance. All those running for President and all other offices may as well be the dead and buried Founders of 200 and some odd years ago. There is no vision among them.
1
I will go a step further than Miley Cyrus ( although I do not know how she can be a representative of anything except irreverence ) I would just repeat Chicago Guy's quote from Skakespeare," Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind." So my attraction leads me not only to anyone over 18 but extends to babies, kids, pets and animals. Every attraction and connectivity does'nt have to be sexual. The attraction could be in the cooing and gurgling of babies, in their angelic smiles and eyes searching and recognizing a warm, familiar face. It could be in the innocence of kids, without guile, trusting, in their mischief and laughter. It could be in the nuzzling of your pets, wagging tails, yelps and purrs of contentment, in the eyes of a deer caught in the headlights or the soulfulness in the eyes of cows, pigs, sheep and horses. It could be with anyone who gives you pleasure and contentment just for being who they are. For me that is attraction. Most certainly I am not attracted to someone who just puts her tongue out for no rhyme or reason. To me that is an real damper to attractiveness.
3
Miley Cyrus should not be held out as anything other than mediocre pop star willing to say or spray any old thing so long as turns heads and cameras get way. Especially not as a spokeswoman for transgender issues or as the "voice of her generation" with regards to anything at all.
She wears this whole phoney attitude alongside her sexual boasting like it was a piece of bling! Methinks that Papa Cyrus was away a bit too often when she was little and she's got a wee bit of an attention seeking disorder.
She wears this whole phoney attitude alongside her sexual boasting like it was a piece of bling! Methinks that Papa Cyrus was away a bit too often when she was little and she's got a wee bit of an attention seeking disorder.
13
Widely known poet/writer Khalil Gibran, author of "The Prophet," upon being asked about sexuality, paced the floor, looked up and said: "What is not sexual?"
7
"“I am literally open to every single thing that is consenting and doesn’t involve an animal and everyone is of age. Everything that’s legal, I’m down with. Yo, I’m down with any adult — anyone over the age of 18 who is down to love me.”
There are many restrictions here. And for Gay folk, males in particular our sex needs, wants, and desires are and have been ILLEGAL today and since the beginning of time. Bisexuals/"fluids"/pansexuals (all labels) and still be with opposite sex and be LEGAL, not beaten, murdered, jailed, thrown off balconies, stoned to death, or disowned and thrown into the street/denied housing and fired from job, as well as refused medical treatment or get pizza for their reception. Would the bisexuals, "no label," "fluid," pansexual, "mostly heterosexual call themselves out for having same-sex sex with a male???????? As a gay ADULT that's my issue!!!!
There are many restrictions here. And for Gay folk, males in particular our sex needs, wants, and desires are and have been ILLEGAL today and since the beginning of time. Bisexuals/"fluids"/pansexuals (all labels) and still be with opposite sex and be LEGAL, not beaten, murdered, jailed, thrown off balconies, stoned to death, or disowned and thrown into the street/denied housing and fired from job, as well as refused medical treatment or get pizza for their reception. Would the bisexuals, "no label," "fluid," pansexual, "mostly heterosexual call themselves out for having same-sex sex with a male???????? As a gay ADULT that's my issue!!!!
4
Miley Cyrus is not showing enlightenment with her pronouncements; she is either being rebellious or attention-seeking. Most of these celeb daughters were unloved, and are generally needy. It is a psychological issue, not a natural biological urge. Get it? Got it? Good.
5
Oh, are you Miley Cyrus's psychiatrist, or do you just play one in the pages of the New York Times?
thank you for your truth!
3
I have always flinched at the "born this way" or "it's genetic" approach and insistence of many gay advocates, for many of the reasons that Mr. Blow points out. That said, in the end, it seems to me after 50 or so years in this game that the vast majority of folks do settle into considering themselves "straight" or "gay" - which are the social constructs. As Gore Vidal often reiterated - "heterosexual" and "homosexual" are mere adjectives describing conduct, not nouns describing discrete groups of human beings.
11
The widely known poet/writer Kahlil Gibran, author of 'The Prophet," upon being asked about sexuality, paced the floor, looked up and said, "What is not sexual?"
9
My candidate: tax returns. Tax returns are not sexual.
If only they were!
If only they were!
Last week I learned that the wonderful Oliver Sacks was gay. Except for wondering if I'd once known this and had forgotten it, this fact was kind of ho-hum to me. What shocked me, however, was that he'd won a weight-lifting championship and that he was a serious open-water ocean swimmer. How had I missed this?
To me it seems a good thing that Mr Blow has spoken out. Here's another person I admire who doesn't conform to the reactionary sexual rules of the right wing. There's Tim Cook: didn't he speak out not long ago about being gay? It matters, because it changes the way we think, but it's not by any means the first thing that crosses my mind when I see a photo or read something about him.
I haven't read "Fire Shut Up In My Bones," so I didn't know anything about Mr Blow's sexuality. Knowing me, I might forget the details. Frankly, I don't care that much about the details. Gay? Bisexual? Linearly one or the other? Or...?
But it's great to hear sexual choices presented in a nonjudgmental and open-minded way.
To me it seems a good thing that Mr Blow has spoken out. Here's another person I admire who doesn't conform to the reactionary sexual rules of the right wing. There's Tim Cook: didn't he speak out not long ago about being gay? It matters, because it changes the way we think, but it's not by any means the first thing that crosses my mind when I see a photo or read something about him.
I haven't read "Fire Shut Up In My Bones," so I didn't know anything about Mr Blow's sexuality. Knowing me, I might forget the details. Frankly, I don't care that much about the details. Gay? Bisexual? Linearly one or the other? Or...?
But it's great to hear sexual choices presented in a nonjudgmental and open-minded way.
10
"“I am literally open to every single thing that is consenting and doesn’t involve an animal and everyone is of age. Everything that’s legal, I’m down with. Yo, I’m down with any adult — anyone over the age of 18 who is down to love me.”
NOTICE THE KEY POINT?
It is "Everything that is legal". This is the desired result of several generations of deliberate "deconstruction" of American culture. Which the deconstructionists would write "American" culture. They deny America was ever anything but a POLITICAL entity. To them an American was someone who made credal assertion that there is and never was anything remotely like "American" culture. The non-judgmentalism of all cultures and lifestyles as being equally arbitrary and thus morally equivalent lowers the bar to that of the merely Legal.
Anything that is legal is good? That turns tolerance on its head and forces each to "celebrate" the particular constellation of desires and aversions of every individual.
Society lacking in organic social cohesive forces is kept from anarchy only by the stern application totalitarian politico-legal boundaries.
Miley, too uneducated to ever understand ,is like a morally repugnant creature of inter-war Berlin.
NOTICE THE KEY POINT?
It is "Everything that is legal". This is the desired result of several generations of deliberate "deconstruction" of American culture. Which the deconstructionists would write "American" culture. They deny America was ever anything but a POLITICAL entity. To them an American was someone who made credal assertion that there is and never was anything remotely like "American" culture. The non-judgmentalism of all cultures and lifestyles as being equally arbitrary and thus morally equivalent lowers the bar to that of the merely Legal.
Anything that is legal is good? That turns tolerance on its head and forces each to "celebrate" the particular constellation of desires and aversions of every individual.
Society lacking in organic social cohesive forces is kept from anarchy only by the stern application totalitarian politico-legal boundaries.
Miley, too uneducated to ever understand ,is like a morally repugnant creature of inter-war Berlin.
3
Funny, I thought the key point was this: "I am literally open to every single thing that is consenting...". Consent addresses the need to respect every individual human being's rights of self-actualization and self-expression. That's the First Amendment right there. What could be more American?
Perhaps your need to judge Miley overrides anything she actually says.
Perhaps your need to judge Miley overrides anything she actually says.
Our culture has demonized sex, and sexual expression, for too long. Ms. Cyrus offers a new approach which is both healthy and moral. She elevates consent to be the most primary concern in sexuality. She rightly rejects underage and beastiality, both of which are forms of lack of consent. By placing such a high value on consent she reaffirms the importance of the dignity of the person in sex. These are the sexual values I want my children to learn. I want them to learn, that above all else, they most respect and love both self and others.
4
i wished the article started where it ended, with the assertion: "attraction is attraction, and it doesn't always wear a label."
the implication from the rest of the article that attraction must equate with sexual consummation, frequent sexual practice, or viable pair bonding.
ms. cyrus is a public figure in the mix of marketing tactics, and anything she says must be leavened by the calculus of "what i say that might be appealing to my target audience." this is basic media devaluation, and i'm surprised mr. blow doesn't reflexively apply it.
what's true of the younger generation is the willingness to set aside sexual orientation as the pretext for judgments of character or human worth. in that sense they should be applauded.
if you want to know about sexual orientation, ask about sexual encounters and sexual experience: in that regard, i don't believe the current youth generation is really that much different from their elders. look at the original kinsey data, for example, as evidence.
the implication from the rest of the article that attraction must equate with sexual consummation, frequent sexual practice, or viable pair bonding.
ms. cyrus is a public figure in the mix of marketing tactics, and anything she says must be leavened by the calculus of "what i say that might be appealing to my target audience." this is basic media devaluation, and i'm surprised mr. blow doesn't reflexively apply it.
what's true of the younger generation is the willingness to set aside sexual orientation as the pretext for judgments of character or human worth. in that sense they should be applauded.
if you want to know about sexual orientation, ask about sexual encounters and sexual experience: in that regard, i don't believe the current youth generation is really that much different from their elders. look at the original kinsey data, for example, as evidence.
2
Miley Cyrus's likely commercial motives strengthen the piece's argument, they do not weaken it. If she's just saying what she thinks will sell, then the implication is that sexual fluidity is broadly acceptable to people her age.
And I don't see why encounters & experience are better indicators of sexual "orientation," whatever that really means, than attraction. Social pressures are far more likely to suppress overt behaviors than desire, which may be kept hidden.
And I don't see why encounters & experience are better indicators of sexual "orientation," whatever that really means, than attraction. Social pressures are far more likely to suppress overt behaviors than desire, which may be kept hidden.
2
Today is Labor Day in case anyone has forgotten. An op-ed on the history of black participation in the US workforce and trade unions during the 20th century that included major events (Great Migration) and major figures (A. Philip Randolph) would have been preferable to this silly overwrought story on sexuality. Shame on you Mr. Blow.
29
Miley Cyrus?
This subject cries out for a far more sensitive approach.
Quit trying to tell people how to be or how to not be.
Better yet get this out of the public media and encourage people to be careful and thoughtful as they find their way.
Physical intimacy at its best is an experience of loving vulnerability.
This subject cries out for a far more sensitive approach.
Quit trying to tell people how to be or how to not be.
Better yet get this out of the public media and encourage people to be careful and thoughtful as they find their way.
Physical intimacy at its best is an experience of loving vulnerability.
4
I care for the next generation and am stunned by the impact of the sexual behavior of parents on every key metric in a child's future. Life expectancy, probability of addiction, probability of going to college, total income all are much less favorable once the child's home life deviates from having a biological father and mother who maintain their marriage and an intact family for the long term.
Children are not toys or hobbies to be cast off in favor of our next pursuit of pleasure. The sociological data clearly states they need a high level of home stability, nurturing by both biological parents working as a team.
Let us not only consider ourselves and our selfish preferences but let us consider the next generation as many of our parents and most of our grandparents did for their children.
Roger Morton
Children are not toys or hobbies to be cast off in favor of our next pursuit of pleasure. The sociological data clearly states they need a high level of home stability, nurturing by both biological parents working as a team.
Let us not only consider ourselves and our selfish preferences but let us consider the next generation as many of our parents and most of our grandparents did for their children.
Roger Morton
18
Somehow I suspect that the word "biological" was inserted into the second paragraph and does not appear is most sociological data. And of course, I'm missing the relevance here to adult sexual identity.
I discovered that the more sex you have, the more open you are to bisexuality etc. I'd guess that many who are rigidly heterosexual are having less than average.
That's it, of course. People who are sexually conservative simply can't get any.
People should be however they want to be. But it's hard to identify in this attention-hungry era how much off this spike is real, promotional, bandwagon jumping or just passing fancy. I'll be curious to see what surveys report 10 years from now.
5
In all my years of std work I never once remember the term bi, or gay, or straight being used in any professional discussion among co-workers.
The forms we filled out ( extremely confidential forms that protected identity I might add) never used the terms gay, straight or bi on them.
We were only interested in what the person did during the time they may have been exposed or infectious. What they did who they did it with was our only concern. Labels not at all.
If we did not have this label issue I believe people could talk about sex more clearly and honestly and with less drama.
Like in baseball where they say you are what your record says you are in STD work you are what you do. What you call it hardly matters.
The forms we filled out ( extremely confidential forms that protected identity I might add) never used the terms gay, straight or bi on them.
We were only interested in what the person did during the time they may have been exposed or infectious. What they did who they did it with was our only concern. Labels not at all.
If we did not have this label issue I believe people could talk about sex more clearly and honestly and with less drama.
Like in baseball where they say you are what your record says you are in STD work you are what you do. What you call it hardly matters.
6
"For instance, according to Gallup, only 48 percent of Americans in 2008 found gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable. That number has now jumped to 63 percent, and among those ages 18-34 it is now at 79 percent."
I would guess that, of the 37 percent of Americans who don't find gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable, the vast majority of them are religious conservatives. Since my sense of morality isn't based on belief in words in some "holy" book from thousands of years ago but rather on reason, I find consensual relations among gays and lesbians to be just as moral as consensual relations among us straight people, and nonconsensual relations (i.e. rape) among gays and lesbians to be just as immoral as nonconsensual relations among us straight people.
I would guess that, of the 37 percent of Americans who don't find gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable, the vast majority of them are religious conservatives. Since my sense of morality isn't based on belief in words in some "holy" book from thousands of years ago but rather on reason, I find consensual relations among gays and lesbians to be just as moral as consensual relations among us straight people, and nonconsensual relations (i.e. rape) among gays and lesbians to be just as immoral as nonconsensual relations among us straight people.
4
I think Bisexuals live on a higher plane than those of us that opt strictly for hetero or gay love/relationships. I think being open to both indicates a broader mind set than I seem capable of attaining.
1
Oh, please. Do what you want. Who cares. No need to claim superiority.
3
Personally I wouldn't mind having three or four wives. Is that kind of pan-sexualism okay?
3
That's not pansexualism.
Apart from her sexual proclvities, Mr. Blow, what other wisdom do you cull from Miley Cyrus and her life experience? Surely you don't look to her for teachings on only one topic? I hope we can look forward to an ongoing series of columns about Things Miley Cyrus Believes.
13
Mr. Blow has jumped the shark.
1
Older is wiser. Considering Miley Cyrus as an authority on anything is insanity. Younger fools will mimic the popular culture's most publicized blatherings, but, as you note, older folks are WISER!
11
Too much time on your hands.
12
Many years ago, a therapist whom I greatly respected, told me that she believed that sexuality is a Bell curve, i.e. a few people at both ends could NEVER be anything other than homosexual or heterosexual. The rest of us fall somewhere in between and where we fall on that curve is a matter of choice, situation, trauma - you name it. I have never heard or read anything that goes against this.
It is well known that there are periods of time in adolescence when due to a variety of circumstances, a teen may dabble or even throw themselves wholly into a homosexual relationship. But as they get older and circumstances change, they may move to become solely heterosexual. I think that the statistics offered in the article may reflect this far more than a shift in values.
My greatest concern is that in today's world, sex has become a bodily function. It has little if anything to do with emotional intimacy, trust, love. It's merely an itch which is scratched with any and all. Whether one is hetero or homo, I believe this is a major mistake that will leave our souls even emptier than they already are due to so many reasons.
As for Miley Cyrus...really?
It is well known that there are periods of time in adolescence when due to a variety of circumstances, a teen may dabble or even throw themselves wholly into a homosexual relationship. But as they get older and circumstances change, they may move to become solely heterosexual. I think that the statistics offered in the article may reflect this far more than a shift in values.
My greatest concern is that in today's world, sex has become a bodily function. It has little if anything to do with emotional intimacy, trust, love. It's merely an itch which is scratched with any and all. Whether one is hetero or homo, I believe this is a major mistake that will leave our souls even emptier than they already are due to so many reasons.
As for Miley Cyrus...really?
10
Like Honest Abe said, you can call a tail a leg but that doesn't make it so.
1
Now you don't have to say anything if you don't want any.
Mr. Blow:
In my opinion we live in a dysfunctional society. We have been so for quite some time. The rampant hypocracy exhibited by our traditional institutions revolves around the acquisition of money and power. The individual matters less and less.
So, we have a society where the individual cries out for attention and validation. The ultimate expression of that is our own bodies. Sexualty has become a battleground of that expression of self. In many ways we are picking up where the unfinished business of the 60's left us. This would include the issue of racism.
Personally, I doubt any studies or statistics that attempt to give reason to any of this. I am sure that we live in very confusing times that have yet to coalesce into a coherent definition. I don't believe that any trends should be separated from the obvious decline across the social spectrum.
From my perspective this sexual soup is a cry for a humanization of a society that has lost its way. I don't think anyone's sexuality is anyone else's business. But, I cannot help but be reminded of "Cabaret" when I think of this issue. Are we becoming freer or more decadent? I'm not sure.
In my opinion we live in a dysfunctional society. We have been so for quite some time. The rampant hypocracy exhibited by our traditional institutions revolves around the acquisition of money and power. The individual matters less and less.
So, we have a society where the individual cries out for attention and validation. The ultimate expression of that is our own bodies. Sexualty has become a battleground of that expression of self. In many ways we are picking up where the unfinished business of the 60's left us. This would include the issue of racism.
Personally, I doubt any studies or statistics that attempt to give reason to any of this. I am sure that we live in very confusing times that have yet to coalesce into a coherent definition. I don't believe that any trends should be separated from the obvious decline across the social spectrum.
From my perspective this sexual soup is a cry for a humanization of a society that has lost its way. I don't think anyone's sexuality is anyone else's business. But, I cannot help but be reminded of "Cabaret" when I think of this issue. Are we becoming freer or more decadent? I'm not sure.
3
Commenters who bring religious morality or skepticism about the existence of bisexuality really fail at a basic level to understand reality, which includes a fairly pervasive presence of fluid and in-between sexuality. That's that point, and it's a good point to hear made occasionally. Thanks, Charles.
There is so much cultural weight pressing against frank acknowledgement of any sexuality besides heterosexual monogamy. Whether a bisexual is precisely 50/50 in splitting their attraction or goes back and forth, or is mostly gay or mostly straight, we are more numerous than gay people. The generation under 45, and especially under 35, who ignore the weight of religion and older-generation expectations, are guaranteeing us a commonality and place in the sun that makes us normal.
So just get used to us, we've been here the whole time. Good for Charles for learning to chill out about who he is. I'm glad I lived long enough to be part of a world where I could too. It took way too long for me.
The task of the liberal West is the respectful experience of the subjectivity of others. Vive le difference. Long live the liberal Western project that embraces difference, not as compulsory, but as fun, interesting, and educational. Sorry for the sourpuss commenters in the thread who aren't thus engaged. Your loss, not ours so much.
There is so much cultural weight pressing against frank acknowledgement of any sexuality besides heterosexual monogamy. Whether a bisexual is precisely 50/50 in splitting their attraction or goes back and forth, or is mostly gay or mostly straight, we are more numerous than gay people. The generation under 45, and especially under 35, who ignore the weight of religion and older-generation expectations, are guaranteeing us a commonality and place in the sun that makes us normal.
So just get used to us, we've been here the whole time. Good for Charles for learning to chill out about who he is. I'm glad I lived long enough to be part of a world where I could too. It took way too long for me.
The task of the liberal West is the respectful experience of the subjectivity of others. Vive le difference. Long live the liberal Western project that embraces difference, not as compulsory, but as fun, interesting, and educational. Sorry for the sourpuss commenters in the thread who aren't thus engaged. Your loss, not ours so much.
3
Wonderful column Charles Blow! It is important for An African American male to write about bisexuality and homosexuality in such a direct and honest way instead of being in denial and on the "down low" which hurts people physically (I.e. Transmission of AIDS, etc.) and psychologically!
24
And exactly how do you know he's being honest? Because he's black?
Thank you.
Just thank you.
(Bisexual and a baby boomer.)
Just thank you.
(Bisexual and a baby boomer.)
9
To all those people who complained that they're tired of all the LBGT business being "in your face", I say this: just try growing up different (i.e. gay/bisexual/trams) in a family/neighborhood/town/state/country/world that overwhelmingly screams HETEROSEXUAL in every movie, novel, restaurant, store, theater or school. If you consider this, you perhaps might find a bit more empathy for the plight of people who are "different."
21
I agree you should choose to follow your heart regardless of gender.
On the other hand, taking Ms. Cyrus' advice to simply choose everybody, well...Sometimes a little discrimination is a good thing.
On the other hand, taking Ms. Cyrus' advice to simply choose everybody, well...Sometimes a little discrimination is a good thing.
3
What are Trump's views on this issue?
3
Don't know. But I doubt he would use Miley Cirus would as a bell weather for sexual "progress"!!!
Trump married an America, a Czech and a Slovenian. And the latter two had four "anchor babies."
"And remember, 2008 is forever ago..."
Based on this phrase maybe you should look to pop-culture for the reasons behind the survey results.
Based on this phrase maybe you should look to pop-culture for the reasons behind the survey results.
4
Mr. Blow, you would have been better off using Sarah Palin as an example of fluidity. Like Cyrus Palin will say or do anything to call attention to herself.
13
Unfortunately, Sarah Palin is not an entertainer, and nobody is proposing Miley Cyrus as a vice-presidential candidate. Cyrus has some talent, and Palin is an aging, talentless grifter who's had her fifteen minutes of (ill) fame.
Miley Cyrus as the personification of your thesis? I agree with many of the others about using Miley Cyrus as the standard bearer for the point of Mr. Blow's OP-ED. You have to be kidding? Everything she says is for theatrical effect, just like Lady Gaga, as a methodology to sell their cult of personality franchise.
Mr. Blow take some personal responsibility for what you and your editors allow you to write. Realistically, would you take this article and sit at your kitchen table with your children and discuss what you are writing as appropriate for their future. In your soul, do you really think this is right for your children, my children, or the future of our society. In my interpretation, you are basically saying for a large portion of our population for every personal encounter their is a sexual calculation regardless of the other individuals sex or sexual preference. Be damned with morality! With our loose moral compasses, why is polygamy still illegal, why does Miley draw a line with animals, why do we have any morale restrictions at all.
Do you see President Obama sitting with his daughters saying Fluidity is acceptable? We, you, do need to put some limits on what is deemed appropriate. Just because we can do something does not necessarily mean we should. You and your editors should take greater care in what ideals you propagate, with power comes responsibility.
Mr. Blow take some personal responsibility for what you and your editors allow you to write. Realistically, would you take this article and sit at your kitchen table with your children and discuss what you are writing as appropriate for their future. In your soul, do you really think this is right for your children, my children, or the future of our society. In my interpretation, you are basically saying for a large portion of our population for every personal encounter their is a sexual calculation regardless of the other individuals sex or sexual preference. Be damned with morality! With our loose moral compasses, why is polygamy still illegal, why does Miley draw a line with animals, why do we have any morale restrictions at all.
Do you see President Obama sitting with his daughters saying Fluidity is acceptable? We, you, do need to put some limits on what is deemed appropriate. Just because we can do something does not necessarily mean we should. You and your editors should take greater care in what ideals you propagate, with power comes responsibility.
22
You go ahead and stick to your own morality and let the rest of us do the same. As history shows us, so called morality has often demanded the crucifixion of love. Never a good idea.
1
I tried to understand what you wrote by reading it three times. All I find is a desperate need to cling to something. Sorry.
Dude, this article is about sexual attraction, not love. I am not stating that you should limit your love for anything or anyone. Simply, we have to have some limits to what is considered right and wrong as a society for with whom we have sexual intimacy. Are you a father? And if so, as a father are you OK with the idea of an adult male being sexually attracted to your 8 year old daughter under the principle of Fluidity. I think not, especially if that adult male acted upon his "Fluidity" attraction. We do have to set some boundaries and free love does have to have some limits.
People who are fluid in their identities - whether sexual, religious, ideological, etc.- can be wonderful people to know, as long as you can accept that the next current may take them away from you, or turn them into someone you don't like. I know someone who has traveled from Jesus Freak, to hard-core Leninist, to Catholicism, to Democratic Party stalwart. He has, however, remained a vegetarian throughout! Have known another guy who has been married four times to three women of three different ethnicities and one Irish man. He loved them all! He is also completely oblivious to having also hurt them all quite badly. Personally, I'll take a reasonably flexible person over a fluid one any day.
13
Thank you for so clearly drawing such a sharp contrast between the faith of the unbelievers and those who seek to follow the Lord: "But he who is joined to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own." (Paul's letter to the Corinthians)
2
Come on, now, Mr. Blow. Haven't you heard the Garfunkel and Oates song, "The College Try?":
"We don't live a in a black and white world
And sexuality exists in the gray
You can't define those roles so rigidly
By saying someone's totally straight or totally gay
Cause people are just people
And love today is omnisexual
God, I love this new side of me
As a modern heteroflexible"
Of course, there is a small difference between "attraction" in the abstract, and the realities of a same-sex experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n39RzgVNP8
Moral of the story: I would not take what 18-24-year-olds have to say about their sexuality, or any other aspect of their identities, as Gospel. They're still figuring things out.... and experience has a way of changing a lot of minds.
"We don't live a in a black and white world
And sexuality exists in the gray
You can't define those roles so rigidly
By saying someone's totally straight or totally gay
Cause people are just people
And love today is omnisexual
God, I love this new side of me
As a modern heteroflexible"
Of course, there is a small difference between "attraction" in the abstract, and the realities of a same-sex experience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7n39RzgVNP8
Moral of the story: I would not take what 18-24-year-olds have to say about their sexuality, or any other aspect of their identities, as Gospel. They're still figuring things out.... and experience has a way of changing a lot of minds.
6
And what does Miley think of the monetary policy of China ...and do you think I could get a sense of the Russian Revolution from her as well. While she's at it. Finally, a “go to” resource for living.
17
Economic policy and history have absolutely nothing in common with one's understanding of one's sexuality. Molly is an expert with regard to her perception of whom she finds attractive, as am I with regard to my attractions and as are you regarding yours. She is not attempting to persuade anyone to adopt her perspective on her own sexuality, nor is Mr. Blow suggesting that her pan sexuality is right for you or me. He points to her only as an example of an attitude that permits greater sexual and relational diversity and tolerance of the orientations of others. Seems to me that what he and Ms. Cyrus are saying to you is "Relax" and stop being so critical of folks who aren't as sexually rigid and constrained as you might like them to be.
1
For some, the order of attraction starts with body first. That’s fine.
-------------------------
You can see where the unease many men feel in the company of gay and bisexual men comes from. If a man does not want be a sex object of desire for other men he is working with, then any pat on the back or friendly smile could be construed as sexual advance.
Can you now see why your admission of being bisexual 'engendered' adverse reaction among at least some?
-------------------------
You can see where the unease many men feel in the company of gay and bisexual men comes from. If a man does not want be a sex object of desire for other men he is working with, then any pat on the back or friendly smile could be construed as sexual advance.
Can you now see why your admission of being bisexual 'engendered' adverse reaction among at least some?
9
"If a man does not want be a sex object of desire for other men he is working with ..."
__________________________
For years, when women complained of being sexual objects at work, we were told that it was a compliment and stop complaining. Reverse the situation, and look who's complaining.
__________________________
For years, when women complained of being sexual objects at work, we were told that it was a compliment and stop complaining. Reverse the situation, and look who's complaining.
1
"If a man does not want be a sex object of desire for other men he is working with, then any pat on the back or friendly smile could be construed as sexual advance. "
Ha. Welcome to being a woman.
Ha. Welcome to being a woman.
2
Your comment makes me think about how much some heterosexual men do not understand about their actions towards women.
1
no one has the right to define or restrict the parameters of another person’s attractions, love or intimacy.
---------------------------------------
Well, if one does not want another to be 'intimate' with him or her, then of course they can define and restrict the parameters of your affection, love, and intimacy. By being bisexual, you are not being fair to either partner in your relationships.
---------------------------------------
Well, if one does not want another to be 'intimate' with him or her, then of course they can define and restrict the parameters of your affection, love, and intimacy. By being bisexual, you are not being fair to either partner in your relationships.
4
You're confusing sexuality and monogamy. Heterosexuals are just as capable as committing to a monogamous relationship or cheating as a bisexual is. You're assuming a bisexual isn't capable of making the choice to be monogamous. Monogamy is a conscious decision, sexuality is a preference from within.
1
Sonny Pitchumani:
You seem to be assuming that 1) bisexuals need to have at least one partner of each (binary) gender at any given time, 2) that they are incapable of being monogamous, and 3) that any state outside of monogamy is "not fair" to the partners involved. Lots of room for debate there!
You seem to be assuming that 1) bisexuals need to have at least one partner of each (binary) gender at any given time, 2) that they are incapable of being monogamous, and 3) that any state outside of monogamy is "not fair" to the partners involved. Lots of room for debate there!
1
Miley Cyrus belongs on the twenty dolor bill.
1
Seriously, "Joe G"? Your comment contains eight words and you did not have time to proofread? "Dolor bill...what is that????????????
1
I must be missing something. The subtext of this column, as in every New York Times writing by this columnist, is our white institutionalized racist society, right? Maybe I’m too sleepy to find it.
I subscribe to live and let live. I don’t want others prying into the bedroom I share with my wife. I have no interest into prying into theirs. LGBT deserve the same respect and should have the same rights as the rest of the population.
On the other hand, I see what attracts attention, from the media and otherwise. It’s not enough to be in the NBA, NFL, [fill in the blank], or to play sports in college or high school. It’s now the first LGBT or if not the first, the second, and down the line. How one plays the game, that’s secondary. In certain quarters, LGBT seems to be almost obligatory. As in the actress who rode the wave of being gay, had a well publicized girl friend, then, “Oops, I’m going to get married. To a guy.”
What’s out there to attract attention, as set out in the column, is out there. While Daniel Moynihan, were he alive, might think of some of it as “Defining deviancy downward,” there it is. Miley Cyrus—society’s role model. If she plays her cards right, when she gets to be 35 she can pull a Donald Trump and run for president.
I subscribe to live and let live. I don’t want others prying into the bedroom I share with my wife. I have no interest into prying into theirs. LGBT deserve the same respect and should have the same rights as the rest of the population.
On the other hand, I see what attracts attention, from the media and otherwise. It’s not enough to be in the NBA, NFL, [fill in the blank], or to play sports in college or high school. It’s now the first LGBT or if not the first, the second, and down the line. How one plays the game, that’s secondary. In certain quarters, LGBT seems to be almost obligatory. As in the actress who rode the wave of being gay, had a well publicized girl friend, then, “Oops, I’m going to get married. To a guy.”
What’s out there to attract attention, as set out in the column, is out there. While Daniel Moynihan, were he alive, might think of some of it as “Defining deviancy downward,” there it is. Miley Cyrus—society’s role model. If she plays her cards right, when she gets to be 35 she can pull a Donald Trump and run for president.
7
Charles, thank you for finally writing about something different than your usual column.
1
Someone should do a study to see what percentage of people couldn’t care less about the sexuality of people other than individuals with whom they are sexually or romantically involved. My guess is that about 89 percent would say they don’t care as long as heterosexuals, gays and lesbians, and bisexuals don’t go overboard with public displays of affection. When asked “Which of the following best describes your sexuality?” 89 percent of those who responded to the YouGov survey said heterosexual, six percent said gay or lesbian, two percent said bisexual, on percent said other and three percent preferred not to say. I wish 97 percent had preferred not to say.
6
Since heterosexuals are the worst offenders in displaying public affection, you should spread the word among them first.
Discussing Miley Cyrus as "charming and revolutionary" instead of with disapproval, or better yet, ignoring her? Mr. Blow has jumped the shark.
14
So, who are you going to quote next? Madonna? Paris Hilton? Kardashians?
28
Charles I was interested in your opening line about not putting people in "boxes". Good.
Why not apply that in your columns on "race"/racism. There you consistently see us (Americans) as members of "races", one Black, one White.
Open your eyes and then abandon that racist belief. Why "racist"? Here is why.
The "races" are the "fatal invention" (read Dorothy Roberts) of racists. So recognize difference not "races".
No more box checking for gender or color.
Please.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Why not apply that in your columns on "race"/racism. There you consistently see us (Americans) as members of "races", one Black, one White.
Open your eyes and then abandon that racist belief. Why "racist"? Here is why.
The "races" are the "fatal invention" (read Dorothy Roberts) of racists. So recognize difference not "races".
No more box checking for gender or color.
Please.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
10
Never happen in your lifetime.
How silly.
The "races" that Charles sees are socioeconomic political educational historic colored American realities. That have nothing to do with the evolutionary DNA genetic biological truth that there is only one surviving modern human race that originated in East Africa about 180-200 thousand years ago.
With regard to the fluidity of human sexual attraction, I much prefer the fiction of Ursula K. Le Guin"s "The Left Hand of Darkness" and Octavia E. Butler's "Xenogenesis"series", "Fledgling", "Kindred", "Bloodchild", "Patternmaster" series and "Parable of the Sower/Talents" to any of Sigmund Freud's tales.
With regard to the fluidity of human sexual attraction, I much prefer the fiction of Ursula K. Le Guin"s "The Left Hand of Darkness" and Octavia E. Butler's "Xenogenesis"series", "Fledgling", "Kindred", "Bloodchild", "Patternmaster" series and "Parable of the Sower/Talents" to any of Sigmund Freud's tales.
1
So, what's wrong with dogs, sheep and horses?
And, why should we deny those under legal age this pleasure of sexual fluidity?
Mr. B, you really need a vacation, sir!
And, why should we deny those under legal age this pleasure of sexual fluidity?
Mr. B, you really need a vacation, sir!
12
It 's called "consent" L.W.
Sigh.
Sigh.
1
Only legal behavior is OK. All legal behavior is therefore OK. Thus who controls the legal apparatus decides. Hence Totalitarianism. Miley is really a twerking fascist.
1
Didn't you read? They can't consent.
Does anyone honestly find Miley Cyrus's comments on anything goes sexuality (as long as its between consenting adults) sexuality "charming?" Would anyone who has a daughter encourage her to follow the example of Miley Cyrus? Some of the legitimate points raised by Mr. Blow are undermined by his using Miley Cyrus as his example.
32
The kids are going to change the world, gender will no longer a useful category in the future. Miley is relevant in that she speaks to the future, whether you like it or not.
I tend to agree. She is something of a flake. But even flakes can tell the correct time twice a day.
One might also ask if we wish to elevate promiscuity to a societal norm or even a social obligation. Yes to gay marriage and openess to new definitions of happiness. But I would draw the line at the commodification of sex and its merchandising to young people as the latest club drug.
Apparent from some of the comments, Sigmund Freud lived and died too soon.
3
It is important not to repress any of our pansexuality and to live it
freely, using good sense. The repression and banning of natural instinct
creates frustration, often resulting in antisocial and violent behaviour as you mentioned. Like the Isley Brothersa say, "Make's me no difference now, who you give your thing to. It's your thing, do what you wanna do."
freely, using good sense. The repression and banning of natural instinct
creates frustration, often resulting in antisocial and violent behaviour as you mentioned. Like the Isley Brothersa say, "Make's me no difference now, who you give your thing to. It's your thing, do what you wanna do."
1
"I sung of Chaos and Eternal Night,
Taught by the heav'nly Muse to venture down
The dark descent, and up to reascend,
Though hard and rare..."
If Miley Cyrus is indeed Charles Blow's muse, it explains, I guess, this sadly confused piece of writing.
Taught by the heav'nly Muse to venture down
The dark descent, and up to reascend,
Though hard and rare..."
If Miley Cyrus is indeed Charles Blow's muse, it explains, I guess, this sadly confused piece of writing.
16
Not but what Miley has her own way of venturing "down the dark descent": "Everything that's legal, I'm down with. Yo, I'm down with any adult--anyone ... who is down to love me". Not exactly what John Milton had in mind, I grant you, but Miley's dark descents (sing, heavenly Miley!) will appeal to many, including, apparently, the aptly named Mr. Blow, "Blown up with high conceits engendering pride", as JM would say.
if a column like this proves anything, it's that people should read more Freud--because for all his silliness at times, he's the guy who first pointed out that there ain't no such animal as "normal," sexuality.
As for Miley Cyrus, who cares. Much rather see Mr. Blow writing about the shabby treatment of gay people in African-American culture, starting perhaps with James Baldwin.
As for Miley Cyrus, who cares. Much rather see Mr. Blow writing about the shabby treatment of gay people in African-American culture, starting perhaps with James Baldwin.
20
Freud was mostly a scientific "psychoanalytic" fraud.
1
I hear "Please don't label me." Then all I hear are labels "I am a gay white cis male," "I am a trans woman of color."
Meanwhile, I'm 100% gay. NEVER had a desire for anything female - and can't even imagine it. Yes - we exist, too.
Meanwhile, I'm 100% gay. NEVER had a desire for anything female - and can't even imagine it. Yes - we exist, too.
20
Labels are really good rhetorical devices (such as in the case of the latin word "cis" as it relates to "trans") that can help make people aware of an experience of difference, which may end up helping politically and socially elevate the people the label describes. But labels are really bad at expressing the true fluidity of experience and the richness and fullness of difference.
Hallelujah! I thought I was the only one. :-p
Great article. A quick scan of the comments suggests that readers do not disagree with the idea that people are fluid in their attractions; somewhere on a continuum. But a lot of huffiness is being wasted on the idea that because people's attractions are fluid so should be their choices.
3
My favorite quote from Shakespeare, "Love looks not with the eyes but with the mind, and therefore is wing'd cupid painted blind." - And there's a reason for it.
In a lot of countries you would be put to death for this.
Which just reinforces my impression that the human race has a single digit I.Q.
In a lot of countries you would be put to death for this.
Which just reinforces my impression that the human race has a single digit I.Q.
23
You give the human race too much credit. IQ's are in the negative column.
Except for you. You've always been ahead of the pack.
1
Collectively, this could be fairly close to the truth, but I suspect it's mainly tribalism.
I am glad she can swing, but just wish she could sing.
10
She has some nice twerking moves.
As the intellect dies the libido awakens.
11
As the libido awakens, so does the intellect.
Either way, I bet you must have some really boring friends.
I have no problem with anyone's sexuality -- or lack thereof; it's up to the individual to determine, not me. But I certainly object to Miley Cyrus being quoted (and lauded!) and the new poet/philosopher/King (Queen?)!
To say the very least: she's not.
To say the very least: she's not.
16
'I'll have sex with any willing, consenting human' is social progress?
31
The second sentence in the Declaration of Independence is: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
What makes people happy varies tremendously. Some -- like say, a certain dentist from Minnesota -- find happiness in killing a lion (and numerous other animals.) Some find happiness in getting tattoos all over their body. Some find happiness in dining at posh restaurants or driving expensive cars. And others find happiness in sleeping with a variety of people.
What I consider social progress is allowing people to have the freedom to pursue happiness in the way they choose (as long as, of course, it doesn't harm others) even if I wouldn't choose to do these things.
What makes people happy varies tremendously. Some -- like say, a certain dentist from Minnesota -- find happiness in killing a lion (and numerous other animals.) Some find happiness in getting tattoos all over their body. Some find happiness in dining at posh restaurants or driving expensive cars. And others find happiness in sleeping with a variety of people.
What I consider social progress is allowing people to have the freedom to pursue happiness in the way they choose (as long as, of course, it doesn't harm others) even if I wouldn't choose to do these things.
Yes, Hunt, the right to have sex with any consenting adult is social progress.
Bravo!
Miley's statement is profoundly depressing (and almost incoherent). She conflates "every single consensual thing" with "love". This is at the heart of how human beings ruin sex. I'll assume Mr. Blow's statistics are correct - that many people say they are attracted to people of both genders. So what? What we want to do and what we ought to do are not the same thing. Similarly, I would argue that indulging in pleasure is not the same thing as achieving happiness - the soul satisfaction of a life lived well.
An observation that human beings are inclined to voracious sexual appetites that do not discriminate for gender, marital status, age, etc. is just not very illuminating. What's the implication? Mr. Blow tells us, "People must be allowed to be themselves, however they define themselves, and they owe the world no explanation of it or excuse for it." He caveats for "honesty" and "safety", but I can't really understand his philosophical basis for doing so in a scenario in which we get to define ourselves however we want and don't have to explain it.
Why do we owe each other honesty or regard safety? I would suggest that these principles are based on a concept of innate dignity of the human person. I would argue that such dignity is diametrically opposed to the idea that "it is morally right to do whatever or whomever I feel like doing".
An observation that human beings are inclined to voracious sexual appetites that do not discriminate for gender, marital status, age, etc. is just not very illuminating. What's the implication? Mr. Blow tells us, "People must be allowed to be themselves, however they define themselves, and they owe the world no explanation of it or excuse for it." He caveats for "honesty" and "safety", but I can't really understand his philosophical basis for doing so in a scenario in which we get to define ourselves however we want and don't have to explain it.
Why do we owe each other honesty or regard safety? I would suggest that these principles are based on a concept of innate dignity of the human person. I would argue that such dignity is diametrically opposed to the idea that "it is morally right to do whatever or whomever I feel like doing".
20
I think you misunderstand Mr. Blow. I don't see him saying "it's right to do whatever you feel like" but rather "no-one else can tell you how you should feel, including to whom you should or do feel attracted". The whole column is focused on feelings, not behaviors, although I do think Mr. Blow could have made that clearer than he did.
It's about time that we, as a society, stop pressuring young people to choose column A or column B on sexuality. Let them be and do what they feel like.
Similarly, I'd like to see Mr. Blow write about the tyrannical attempt of society to force all adults into monogamy. This tyranny has been directed as a weapon of mass destruction into the black community - labeling fathers and mother irresponsible and undeserving, and their children as doomed because the parents failed to me monogamous and married.
Our society needs to be organized based on how people are, not how we imagine they should be. When 50% of children do not live in a husband/wife household, and 30% of young adults are somewhat bi-sexual (meaning they may need more than one partner), we need to change the way we thing about family units, domestic partnership and the like.
Lets organize society the way people are actually choosing to live their lives, and support those choices. Not vilify them, and use outdated norms as weapon to demonize them.
Similarly, I'd like to see Mr. Blow write about the tyrannical attempt of society to force all adults into monogamy. This tyranny has been directed as a weapon of mass destruction into the black community - labeling fathers and mother irresponsible and undeserving, and their children as doomed because the parents failed to me monogamous and married.
Our society needs to be organized based on how people are, not how we imagine they should be. When 50% of children do not live in a husband/wife household, and 30% of young adults are somewhat bi-sexual (meaning they may need more than one partner), we need to change the way we thing about family units, domestic partnership and the like.
Lets organize society the way people are actually choosing to live their lives, and support those choices. Not vilify them, and use outdated norms as weapon to demonize them.
4
You, as a society are composed of yourself and your gut flora and parasites.
I agree with your points in general. But please don't assume that bisexuals are less likely to be monogamous than those at the gay or straight ends of the Kinsey spectrum. Being attracted to both women and men doesn't mean I need to have both types of partner, any more than being attracted to both short and tall people means I can't be monogamous with one short person (or one tall one, if that's who I fall in love with). This is a common stereotype about bisexuals that contributes to the prejudice against us.
Para 2 is trash politics and nothing to do with this unenlightening article that did not educate you in the least. You even got bisexuality wrong!!
Miley Cyrus’s defiant openness about her sexuality will provide encouragement to the more experimental among our people, but also will stimulate the kind of reactionary responses to non-traditional couplings that the Rick Santorums of the world live by. What Miley is calling “pansexualism” is a state that some evolutionary behavioral scientists and a LOT of science fiction writers have regarded as inevitable for some time, as the conditions for survival that created our traditional views become less demanding. What she fails to see is 1) merely by practicing it herself she doesn’t show a way to greater societal willingness to change dramatically and quickly, and 2) her defiance and the support she creates for the reactionary responses actually retards acceptance of a more manageable pace of change.
Santorum and such, when they notice her at all, will use her defiance to claim as evidence that the merely human steps we’ve taken to recognize same-sex marriage and a greater acceptance of non-traditional gender and sexual identities leads to license; a license that they claim directly challenges religious beliefs and what they believe are the supports to civilization. They’ll win over a lot of people, and seek to impose a more generally socially conservative worldview using sexuality as the fulcrum.
We’ll see how influential her defiance really is among the young, who can be just as religious and reactionary as their elders. But actions such as hers create reactions.
Santorum and such, when they notice her at all, will use her defiance to claim as evidence that the merely human steps we’ve taken to recognize same-sex marriage and a greater acceptance of non-traditional gender and sexual identities leads to license; a license that they claim directly challenges religious beliefs and what they believe are the supports to civilization. They’ll win over a lot of people, and seek to impose a more generally socially conservative worldview using sexuality as the fulcrum.
We’ll see how influential her defiance really is among the young, who can be just as religious and reactionary as their elders. But actions such as hers create reactions.
1
The kids are going to change the world, they already are (we're in the middle of a gender revolution) and the Santorums of the world are in the middle of dying out.
All the more reason to stand in opposition to all forms of religious fundamentalism with currently the most threatening being Islamic fundamentalism.
3
Which religious fundamentalists are "most threatening" depends a lot on where you (and they) are, I think. Certainly Christian fundamentalists are a far greater threat to and in the United States than are Islamist ones.
While I applaud more tolerance of all the sexual proclivities today, I do wonder what soundbytes Ms Cyrus might use in a couple of decades to sell her music? How about "polysexual"? Hey, as long it sells.
2
My guess is in a decade, she will decide to do the OPPOSITE of everything here -- convert to a Pentecostal faith, marry a man, have lots of babies, etc. She will repudiate her entire youthful lifestyle!
It will be the only way she can get media attention by then, as her youthful looks will be fading.
It will be the only way she can get media attention by then, as her youthful looks will be fading.
1
Even well written pieces on the authors sexuality are wearing on me now. When will it end? I am not interested in being "converted" and I really don't care about the bedroom habits of strangers or whether or not they marry. If your sexuality doesn't have anything to do with your job then it should not be a factor in having that job. So, that's done.
Isn't there anything else to discuss?
Isn't there anything else to discuss?
19
Margo, we don't live in a Eutopia world or country so your comment is naive. Laws are enacted or dismantled everyday regarding sexuality, especially mine as a gay adult; and YOU, I suspect, is a voting citizen!
There has been an entire issue not just of the NYT but many other fine papers, blogs, websites today alone that has plenty of other things to discuss for you. In fact way too many other things. Why waste your energy one reading and complaining about things of no interest to you.
True bisexual males are black swans.
Repeated psychological assessments have show that over 75% of self-identified male Bi's were gay men who did not want to be identified as gay men.
The actual incidence of actual bisexuality within males was below .7% of the population
2005 "Sexual Arousal Patterns of Bisexual Men.” by Dr. Michael Bailey, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University.
Repeated psychological assessments have show that over 75% of self-identified male Bi's were gay men who did not want to be identified as gay men.
The actual incidence of actual bisexuality within males was below .7% of the population
2005 "Sexual Arousal Patterns of Bisexual Men.” by Dr. Michael Bailey, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University.
12
This is outdated. From the Times Magazine, 3/20/2014, article by BENOIT DENIZET-LEWIS:
"...Bailey did a second study in which he used more stringent criteria to find bisexual-identified test subjects. Instead of advertising in an alternative newspaper and gay magazines, Bailey’s team recruited men who placed online ads seeking sex with both members of a mixed-gender couple. The men also needed to have had romantic relationships with both men and women.
To Bailey’s surprise, the new study — published in 2011 and called “Sexual Arousal Patterns of Bisexual Men Revisited” — found that the bisexual men did in fact demonstrate “bisexual patterns of both subjective and genital arousal.” Their arousal pattern matched their professed orientation..."
"...Bailey did a second study in which he used more stringent criteria to find bisexual-identified test subjects. Instead of advertising in an alternative newspaper and gay magazines, Bailey’s team recruited men who placed online ads seeking sex with both members of a mixed-gender couple. The men also needed to have had romantic relationships with both men and women.
To Bailey’s surprise, the new study — published in 2011 and called “Sexual Arousal Patterns of Bisexual Men Revisited” — found that the bisexual men did in fact demonstrate “bisexual patterns of both subjective and genital arousal.” Their arousal pattern matched their professed orientation..."
Finally a piece that is not about race. Thanks for giving it a break Charles.
10
@JP - JP in my main comment and again in reply to blackmamba I have asked Charles to do the same for "race" as he here does for gender, recognize that there are no uniquely independent "races" but rather a continuum or continua. Charles writes endlessly, as you imply, as if there was a black race and a white race and one could without fail assign a person to one or the other. He simply will not discuss any other way of looking at human difference. Have tried to get him to talk with Svante Pääbo.
1
The vitriolic distain of commenters to this article honestly surprises and saddens me. So you don't like his lead example, that's fine. But that doesn't negate the reality that significant numbers of people, when asked anonymously, identify along that spectrum. And they never need to act on it to be bisexual. You weren't a blank slate until the day you went on your first date. People who remain celibate until marriage don't instantly become gay or straight on their wedding night. If for some reason you never date or marry, you don't lack sexual orientation. Bisexuality exists whether or not you see it or believe it or like the author's examples.
18
Seriously, Charles? Here's a short primer on your "charming" and "revolutionary
champion from Slate Magazine:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/08/31/miley_cyrus_video_music_a...
Human sexuality is far too complicated and important and simple and frivolous to ever be left to the likes of Ms. Cyrus. She is part of the commodity spewing consumer culture that displays human values only by happenstance or when there's a buck to be made. She represents everything that's spurious, vulgar and throw-away in our society. Surely, you can find better examples.
champion from Slate Magazine:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/08/31/miley_cyrus_video_music_a...
Human sexuality is far too complicated and important and simple and frivolous to ever be left to the likes of Ms. Cyrus. She is part of the commodity spewing consumer culture that displays human values only by happenstance or when there's a buck to be made. She represents everything that's spurious, vulgar and throw-away in our society. Surely, you can find better examples.
17
If I was to psychoanalyze this writing I would conclude that Blow is still very much hung up on the bisexual thing. Otherwise he would just shut up about and live his life. Frankly i don't care whether he is a bisexual or not, but like the case of Miley Cyrus I am very tired of hearing about it.
12
I agree with you about Mr Blow. But Miley? I am all ears for every salacious, blow by blow (not that Blow) detail
Miley Cyrus, like young people of every generation, thinks she invented sex and is the first person to enjoy it. She appears simply self-indulgent as opposed to someone who is truly seeking his or her place and goes about it with integrity.
I think Mr. Blow's column is spot on but I wish he had selected a better person to represent his thinking.
I think Mr. Blow's column is spot on but I wish he had selected a better person to represent his thinking.
3
"Miley Cyrus, like young people of every generation, thinks she invented sex and is the first person to enjoy it."
Young people of every generation always think that because older people of every generation always try so hard to pretend to them that it doesn't exist.
Young people of every generation always think that because older people of every generation always try so hard to pretend to them that it doesn't exist.
1
Not unique but to be much more tolerantthis column expresses a point position on the profound changes in morality based beliefs underway in our world. We have always had a small number in western societies who question the basic precepts handed down the ages mostly through the literature of nomadic tribes. It is becoming more common to challenge it particularly among the young who have more to lose by accepting it as the basis for the rest of their lives. I'm sure that a poll would reveal the young to be much more tolerant as well. Of course that tolerance is purely western as demonstrated by the intense pushback in the developing and arab world. Indeed that moral schism is the source of many of our ills; but, not all - unfettered procreation, economic systems based on forever growth, islands of prosperity in an increasingly impoverished world. We live in interesting times. Too bad I'm of an age where I am unlikely to see the struggle work out; or, too lucky.
Past articles have noted that younger people, high school through their 30's, are often hooking-up i.e. having sex, with little emotion attached. Since being LGBT is becoming more acceptable and legal, it doesn't surprise me that this group would be more fluid in choosing sexual partners. It will be interesting to see if this continues throughout the rest of their lives. The results of the survey indicate that as people age they settle down to one sexual identity and my guess, is one partner. If one is truly seeking stability then it's a lot easier to have just one partner. True confession, in my 40's I tried several partners at a time, I was divorced and dating then. Before that I was married and had 2 children. Women didn't interest me, but men did. I found it difficult to sustain anything meaningful with more than 1 partner. If you think life is complicated with 1 person, try 2 or 3. By the time I was in my 40's I was ready to settle down again. I have been with the same partner for some 29 years now and don't regret it. I think we will have to wait and see if this trend in younger people continues as they age. Regarding attraction, that's different. I think we are attracted to a variety of people but don't act on it if we want stable lives. IMO, Miley is just young and desperately wanting attention. I really don't care about her sexuality.
2
I find it wild to hear all the usual suspects, the religious conservatives and the like, claiming Blow is promoting promiscuity or irresponsibility, when he isn't. How is being open to the idea of being attracted to someone of the same sex promoting promiscuity? After all, a straight guy is attracted to a wide variety of women, yet he doesn't have to screw around by admitting a wide variety of girls turn him on. Someone who is bi or pansexual can be attracted to people of various sexes/genders, but it doesn't mean they are having sex with a lot of people irresponsibly.
What this means is that the 3000 year old goat herder or Arab tribal mentality is finally being pushed back, kids are realizing that the old world view of man and women being the only thing isn't true, that they see healthy gay people, bi people, and no longer feel the stigma of what 3000 year old idiots wrote, the same way that most modern people, other than evangelical christians and far too many muslims, have learned that women are not temptresses, the daughter's of Eve or inferior by God's command.
What this means is that the 3000 year old goat herder or Arab tribal mentality is finally being pushed back, kids are realizing that the old world view of man and women being the only thing isn't true, that they see healthy gay people, bi people, and no longer feel the stigma of what 3000 year old idiots wrote, the same way that most modern people, other than evangelical christians and far too many muslims, have learned that women are not temptresses, the daughter's of Eve or inferior by God's command.
11
Ms. Cyrus' comments -- yo, I'm down with anything sexually except animals or kids -- makes one wonder about scat and golden showers. Is that excluded, or she's open to new experiences with anyone and everyone, all takers w/safe and sane consent?
She will retreat from those all-inclusive statements, I think, and who listens to pop stars who have a crazy career history and one of estrangement with her own celebrity father. In short, it was naivete talking, someone with little real world life experience, talking about her charmed celebrity life and what she sees it offering up. Everything and anyone, consenting of course!
Mr. Blow's echoing the barely-out-of-her-teens is sadder still. He should look to a more grown-up celebrity like Kim Kardashian for more practical, real world sex talk.
At least it's not another racial column, and he's not mentioning Miley's white privilege. (just noting, of course, that men have it the roughest. sigh. "I also wrote about the tremendous amount of agitation, and even hostility, that people — particularly men — so identified can engender.")
Mr Blow has three children from a woman he is no longer with. He's got a book, that reveals a lot about his past -- the frat initiation scene really stuck with me.
But what these columnists, like Mr. Bruni's big family Sunday column, miss is that while they might have found something that works for them, they are a minority and have no business pretending their personal lifestyles are open to all.
She will retreat from those all-inclusive statements, I think, and who listens to pop stars who have a crazy career history and one of estrangement with her own celebrity father. In short, it was naivete talking, someone with little real world life experience, talking about her charmed celebrity life and what she sees it offering up. Everything and anyone, consenting of course!
Mr. Blow's echoing the barely-out-of-her-teens is sadder still. He should look to a more grown-up celebrity like Kim Kardashian for more practical, real world sex talk.
At least it's not another racial column, and he's not mentioning Miley's white privilege. (just noting, of course, that men have it the roughest. sigh. "I also wrote about the tremendous amount of agitation, and even hostility, that people — particularly men — so identified can engender.")
Mr Blow has three children from a woman he is no longer with. He's got a book, that reveals a lot about his past -- the frat initiation scene really stuck with me.
But what these columnists, like Mr. Bruni's big family Sunday column, miss is that while they might have found something that works for them, they are a minority and have no business pretending their personal lifestyles are open to all.
2
It seems to me that Mr. blow is saying that bisexuality or other expressions of sexuality are normal. Yet he uses as an example a statement by Miley Cyrus, who chooses to do, say, or be whatever she believes is the most outrageous and abbé rent for the shock value. Clearly she does not share Mr. Blow's heartfelt, and reasoned assertions.
The idea or practice of "pansexuality" seems more about Miley Cyrus's completely self-absorbed, self focused, self obsessed lifestyle than about any revolutionary notions of sexuality. She is a poor example of anything positive.
10
Sexual awareness is probably (maybe obviously) what Genesis is referring to in the fall of Adam. They probably were not courageous enough at that time to admit homosexual attraction. This is probably what all this gay awareness is about today…
i.e. the courage to break away from the norm…
As if heterosexuality should be considered the norm?
i.e. the courage to break away from the norm…
As if heterosexuality should be considered the norm?
1
There is something lost when we see the world around us through the lens of politics. While we have fortunately gained acceptance for people who identify as gay, to label someone gay, or straight, or bisexual is as wrong as trying to divide the world into the gustatory categories chocolate or vanilla lovers. As with our taste in food, our libidos are infinitely varied. No two people are alike in their sexual desires. And our libidos change over time. Do you like mushrooms? Did you always? Do you like anal play? Did you always? Do you like rough sex? Spicy food? Sexy feet? Stinky cheese? Even gay and straight is a continuum, not an absolute. Some find no pleasure at all in the thought of gay (or straight) sex, some must have one not the other, most are somewhere in the middle. Some so close to the middle that we label them bisexual. Others insist that you are more on one side of the gay/straight divide so you must pick. How 1990s! Miley Cyrus’ generation understands this instinctively. We are polymorphously perverse. Learn to love it.
2
Nothing is less interesting than the details of the sex life of a person to whom one is not attracted.
6
We thank the supreme court law for disallowing homosexual conversion therapy, for allowing homosexual pedophiles to walk the streets, and also for giving little 12 yr old girls the "morning after pill", and free abortions....no questions asked, and for legalizing recreational marijuana, and soon to follow.....legalizing recreational heroin and recreational cocaine.
Everyone has the power to say yes or no to God. There is a Heaven for those who follow the word of God. Those that fail to follow the goodness of God live in a state of confusion. There is darkness for those who wish to do as they wish. Atheists say they do not believe in the existence of God nor in the existence of Satan. Atheists are asked how they are able to discern between decent and indecent, between moral and immoral, and between right and wrong when raising a family and little children. Atheists are asked if they depend on the supreme court and man’s laws to provide those answers. Atheists are asked if their parents and families taught them right from wrong. Atheists are asked if their past generations of family histories were founded in Christianity, the Bible, church and God. Their answer is I believe in no one, I am who I am, I answer to no one, and I do what I want to do.
Jesus said, “Forgive them for they know not what they do.” These words will only have meaning to Christians, but not to atheists and agnostics who support indecent and immoral supreme court rulings.
Everyone has the power to say yes or no to God. There is a Heaven for those who follow the word of God. Those that fail to follow the goodness of God live in a state of confusion. There is darkness for those who wish to do as they wish. Atheists say they do not believe in the existence of God nor in the existence of Satan. Atheists are asked how they are able to discern between decent and indecent, between moral and immoral, and between right and wrong when raising a family and little children. Atheists are asked if they depend on the supreme court and man’s laws to provide those answers. Atheists are asked if their parents and families taught them right from wrong. Atheists are asked if their past generations of family histories were founded in Christianity, the Bible, church and God. Their answer is I believe in no one, I am who I am, I answer to no one, and I do what I want to do.
Jesus said, “Forgive them for they know not what they do.” These words will only have meaning to Christians, but not to atheists and agnostics who support indecent and immoral supreme court rulings.
2
The bigotry and ignorance contained within your comment and opinions is stunning, though sadly all too familiar in this day and age.
It never ceases to amaze me how certain the Faithful Crowd is that if we all just do what they want, think what they want, act they way they want, and generally march in lockstep that all will be good in the world.
What a profoundly silly and destructive way to think. Certainly there was much lockstep in the Catholic Church. How has that worked out re: pedophilia and child rape? Plenty of lockstep thinking in the GOP and among many many evangelical leaders – and their followers – who have taken spectacular falls from grace.
BTW, the single largest category of pedophilia in the world, yes including the USA, is fathers who sexually abuse and rape their daughters, yet I see that did not warrant one word of outrage in your expose.
It never ceases to amaze me how certain the Faithful Crowd is that if we all just do what they want, think what they want, act they way they want, and generally march in lockstep that all will be good in the world.
What a profoundly silly and destructive way to think. Certainly there was much lockstep in the Catholic Church. How has that worked out re: pedophilia and child rape? Plenty of lockstep thinking in the GOP and among many many evangelical leaders – and their followers – who have taken spectacular falls from grace.
BTW, the single largest category of pedophilia in the world, yes including the USA, is fathers who sexually abuse and rape their daughters, yet I see that did not warrant one word of outrage in your expose.
"Everyone has the power to say yes or no to God."
Good. I choose 'no'. He sounds like an awful person.
Good. I choose 'no'. He sounds like an awful person.
1
ManofLaMancha,
You are tilting at windmills. And your fantasies about what atheists believe or don't believe are just silly. And remember that Jesus was not ever a Christian.
You are tilting at windmills. And your fantasies about what atheists believe or don't believe are just silly. And remember that Jesus was not ever a Christian.
1
Am I the only one who is sick to death of people announcing their sexual preferences to the world?
21
This isn't Nam. This is bowling. There are rules.
What is yours?
As an adult, bisexual, married to a woman, and faithful, I appreciate Charles Blow's argument. Thank you very much for writing this column, and for reemphasizing your own sexual identity. I also find comfort in the top three comments to this column, all of which are excellent.
I am, however, less critical of Ms. Cyrus than others. I think that she is a reaction to the porn culture, to be sure, but not an unhealthy one. I completely agree that she is "narcissistic self-indulgent" and "tasteless." However, these attributes are the same attributes that youth have always had. She also values love, tolerance, and freedom. Today's youth, as well as our adults, have access to and enjoy highly sexualized entertainment. That's not going to change. Miley, however, encourages love and tolerance as part of that entertainment, and that is a good thing.
I am, however, less critical of Ms. Cyrus than others. I think that she is a reaction to the porn culture, to be sure, but not an unhealthy one. I completely agree that she is "narcissistic self-indulgent" and "tasteless." However, these attributes are the same attributes that youth have always had. She also values love, tolerance, and freedom. Today's youth, as well as our adults, have access to and enjoy highly sexualized entertainment. That's not going to change. Miley, however, encourages love and tolerance as part of that entertainment, and that is a good thing.
5
Perhaps in his next column, Mr. Blow can write about the fluidity of race - and he can take as an example President Obama, who seems to be in denial that he is half-white.
Even Mr. Blow seems to be in denial about this aspect of President Obama, always referring to him as a "black" president (and using the go-to argument that any criticism of the president is by its very nature racist).
When is Mr. Blow going to explore this "dark" side of President Obama, consisting of his whiteness.
Even Mr. Blow seems to be in denial about this aspect of President Obama, always referring to him as a "black" president (and using the go-to argument that any criticism of the president is by its very nature racist).
When is Mr. Blow going to explore this "dark" side of President Obama, consisting of his whiteness.
4
By American socioeconomic political educational colored one-drop rule historical reality there is no such thing as being half-white in America. Neither President Obama nor Mr. Blow can deny their physically colored reality that justified enslavement and Jim Crow for their kind.
When are you Canadians going to learn to read and write American so that you can understand and know American history? Meanwhile mind your own Canadian business. And please take Rafael Cruz back.
When are you Canadians going to learn to read and write American so that you can understand and know American history? Meanwhile mind your own Canadian business. And please take Rafael Cruz back.
Maybe he's leaving that to Hillary! who'll drop a "g" when the feeling's right.
Why is it of late that when Mr. Blow addresses race relations and sexual identity, it comes off less as an instructive moment for his readership than as a cathartic moment for him and about him?
3
The next and most socially useful stage will occur when young men won't feel they have to me macho to be men.
1
...or drink excess amounts of beer, or be rude, loud and boorish, disrespectful, molesting or assaulting to women, men and animals...
Thanks for your ignorance towards biology. How 'bout that global warming... ooooh, it's hot!
Mr Blow,
I am a Christian so my views are predicated on what the Bible says.Having said that I really don't care if you are bisexual.Think about it.Gay marriage is now the law of the land, gays adopt kids, they are scout masters, teachers, pastors, they are in every fabric of our society. My views will not stop the tidal wave of public opinion that is sweeping this country.
What I object to is being demonized for being a Christian and having the views I have. It is very clear the position of this paper is to do that. Many columns have been written this year and LGBT and transgender rights are evidence of that. That's fine. AT this point I am suppose to make the obligatory comment about knowing a lot of gay people. I do, so what' s the point? We have many interesting and thought provoking conversations. And why even though we don't agree we don't attack.To do that shows ignorance, stupidity, insensitivity and intolerance.
Why is it I am condemned for being a Christian? Because I disagree? Here's a news flash. It's my right! Why should I be called a homophobe or any other slur when it is not the case? Why are people allowed to post comments using that slur? By allowing that it sends a very clear message that intolerance and libelous comments are allowed.
I am more than willing to have a fair and honest discussion but not when slurs are allowed. It's a one sided discussion. Your side. To dissent brings recrimination, insults and slurs. Pretty sad example of tolerance
I am a Christian so my views are predicated on what the Bible says.Having said that I really don't care if you are bisexual.Think about it.Gay marriage is now the law of the land, gays adopt kids, they are scout masters, teachers, pastors, they are in every fabric of our society. My views will not stop the tidal wave of public opinion that is sweeping this country.
What I object to is being demonized for being a Christian and having the views I have. It is very clear the position of this paper is to do that. Many columns have been written this year and LGBT and transgender rights are evidence of that. That's fine. AT this point I am suppose to make the obligatory comment about knowing a lot of gay people. I do, so what' s the point? We have many interesting and thought provoking conversations. And why even though we don't agree we don't attack.To do that shows ignorance, stupidity, insensitivity and intolerance.
Why is it I am condemned for being a Christian? Because I disagree? Here's a news flash. It's my right! Why should I be called a homophobe or any other slur when it is not the case? Why are people allowed to post comments using that slur? By allowing that it sends a very clear message that intolerance and libelous comments are allowed.
I am more than willing to have a fair and honest discussion but not when slurs are allowed. It's a one sided discussion. Your side. To dissent brings recrimination, insults and slurs. Pretty sad example of tolerance
5
Too many Christians have been targeting gays (GLBT) for spiritual abuse and secular civil discrimination and worse for far too long.
Personal beliefs are one thing, but persecuting gays is another.
Personal beliefs are one thing, but persecuting gays is another.
Younger people are quite free and accepting about sexuality, and thank you Charles Blow for writing a column about it. The young people I know are also quite responsible and aware that they are living in difficult economic times. So while they are socially accepting, the young people I know tend to be economically pragmatic and responsible. Let's leave them a good world.
2
Thank you Mr. Blow for your course: Attraction 101. People do not have to accept anything and everything that comes down the pike for purposes of attraction. We do have a responsibility to acknowledge there are those different from us and respect their freedom to be what they are and not be hostile to others. No one, however, should be imposed upon to embrace anything that merely exists. That's what individual freedom is all about.
2
Glad to learn I've always been unusual. I'm in the 45-64 group who does not identify as exclusively straight or gay. Yes, I'm married and monogamous with someone of the opposite sex. But I've always been attracted to both men and women. Attraction doesn't stop just because you get married, even if what you do about it does.
4
The fluidity description strikes at the heart of the "born that way" argument.
1
Several years ago, a Democratic fundraiser and a Republican consultant started a bogus "centrist" political entity called "No Labels." A well-funded entity, it turned out to be yet another "popular" front for corporations. However, many were attracted to the name.
Charles, we are born into so many boxes: gender, race, sexuality, religion, community. We receive our first world outlook from our parents, their friends, and our teachers. We are told that good children are seen but not heard.
When does that change?
It occurred to me recently that the very people who yell FREEDOM the loudest are the same folks who would restrict others' freedom in the realms of gender, sexuality, and religion. You are free to do things their way. If you are gay and would like to marry, you can do so only with their permission. That's because they value FREEDOM as long as it's theirs. Yours? Don't be silly.
Fifty years ago the greatest taboo for these people was miscegenation. Now it's gay marriage. Imagine if their children ever became open about sexual attraction to people of both genders! Ah me.
From my teens to my 30's, I trained and worked in the theater. Although I remained exclusively hetero, I was attracted to a lot of people, some of them guys. However, my CCD training and phobias kicked in, precluding possibilities. I don't regret my decisions, but I do sometimes wonder.
Every time a kid breaks out of one of the confining boxes he or she is made to feel shame. Shame on the shamers.
Charles, we are born into so many boxes: gender, race, sexuality, religion, community. We receive our first world outlook from our parents, their friends, and our teachers. We are told that good children are seen but not heard.
When does that change?
It occurred to me recently that the very people who yell FREEDOM the loudest are the same folks who would restrict others' freedom in the realms of gender, sexuality, and religion. You are free to do things their way. If you are gay and would like to marry, you can do so only with their permission. That's because they value FREEDOM as long as it's theirs. Yours? Don't be silly.
Fifty years ago the greatest taboo for these people was miscegenation. Now it's gay marriage. Imagine if their children ever became open about sexual attraction to people of both genders! Ah me.
From my teens to my 30's, I trained and worked in the theater. Although I remained exclusively hetero, I was attracted to a lot of people, some of them guys. However, my CCD training and phobias kicked in, precluding possibilities. I don't regret my decisions, but I do sometimes wonder.
Every time a kid breaks out of one of the confining boxes he or she is made to feel shame. Shame on the shamers.
4
Thank you for this.
I envy the youth, who don't have to struggle through this, like (and most likely BECAUSE) people of my generation did.
At age 57, I'm finally becoming open to the possibilities of bi- / pan- / whatever-sexuality. The only thing that truly matters to me is that it is based upon respect. Miley put it much more specifically, but yes, her approach is also based upon respect.
It's still difficult for people of my generation because of the history and baggage of the early struggles. I guess all that I hope is that people will be kind and as accepting to us as they seem to be to the youth talked about in the article.
I envy the youth, who don't have to struggle through this, like (and most likely BECAUSE) people of my generation did.
At age 57, I'm finally becoming open to the possibilities of bi- / pan- / whatever-sexuality. The only thing that truly matters to me is that it is based upon respect. Miley put it much more specifically, but yes, her approach is also based upon respect.
It's still difficult for people of my generation because of the history and baggage of the early struggles. I guess all that I hope is that people will be kind and as accepting to us as they seem to be to the youth talked about in the article.
3
I always remember a saying from college statistics class way back over 40 years ago---"Figures lie and liars figure".
Opinion polls and surveys even by respected pollsters are so easily manipulated that they mean next to nothing. If you have enough money you can always buy a pollster to "prove" whatever you want.
The entire article is nothing but maybes and what ifs full of very convenient and very self serving propaganda that proves nothing.
And opinion polls and surveys are not substitutes for democracy.
Opinion polls and surveys even by respected pollsters are so easily manipulated that they mean next to nothing. If you have enough money you can always buy a pollster to "prove" whatever you want.
The entire article is nothing but maybes and what ifs full of very convenient and very self serving propaganda that proves nothing.
And opinion polls and surveys are not substitutes for democracy.
2
Mr. Plumpe --- "opinion polls and surveys are not substitutes for democracy." Indeed they are not. That's why we have things like legislation and Supreme Court decisions! :-)
This is refreshing! I remember going to high school in the 60's and being told by a "Health Care" class teacher (the burly football coach) about what to do when "one of 'those types' approaches you in the shower...there's only one way to handle that!). We all laughed when told the remedy yet I know that even back then there were several young teenage boys in that class that sank into their seats as the coach expressed his rage against homosexuality. Not too long after that class one of the boys committed suicide. Few will remember Joseph Wall. He was a kind and gentle soul. His father had passed away a few years earlier. He too was a gentle and compassionate man. Joseph spoke differently than we did. He also wore a little bit of make-up. I remember some guys who offered snide and brutal remarks about that. It was none of their business.
I wonder how many other wonderful young people took their own lives or lived in fear of being revealed.
Shortly before Joe died, he took me for a ride in his new Oldsmobile Tornado. He talked about the advantages of front wheel drive and how it felt to be pulled around corners rather than pushed.
Wouldn't it have been wonderful if we all could have turned the corner many years ago. We lost Joe. I hope we don't have to lose anyone else.
We need to let people live in peace to accept them whatever their sexual and gender choices.
I wonder how many other wonderful young people took their own lives or lived in fear of being revealed.
Shortly before Joe died, he took me for a ride in his new Oldsmobile Tornado. He talked about the advantages of front wheel drive and how it felt to be pulled around corners rather than pushed.
Wouldn't it have been wonderful if we all could have turned the corner many years ago. We lost Joe. I hope we don't have to lose anyone else.
We need to let people live in peace to accept them whatever their sexual and gender choices.
8
I'm surprised your comment has only 5 likes (now 6)
Well, I may be way off my rockers here thinking beyond ---- but has one ever considered how in the beginning, when man traveled about, owning nothing, living off the land --- how good/fair women were his greatest possession and how they were sought after and how they increased his being? Fifty sons to none was an advantage. "She" was his only possession. Man didn't have real estate or stocks - he had a few good women to increase his being. Had the bible been accepting of homosexuality, in that day, I would imagine, the men would have killed the women, and many of us wouldn't be here today. I don't know if that is still the case today where possessions abound, but I am still no match for a 250 lb. athlete, in a competition for ones' love, so I guess, I would be killed or die. As far as wrong or right, and who goes to heaven, ---- heaven is not ours --- we cannot shut one out or give it away to another, even though many try.
1
I appreciate the Mr. Blow's honesty and courage regarding his sexuality. His authenticity is powerful and lends credence to the perspective offered by a younger generation.
While boxes are important to quantify important data and information about populations of people, they can be limiting when applied at the individual level. This article well illustrates the complexity in getting this right.
While boxes are important to quantify important data and information about populations of people, they can be limiting when applied at the individual level. This article well illustrates the complexity in getting this right.
2
I see the issue a little differently. I've always said, my attractions are not hemmed in by a rejection or disgust of one gender or the other. Maybe I'm a bit arrogant; I feel I can see the whole world around me not just half of it. I've never married and don't have sex often because of all the complications but I'm aroused by what I see every day. Being attracted doesn't mean going for it. I wouldn't have the time or energy.
1
If people spent half as much time on determining their spiritual orientation as they did on their sexual orientation, they might just reach a happy balance between both, their physical and metaphysical urges?
3
To not acknowledge the attraction of both sexes is to be blind the beauty in half the population. Being open to the possibility seems only reasonable.
1
Bisexuals, or anyone with some form of attraction to both genders, need to see more articles like this in major publications. We feel invisible. It's nice to see that the world outside of us knows that we exist. There are many of us out there, and 99.9999% of us are not young pop stars.
2
We also have to keep in mind that the youngest group of adults today have grown up with exposure to hard core pornography at a very young age. Boys saw threesomes by watching porn, so they wanted their girls to engage in threesomes, so bisexuality became popular for young women for awhile. No doubt they also watch alternative pornography and those who are curious experiment. Porn has broken down many sexual behaviours but we really need to study how this early exposure (to both boys and girls) may be affecting their ability to stay monogamous and their ability to integrate sex and love.
2
To each his own, but personally, I believe the promotion of homosexuality leaves the female extinct one day. It's probably why it was declared an abomination. I will never be able to understand how a man or woman cannot see the beauty in/of the opposite sex.
1
It is the male Y chromosome that is headed towards extinction. There are all female vertebrate species among fish, amphibians and reptiles.
I think the distinction between sex and sexual attraction is an important one. Sex is first and foremost a manner of reproduction. (Viewed in that light, you haven't successfully engaged in sex until you have produced an offspring.) However, as critical as sexual reproduction is to the species, we humans spend a great deal of our time focusing on culturally relevant variations of mating behavior: the sex act and sexual attraction.
Obviously, there is considerable hard-wiring that controls mating behavior, and the biological reasons why things evolved as they did are perfectly clear. But given the current success of our species, few among us feel any obligation to produce an offspring, and so success in mating is not generally viewed as being directly related to reproduction.
This shift has allowed us to expect different things from mating: success in mating is now viewed as being more about fully satisfying our personal sexual preferences and to fulfill our personal emotional needs.
One of the interesting things that has come out of this new freedom is the discovery that our biological hard wiring is much more diverse than had previously been thought, plus the opportunity to explore that diversity culturally. This has created a growing “second sexual revolution”, one that may end up dwarfing the one triggered by wide availability of birth control.
Like any large revolution, there will always be a large opposing reaction, so be careful out there, sexual warriors!
Obviously, there is considerable hard-wiring that controls mating behavior, and the biological reasons why things evolved as they did are perfectly clear. But given the current success of our species, few among us feel any obligation to produce an offspring, and so success in mating is not generally viewed as being directly related to reproduction.
This shift has allowed us to expect different things from mating: success in mating is now viewed as being more about fully satisfying our personal sexual preferences and to fulfill our personal emotional needs.
One of the interesting things that has come out of this new freedom is the discovery that our biological hard wiring is much more diverse than had previously been thought, plus the opportunity to explore that diversity culturally. This has created a growing “second sexual revolution”, one that may end up dwarfing the one triggered by wide availability of birth control.
Like any large revolution, there will always be a large opposing reaction, so be careful out there, sexual warriors!
2
The Sacred Band of Thebes was a legendary elite military unit in ancient Greece made up of 150 pairs of male lovers. They were the only unit to ever defeat the Spartans when evenly matched. And they did it twice. When Alexander the Great's elite Companion cavalry defeated them in battle he wept.
To be human is to stereotype. Our early brain structure function is focused on survival and still dictates we process extremely quickly for threats so we have a checklist and anything outside the list screams risk. If someone appears different from our accepted view of ourselves or tribe we immediately trigger fear and fear requires a response of fight or flight. Only through education can we curb the excessive need to react to these primitive emotions. So many comments here are based on a checklist response.
5
Skepticism of proclaimed bisexuals stems from experience. 99.5% of the time, men who identify as bi are gay but want to avoid the stigma while women who do are "just experimenting" and end up married to achiever males (LUG = Lesbian Until Graduation) or they're pop stars trying to appear edgy. Miley Cyrus and Lily Rose Depp can announce their fluidity all they want - it titillates straight men, gets them press and costs them nothing. On the other hand, male public figures who claim bisexuality are trying to protect themselves from career-destroying contempt and ridicule. This says a lot about our society. I'm sure there is a small percentage of genuine bisexuals out there but in the main, it's a device.
4
Human sexuality has always been fluid, and societies have always accommodated some parts of the spectrum and not other parts. We are no exception. Note the 18-year cutoff, for example, and more broadly, our society's disapproval of sexuality expressed between people of sharply differing ages. The harem / polygynous marriage is as much part of the human condition as the pair bond, but serves today as a rhetorical stop somewhere below homosexual marriage on the Slippery Slope to depravity. Sexual attraction does serve purposes of social cohesion, with and without genital activity, and societies manage this in different ways.
1
Sexual attraction is nothing more than mere Lust. Lust has always been one of the seven deadly sins. It was a sin in the first place because mere Lust did not lead to lasting relationships that fostered secure families, children, and making decisions for other than selfish reasons.
Lust and acting on it is one the most selfish human actions possible.
Lust and acting on it is one the most selfish human actions possible.
3
Man kind and woman kind live and procreate by lust based upon their primary and secondary sexual characteristics driven by genetic and hormonal biological nature. The seven deadly sins are some theological judgmental clap trap from a clergy caste seeking a tithing compliant congregation. Lust is the prelude to making love and babies. If God did not intend humanity to be lustful then why didn't he make us incapable of lust?
1
We are born sexual creatures. You don't have to go looking for it, it will find you very early on. Animals in nature don't ask questions they just proceed as their genes dictate. Apparently, by nature's calling, we are supposed to be very, very fluid in our youth, however, laws proscribe this more so for economic and political reasons than biological reasons, in my opinion. Restraint and caution only come into play as we grow older and realize that reproductive rights have been politicized...to the point of neurosis it sadly seems.
2
Sexual orientation, sexual attraction, and who we have sex with can be different things to different people. Labels just confuse things or they attempt to give larger meaning or significance to what many see as just getting off.
Just getting off can be an end of its own.
Anyone who has interviewed straight female swingers or men who have sex with other men knows that what we normally want as far as a mate and what we do sexually with people we meet may be totally different. The one----what we want-----can be totally different from what we do.
I have interviewed dozens and dozens of men who identified as straight, claimed to only be attracted to woman, and only looked at straight porn-----yet daily or weekly they would stop into a tea room to give or take relief.
Not a same sex attraction as such. They may not even see the person they are having sex with. But something else. A sexual rush? A sexual release? A sign of sex addiction? A habit? Maybe all of the above.
Female straight swingers also have a lot of same sex acts. But that is usually only during play dates. And often it's more a performance for others as much as it is for the woman.
More complicated than we think or a lot more simple?
In this case it is what it is.
Just getting off can be an end of its own.
Anyone who has interviewed straight female swingers or men who have sex with other men knows that what we normally want as far as a mate and what we do sexually with people we meet may be totally different. The one----what we want-----can be totally different from what we do.
I have interviewed dozens and dozens of men who identified as straight, claimed to only be attracted to woman, and only looked at straight porn-----yet daily or weekly they would stop into a tea room to give or take relief.
Not a same sex attraction as such. They may not even see the person they are having sex with. But something else. A sexual rush? A sexual release? A sign of sex addiction? A habit? Maybe all of the above.
Female straight swingers also have a lot of same sex acts. But that is usually only during play dates. And often it's more a performance for others as much as it is for the woman.
More complicated than we think or a lot more simple?
In this case it is what it is.
1
Sexual fluidity viewed as a continuum of behavior just as other behaviors are viewed seems to make most sense. As far as monogamy, as a heterosexual male may stray from monogamy and find another female, or a heterosexual female may stray and find another male, so a sexually fluid individual in a monogamous relationship may stray to another partner (male or female). I don't see how heterosexuality insures greater monogamy. Loyalty and commitment are the qualities in play here.
1
The left has been preaching their gospel of "sexual liberation" since the 60's. It is still a recipe for unhappiness, exploitation, irresponsibility and sickness (just look at the rates of STDs for those living like this).
While it is not the role of government to regulate people's sex lives, It is the role of government to encourage healthy behavior and discourage foolish behavior. What Mr. Blow is promoting is foolishness.
While it is not the role of government to regulate people's sex lives, It is the role of government to encourage healthy behavior and discourage foolish behavior. What Mr. Blow is promoting is foolishness.
2
What you are promoting is Uncle Sam in our bed rooms, living rooms, family rooms, cars, doctor's offices, hospital rooms, marital altars, church pews and class rooms. What you are suggesting is tyranny.
I am not sure what is "revolutionary" and evolved about promiscuity. In general I find that the approach of Miley Cyrus and others shows a deep, deep lack of self respect regarding one of life's great mysteries. I think her attitude speaks less to her personal "evolution" and more to her complete lack of anything meaningful to occupy her time and whatever intellect she may possess. I don't care whom or what you choose to commit to - but please, mature adults do commit. We cannot be adolescent forever.
1
Who does Miley Cyrus think that she a Catholic Pope, Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop, Priest or Nun?
Interesting column. All the bisexual people I know (at least a dozen) are in their 50's, 60's, and 70's.
Sounds like the young people are reinventing the wheel we had back in the 1970's in San Francisco where we had the Bisexual Center and talked about exactly the same issues of attraction...
Glad Mr. Blow continues to spread the word. I heard his speech at the Commonwealth Club when his book came out and greatly appreciated his honesty....
Sounds like the young people are reinventing the wheel we had back in the 1970's in San Francisco where we had the Bisexual Center and talked about exactly the same issues of attraction...
Glad Mr. Blow continues to spread the word. I heard his speech at the Commonwealth Club when his book came out and greatly appreciated his honesty....
20
Bill in Phoenix: Are you a mental health professional? Well, I am. And I can tell you that bisexuality is not a mental illness. Be careful about spreading misinformation when you are not fully informed...
Bill, I hope you will!
I hope Mr. Blow will do a series of passionate columns on sexual orientation, as he does on race, to reach out to the African American community, which is not very accepting of the LGBT community.
24
Sexual orientation isn't just about sexual attraction but about emotional attraction. And by that definition almost every American male I know, who prefers hanging out with his bros than with his wife or girlfriend, is bisexual. But who cares about labels? People are people and that's the end of it.
11
Sexual orientation _is_ about sexual attraction. My feeling close to my male friends and "loving" them does not mean I would ever have sex with them, or consider myself "bisexual". Sex is part of the word.
tolerance and choice is fine. However, I suspect this is Charles Blow seeking acceptance as much as a change in fundamental sexual identification.
3
I suspect you are correct.
The Venus de Milo and Michelangelo's David stand mute before the human gaze as testimony to the enduring value of art and the universality of beauty as a Platonic ideal. Their appeal as works of art is their mystery and the fact that the artist gives the viewer enough space and respect to form his or her own views and reactions. Admiring them has nothing to do with sexual orientation or where one falls on the sexual "spectrum." By contrast, all Miley Cyrus and Charles Blow do is talk, talk, talk about that which is of the least interest, their sexual preferences and habits. They then try to develop a tiresome thesis about pansexuslity. Please spare us.
11
To be fair to Miley, it's not just talk, talk, talk. She sings too (quite well imho), and then (coming back to sex) there is the action. But that would be telling, and telling is just... talk.
I am a 73-year-old straight man who has had many close friends who were homosexual or bisexual. I have also had friends who were vegetarians. My attitude towards those groups is the same: I'm not one, but I respect their choices.
76
An interesting analogy. I assume you're a strict carnivore, because otherwise you're bivore, too...
Other than big mouths, I cannot find in Cyrus or Blow a basis of authority to speak for the American culture or for the neurobiology of the species. At core would seem to be the fundamental disconnect between sexuality and the creation and upbringing of children by their life-long, mutually faithful biological parents.
Once that is broken, then anything goes, or Blows. Already, the Times has published essayists, again mere loud mouth Opinionators, advocating polygamy.
But the rage of the ISIS be headers, all male, shows already today what results from polygamy in Islam -- winner-take-all alpha males, with the losers left with no other option than kidnapping children and raping them, with religious ritual.
Blow can make his inferences, but such conjecture equally connects the root of pansexual fluidity with Islamic polygamy and the geopolitical pandemonium that leaves lifeless three years boys face down on the beach.
Once that is broken, then anything goes, or Blows. Already, the Times has published essayists, again mere loud mouth Opinionators, advocating polygamy.
But the rage of the ISIS be headers, all male, shows already today what results from polygamy in Islam -- winner-take-all alpha males, with the losers left with no other option than kidnapping children and raping them, with religious ritual.
Blow can make his inferences, but such conjecture equally connects the root of pansexual fluidity with Islamic polygamy and the geopolitical pandemonium that leaves lifeless three years boys face down on the beach.
2
Wow. Did we read the same column? Your comment is absurd.
Wow, this is a loose game of connect the dots...you have anything to back up your connections other than your neurons?
Face it. Human sexuality is as varied as humans themselves are. Kinsey indicated that years ago. Sexuality is expressed along a spectrum of behaviors that does not fit nicely into box "a" or "b".
Like it or not Miley is pointing that out along with the incongruncy of a culture that wants things neater.
Who cares what Miley does in bed is exactly the point. Who cares what anybody does in bed. Folks that claim they do are acting on fear.
Like it or not Miley is pointing that out along with the incongruncy of a culture that wants things neater.
Who cares what Miley does in bed is exactly the point. Who cares what anybody does in bed. Folks that claim they do are acting on fear.
26
I don't know. The first thing that came to mind was the young women at a local college who refer to themselves as LUGs -- lesbian until graduation. Maybe the surveys tell us something about real ambivalence in sexuality and maybe they don't. In any event, this piece comes across as a bit self-serving. Mr. Blow is not an expert in sexuality, but someone who experiences life as a bi-sexual. The evidence and opinions are thus quite limited and subject to confirmation bias. I would like to see a more informed view.
12
@You've Got to be Kidding Here and there
I never heard of LUGs before but given all that we see about rape on campus, I can understand why college women might take that approach.
I never heard of LUGs before but given all that we see about rape on campus, I can understand why college women might take that approach.
Reason and Emotion form our being. Rationalizing, all our emotional worlds, is as futile as unavoidable.
How interesting that as people get older they settle down into being hetero or homosexual. I don't think it's generation-related. I think it's because as we age we get to know ourselves better, and stop wasting our time on activities that are not satisfying.
24
Or sex drive declines as well with aging.
1
It might just be due to a lack of energy, a lack of hormones and a lack of opportunity to pursue sex; if one is lucky enough to have found love - this lack becomes meaningless after a certain age, I suppose. Does not say anything about what is satisfying. Or would you say, just because a 70 year old finds no satisfaction (let alone ability) in lets say skateboarding invalidates the genuine thrill it provides 20 year olds. Wisdom is great in old age - on the rare occasion it is displayed in young people it seems obnoxious and an acquired ability.
I continue to search for the answer to why the issues surrounding the L.G.B.T. community brings out so much controversy and emotion. Maybe it was being brought up in NY or in a family that was not highly religious, I don't know, but these issues never have resonated with me. I cannot fathom going to jail for not issuing a marriage license, or baking a cake. There are so many world threatening issues we need to deal with, the entire social-cultural agenda of conservative right just is not on my list.
56
I think the reason it gets so much negative attention is due to the fact that that the people who object to anything other than heterosexuality are only focused on the sex act. They fail to see the people -- the men and women who have lives, loves, homes, jobs etc and are attracted to the same sex. Instead all of the focus of the people who are against same sex marriage etc. is on the sex act they see in their heads that they associate with homosexuals. The don't see the human beings.
1
Whatever he sexual preferences, Miley Cyrus is just one more narcissistic nitwit on the American scene, and I can thank my generation for eventually creating her.
Red O. Greene, Albuquerque, NM
Red O. Greene, Albuquerque, NM
53
A lot of us don't care what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms, although some of us are uncomfortable with the whole LGBT thing. What we do resent is having it shoved in our faces all the time. The LGBT battle has been won, so now just go about your other business. I don't introduce myself as heterosexual to every person I meet, so don't tell me about your sexual orientation. And you in particular, Mr. Blow, know that the Black community can only dream that they had made as much progress as the LGBT crowd over the past few years. Let the dust settle.
24
But it's not been won, Norm. LGBT rights have still not been secured everywhere in areas such as employment.
I'm a hetero married woman and in no way feel any of this battle is 'in our faces all the time.' I can go about my day quite normally without ever encountering the ongoing battle should I choose. However, if I read the news, which I do daily, this topic IS going to be there, simply because it IS an ongoing battle for equal rights.
What those opposed don't seem to realize is it's their OWN obstinacy that keeps these issues in the forefront. If they weren't so only focused on what they perceive as a strictly sexual aspect, instead of the greater and most core dimensions, if LGBT relationships, along with gender identification, had been allowed to long ago be normalized, instead of the denial of equal rights always, then you'd not be faced with continuing to have to read about it. Then we could all move on with our lives and go about our business.
I'm a hetero married woman and in no way feel any of this battle is 'in our faces all the time.' I can go about my day quite normally without ever encountering the ongoing battle should I choose. However, if I read the news, which I do daily, this topic IS going to be there, simply because it IS an ongoing battle for equal rights.
What those opposed don't seem to realize is it's their OWN obstinacy that keeps these issues in the forefront. If they weren't so only focused on what they perceive as a strictly sexual aspect, instead of the greater and most core dimensions, if LGBT relationships, along with gender identification, had been allowed to long ago be normalized, instead of the denial of equal rights always, then you'd not be faced with continuing to have to read about it. Then we could all move on with our lives and go about our business.
2
The only way to fight ignorance, racism and stereotyping is through education. The problem is a lot of people don't respect the privacy of the bedroom as you claim but then you proceed to call information and discussion around LGBT negatively as in "shoved in our faces". Many claim to not be racist but the truth is stereotyping is hardwired into a very primitive part of our brain and only through education do the higher functions of our brain suppress these primitive fears. Pushing discussion back in the closet causes people to revert back to their primitive mind processes. Keeping "uncomfortable" discussions in the forefront forces society to evolve and reduce the primitive urge to suppress or enslave those that aren't a mirror of ourselves.
1
Norm. The battle will have been won, when people cannot be fired, discriminated against, and are no longer marginalized for their sexual orientation. We are nowhere near that date, and your intolerant, self-important and self-righteous post exemplifies why. And by the way, I don't introduce myself as homosexual to every person I meet either. But I do HAVE to identify myself as such far more frequently than you, because if we didn't, we would have had no success in fighting for any recognition or rights from a bigoted and tyrannical majority.
Why doesn't Miley Cyrus just wear a big neon flashing sign on her head that reads "I'm horny, come one, come all"? She only addresses getting her physical needs met. She calls it love, but she means sex. That says nothing about how her emotional needs are best met, by man or by woman. And what is she going to do if she ever decides she wants to have a child of her own?
Is she implying that she is equally emotionally satisfied by either man or woman? She probably has a slight preference for one or the other but she's not saying which it is. I'm not into religion or the Bible but all this change of thinking, that the data reported in the article well illustrates, kind of smacks of a resurgence of Sodom and Gomorrah, and look how that turned out.
Is she implying that she is equally emotionally satisfied by either man or woman? She probably has a slight preference for one or the other but she's not saying which it is. I'm not into religion or the Bible but all this change of thinking, that the data reported in the article well illustrates, kind of smacks of a resurgence of Sodom and Gomorrah, and look how that turned out.
13
Here in the U.S. with a divorce rate of more or less 50%, high rates of domestic violence, women fleeing for their lives from heterosexual male partners, and rampant child abuse and neglect nationally, it seems to me that Miley's more open and inclusive sexual paradigm is a refreshing and humane change for a healthier, happier social future.
I believe she is wearing the big neon sign an is saying exactly that she is horny, emotional, drugged out, immature, and in no way ready for a meaningful relation with anything. I can see her spending her entire life and never reaching her potential as a human being. She will never take responsibility and she will spend her life unhappy and most likely alone in a crowd.
1
Very often, when a new technology or thought process or idea is introduced, people get hurt. Gabby's post focuses on the difference between just sex, or lust, and some deeper emotions. Thanks for the wisdom. Frankly, I've found Mr Blow's many columns on race in America to be unbalanced. This column certainly was.
Mr Blow is a very good writer, but that doesn't mean that people won't be hurt following his lead.
Mr Blow is a very good writer, but that doesn't mean that people won't be hurt following his lead.
1
Mother nature defined the genders, Charles, I am not sure that man can redefine them. I worked with, and in, the surveying field for a very long time and I know that they can be structured to elicit the answers that the surveyor is looking for.
17
Wow, did you miss the point! CB's point is that while Mother Nature did indeed define the genders, we have misinterpreted those genders as cut-and-dried, "men are attracted to women/women are attracted to men", period. Mother nature's creation is *way* more nuanced than that, and we are just beginning to see, and accept, that as a society. The only "redefinition" going on here is in your perception of what is happening.
3
Considering the behavior one actually sees in mammals, Mother Nature did a pretty casual job of defining.
It's always interesting to see, when people whose objections are religious, try to advert to Darwininian ideas that they'd likely otherwise oppose.
It's always interesting to see, when people whose objections are religious, try to advert to Darwininian ideas that they'd likely otherwise oppose.
3
Mother Nature may well have developed the sexes. More modern research among other primates and mammals documents some behaviors we would label other than heterosexual. I recall reading in the NYT that many researchers discounted their own observations or didn't report them because they didn't "fit" dogma. In short, none of us can see what we cannot conceive.
Surveys have long asked questions that some could not answer honestly because those writing the questions couldn't conceive of the full range of possibilities. Mother Nature has produced a wider range of possibilities than any of us can imagine.
Surveys have long asked questions that some could not answer honestly because those writing the questions couldn't conceive of the full range of possibilities. Mother Nature has produced a wider range of possibilities than any of us can imagine.
To me, the important thing is to avoid letting personal rights granted by our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and judicial interpretation be confused with the ostensible religious right to trample upon the freedom of others.
Neither the bedroom (or wherever) behavior nor the civil rights of other people is anybody else's business. This is not complicated.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Neither the bedroom (or wherever) behavior nor the civil rights of other people is anybody else's business. This is not complicated.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
38
Sex is far more complicated, and carries far more emotional risk, than Miley Cyrus knows right now. But she will learn. Treating it as 'carefree" and "fluid" sounds so modern, so tolerant, so progressive. Many, perhaps, can manage the emotional fallout from multiple partners of all (legal) ages, sexes and all chosen genders. Most will try it because it is fashionable. I do not think that at the personal level, the results will be as light, airy and giggly happy as Mr. Blow predicts.
27
In my view, sexual orientation is a personal self-discovery, not "choosing" an identity. People's own bodies, minds, and feelings signal their sexual attraction. Most people are straight, but a constant and significant few are gay, bi, trans, or have little interest. It is what it is.
The problem is religious culture dictating sexual orientation from a middle-eastern Iron Age of biological ignorance.
Science based Sex Ed should be taught in public schools along with covering ethics and boundaries issues.
The problem is religious culture dictating sexual orientation from a middle-eastern Iron Age of biological ignorance.
Science based Sex Ed should be taught in public schools along with covering ethics and boundaries issues.
7
A good sign that people are beginning to understand and accept what over a century has shown--that humans are sexual creatures with a very wide spectrum of potential sexual behavior. Maybe this basic understanding can help us rid society of so much guilt, pain, and suffering and perhaps update some religious cultural baggage over what are perfectly natural human responses.
12
The only valid interests other people should have in a person's sexuality are when rape of a child or a nonconsenting adult occurs, or a parent fails to financially support and nurture minor children. Otherwise, private human sexual behavior should not be invaded, and sexual exhibitionism should be regarded as boorish.
11
I hear you, but the difficulties with sex most often (not always, but most often) occur with that perilous transition from public to "private human sexual behavior." Privacy is good (no argument there) and sex is usually (maybe even always) best done in private, but the transition from public to private, from strangers to intimates, hoc opus, hic labor est (for some folks anyway). (Probably not for Miley Cyrus, but I suspect a little bit for Charles Blow.)
Sounds like Miley is more of a tri sexual..as in, try anything. And that is probably all she represents. That gray area in between childhood and adulthood where experimentation in sexual activity has become more accepted. Ultimately, I expect the data skews towards the expected with the majority conforming to traditional ex role identification patterns where heterosexuality is predominate followed by bisexual and then exclusively homosexual.
3
It seems to me this conversation revolves our the self and fulfilling one's own perceived desires. I always thought relationships were about love - giving oneself for the pleasure of another. I fear our very primary concerns are about self which will undermine relationships and the meaning and purpose of family.
8
I think what we have here is some kind of sexual addiction and in most addictions, the supstance must be increased in order to feed the addiction. In sexual addiction, I believe the sex must become more and more perverse. But to consider ms Cyrus anything like normal is sure stretching normal. I believe ms Cyrus is an out of control young person who has been given anything she has wanted and never questioned about her choices.
28
Her parents pimped her out for money and fame from the time she was an adolescent.
The Vogue photos of her at age 15, draped across her father's lap, are truly pedophile creepy.
The Vogue photos of her at age 15, draped across her father's lap, are truly pedophile creepy.
Keep thinking. Maybe you arrive at an answer that is more than prejudice eventually.
There is nothing in human sexual freedom that shocks or offends me. Do, please, everyone be free. But few appear to reflect on the history of the idea of freedom in its many varied forms. One major consideration of the idea was the very bookish Arthur Lovejoy's The Great Chain of Being--an idea expressed throughout Western history perhaps best phrased as "if something can exist, it will exist" and, as I remember Lovejoy, it has often taken the form of ideological justification. Modern sexual freedom might be seen as The Great Chain of Being again manifesting itself in Western history. Lovejoy especially notes the idea's roots in Plato, I might add. I also might add that it gave us the atomic bomb. While sexual freedom might seem quite innocent in the form of Miley Cyrus, perhaps it nevertheless deserves serious thought as distinct from ideological justification.
2
Perhaps, with age, we are becoming more open-minded and admitting attractions that were once taboo. One change that has helped open our minds and tastes is the clothes-less-ness of attire advertising. Nowadays, we are shown just about all there is to see. It loosens morality.
Your article offers an escape clause when you write, "Attraction is simply more nuanced for more people than some of us want to admit, sometimes even to ourselves. That attraction may never manifest as physical intimacy, nor does it have to, but denying that it exists creates a false, naïve and ultimately destructive sense or what is normal and possible."
Frankly however, the pansexuality admitted to by Miley Cyrus leaves a lot to be desired. If we make our sexual choices based on the attractiveness of a skinny young girl sticking out her tongue perhaps we should redefine "coming of age."
Your article offers an escape clause when you write, "Attraction is simply more nuanced for more people than some of us want to admit, sometimes even to ourselves. That attraction may never manifest as physical intimacy, nor does it have to, but denying that it exists creates a false, naïve and ultimately destructive sense or what is normal and possible."
Frankly however, the pansexuality admitted to by Miley Cyrus leaves a lot to be desired. If we make our sexual choices based on the attractiveness of a skinny young girl sticking out her tongue perhaps we should redefine "coming of age."
12
Until young people are told it doesn't matter who they kiss or, more pointedly, who they shower with at the school gym, the "enlightenment" you speak of, Charles, is going to be a light bulb or two short of full illumination. In other words, beyond how we are wired at birth, our environment is also important in our preferences or certainly the honest, unfettered expression of those preferences. And the culture will not have truly accepted pansexualism or transsexualism or bisexualism or whatever until kids are truly told it doesn't matter who, how or what they prefer. You can be sure that, whatever Miley Cyrus says, if you go into any high school, this open-minded acceptance of various sexual preferences is held by only a tiny (and, likely, silent) minority.
1
With this "liberation" of which Mr. Blow writes comes a whole new set of problems and difficulties in life. Staying where you are, on the hetro train, ain't so bad and, hey, don't we have enough on our table right there in terms of life's disasters, heartbreaks and, you know, complications?
It is possible to look on sexuality as a problem that cannot be solved, only dealt with occasionally and often with a sense of incompleteness. It can be a source of joy or as a source of grasping failure to create meaningful, satisfying connections with others. How many love affairs end in something far different than love, in bitterness and recriminations? Better question: how few don't end in that way?
Thank you, but I don't care to be told that I am narrow minded because I choose not to play on "the other team" (Seinfeld). Having struggled to achieve a measure of stability in life, as I imagine most people do, I cannot look upon sexuality as a source of risky adventure or erotic recharging through "exploration".
This, unfortunately, is the natural evolution from acceptance of gays into the new phase in which we will be lectured that we are wrong to be "merely" hetro. Please stop.
It is possible to look on sexuality as a problem that cannot be solved, only dealt with occasionally and often with a sense of incompleteness. It can be a source of joy or as a source of grasping failure to create meaningful, satisfying connections with others. How many love affairs end in something far different than love, in bitterness and recriminations? Better question: how few don't end in that way?
Thank you, but I don't care to be told that I am narrow minded because I choose not to play on "the other team" (Seinfeld). Having struggled to achieve a measure of stability in life, as I imagine most people do, I cannot look upon sexuality as a source of risky adventure or erotic recharging through "exploration".
This, unfortunately, is the natural evolution from acceptance of gays into the new phase in which we will be lectured that we are wrong to be "merely" hetro. Please stop.
8
I think you misread him. He doesn't seem to me to say anyone is wrong UNLESS they ignore THEIR OWN feelings due to cultural pressures. You are not wrong to be who you are; he is not wrong to be who he is. He appears delighted that more people feel FREE to be THEMSELVES.
Drink orange juice if you prefer. Don't be afraid to admit you might like tomato. Or both. Or neither.
Drink orange juice if you prefer. Don't be afraid to admit you might like tomato. Or both. Or neither.
Patriarchy needed clear divisions of the sexes to run smoothly, so gender became binary. Sexual orientation then follows suit. What we are seeing is the breakdown of the old patriarchal power structure (which is why conservatives hate all this so). What is underneath, without some sort of social construct - because there is always a social construct of some sort, nobody really knows, although it is definitely much more fluid that what was historically acknowledged in polite society.
For example, imagine if there really was no homophobia. Now imagine a room full of teenage males. You get the picture. What might they be doing 10, 20 years later? Who knows.
For example, imagine if there really was no homophobia. Now imagine a room full of teenage males. You get the picture. What might they be doing 10, 20 years later? Who knows.
10
That is quite a telling fantasy you got going there.
4
"But it seems more younger people are liberating themselves from this thinking and coming to better understand and appreciate that people must have the freedom to be fluid if indeed they are, and that no one has the right to define or restrict the parameters of another person’s attractions, love or intimacy." If in indeed they are. That is the part that confuses me. As a young adult many aspects of the world are new and intriguing because experience is limited and the pleasure reward system is on "high". How does one traverse through these years without some sense of boundaries when all is open ? There are costs to experimentation all one has to do is look at the level of addiction to see that at work.
5
The only thing, for sure, the chart shows is that as we get older we finally admit, one way or the other, exactly where we fit on the sexual continuum between hetero and homo sexuality.
I will assume this is based on actual experience and availability of accepting partners to fulfill physical needs.
I will assume this is based on actual experience and availability of accepting partners to fulfill physical needs.
2
I think the greater ambiguity of responses among younger people is more common among women, less because it's a life long inclination, and part of a live and let live attitude. What consenting adults do in private is no one's business but themselves. The interference in is a legacy of religious and patriarchal practices, and as that hegemony recedes, people a free to be more open and accepting of one another. Religious influence has largely been a pernicious factor in society, tending to support fascism or corporatism, and had always allied itself with divine right dogma. Good riddance to that.
4
"What consenting adults do in private is no one's business but themselves."
How about STDs, HIV, AIDS, etc. brought on by sexual hedonism?
The world has experienced the plague of millions of deaths of gays, that has cost the world trillions of dollars.
Who pays for their deviant sexual indulgence and self-destruction?
Unfortunately private becomes public when lifestyle choices lead to gruesome, ghoulish, sicknesses and death.
I remember years ago Rick Santorum warned that all this rampant sexuality would eventually result in "man on dog". While it's a relief to find out Miley rejects this particular mode of behavior, what is not mentioned is that no matter what kind of sex you wish to indulge in there is always another person involved. And although an 18 may be dazzled by the idea of having sex with an older person, especially a celebrity, there are emotional consequences and they can be severe when said the celebrity moves on to the next conquest.
3
My only issue with your comment is...that you remember anything that Rick Santorium says!
This survey really just indicates that the homosexual normalization movement and its well-heeled sponsors in the entertainment/pornography industry have managed to confuse a lot of people about terminology and categories.
When young people say they are attracted to people of the same sex or both sexes, they are just saying that they're so horny they would do almost anything with almost anybody to get an orgasm, as long as it's not somebody who disgusts them or would get them in trouble. OK, young people are horny, so what else is new?
But this is a very different thing from the profound, transcendental attraction to an individual of the opposite sex with whom a person can reproduce, form a family, perpetuate one's genes, participate in building a civilized society, pursue spiritual perfection and share eternity. That kind of attraction is not pansexual or bisexual or homosexual or any of the other hollywoodized-sexuals out there.
The really sad thing is that the survey indicates a lot of young people don't even know the second thing exists. Their gadgets have told them that love is a way of having an orgasm and they may never learn that love is really a way of having an immortal soul.
When young people say they are attracted to people of the same sex or both sexes, they are just saying that they're so horny they would do almost anything with almost anybody to get an orgasm, as long as it's not somebody who disgusts them or would get them in trouble. OK, young people are horny, so what else is new?
But this is a very different thing from the profound, transcendental attraction to an individual of the opposite sex with whom a person can reproduce, form a family, perpetuate one's genes, participate in building a civilized society, pursue spiritual perfection and share eternity. That kind of attraction is not pansexual or bisexual or homosexual or any of the other hollywoodized-sexuals out there.
The really sad thing is that the survey indicates a lot of young people don't even know the second thing exists. Their gadgets have told them that love is a way of having an orgasm and they may never learn that love is really a way of having an immortal soul.
11
Thanks Woofy.... Our lives here on
Thanks Woofy..... Life is short here on planet Earth and we know so little about why we are here. I want no part of Mr. Blow's take on enlightenment. Our culture is in rapid decline. I think I'll cancel my subscription to the NYT today.
are so short and how we choose to use our sexuality echoes through eternity.
Thanks Woofy..... Life is short here on planet Earth and we know so little about why we are here. I want no part of Mr. Blow's take on enlightenment. Our culture is in rapid decline. I think I'll cancel my subscription to the NYT today.
are so short and how we choose to use our sexuality echoes through eternity.
Praise and Kudos for your stating the obvious.
There is an important way in which humans are different from other animals. Humans have a much longer life span and the human child takes far longer to reach maturity. This is why stable marriages have worked through the centuries. It may not work so well if, as now, they are largely being abandoned.
For we can see the effects on the black community of the destruction of the black family. In a recent interview Thomas Sowell pointed out that today's black community looks bad not just compared to whites but compared even to blacks of three decades ago.
Perhaps a generous but realistic solution would be to keep straight marriage as a norm but be tolerant of other life styles. This would be different from the "anything goes" attitude of Mr. Blow and Ms. Cyrus, but also different from that of the hellfire breathing fundamentalists.
For we can see the effects on the black community of the destruction of the black family. In a recent interview Thomas Sowell pointed out that today's black community looks bad not just compared to whites but compared even to blacks of three decades ago.
Perhaps a generous but realistic solution would be to keep straight marriage as a norm but be tolerant of other life styles. This would be different from the "anything goes" attitude of Mr. Blow and Ms. Cyrus, but also different from that of the hellfire breathing fundamentalists.
5
The one and only biological DNA evolutionary natural selected modern human race originated in East Africa about 180-200 years ago. By nature we are driven to seek sugar, fat, salt, water, habitat, sex and kin. We have been colored and physically marked by chronologically isolated human populations living in different habitats at different latitudes, longitudes and altitudes. Humans are a type of animal vertebrate mammal primate ape.
Evolution is a dynamic continuous adaptive process. The natural normal human condition is fluid by necessity against a changing ecology. Ecology studies the relationship between and among living things and their environment. The concept of the niche is the role that an organism plays in it's environment. Sex was an evolutionary biological adaptation from an asexual biological past.
The most meaningful main biological "goal" is the reproductive continuation of the human species as a whole mediated by individually "selfish" genetic diverse variation. Humans are mental, emotional, physical, social and sexual beings. Whether or not you choose to believe in a faith that seeks" a more abundant life" or a philosophy that has the same goal is your choice. And your brothers and sisters have the same options individually and as a socioeconomic political educational cultural society group whole.
Evolution is a dynamic continuous adaptive process. The natural normal human condition is fluid by necessity against a changing ecology. Ecology studies the relationship between and among living things and their environment. The concept of the niche is the role that an organism plays in it's environment. Sex was an evolutionary biological adaptation from an asexual biological past.
The most meaningful main biological "goal" is the reproductive continuation of the human species as a whole mediated by individually "selfish" genetic diverse variation. Humans are mental, emotional, physical, social and sexual beings. Whether or not you choose to believe in a faith that seeks" a more abundant life" or a philosophy that has the same goal is your choice. And your brothers and sisters have the same options individually and as a socioeconomic political educational cultural society group whole.
2
@ Blackmamba - my comment awaiting review takes your first line further to suggest to Charles that he apply his rejection of "boxes" for gender to "race". He always writes as if there were two uniquely different "races" one black one white. Have asked him to discuss. He won't touch the subject.
Larry
Larry
I love the idea of continuums. It's interesting that we can seem so polarized, but at the same time exist, as individuals, on different places on so many continuums when it comes to attitudes, beliefs and behaviors.
Our social worlds are complex and not easily grasped. This is perhaps why there is so much oversimplification of so many issues. When we step back however, it is easier to see how ambiguity is normal, even if it doesn't poll well.
Our social worlds are complex and not easily grasped. This is perhaps why there is so much oversimplification of so many issues. When we step back however, it is easier to see how ambiguity is normal, even if it doesn't poll well.
7
This is yet again another editorial penned by Mr. Blow destined to crumble under the weight of faulty logic and illegitimate premises. In the form of a syllogism, Mr. Blow's most current mishap can be summarized as follows:
1. Human beings naturally display a wide range of natural tendencies.
2. Any tendency found to be common within the human family is not only morally and socially acceptable but worthy of encouragement and praise.
3. A wide range of sexual preferences, practices, and desires is common among the human family.
4. Given 1-3, all sexual preferences, practices and desires are morally and socially acceptable and worthy of encouragement and praise.
I am quite certain that I need not point to the wide possibility of common human impulses and tendencies that the good readers of the NYT, and Mr. Blow himself, would find repulsive, reprehensible, and proscribed.
I say this of course without rendering judgment on the particular sexual tendencies noted in this editorial. As far as I'm concerned what folks do in their bedrooms is no business of mine. It is the disengenuous reasoning of the sort displayed over and over again by Mr. blow that I strongly object to. That's why, as much as I abhor the manners and messaging of Miss Cyrus, I respect the fact that she does not rely on slight of hand to justify her actions....she simply does what she wants to do because that's what she wants to do.
1. Human beings naturally display a wide range of natural tendencies.
2. Any tendency found to be common within the human family is not only morally and socially acceptable but worthy of encouragement and praise.
3. A wide range of sexual preferences, practices, and desires is common among the human family.
4. Given 1-3, all sexual preferences, practices and desires are morally and socially acceptable and worthy of encouragement and praise.
I am quite certain that I need not point to the wide possibility of common human impulses and tendencies that the good readers of the NYT, and Mr. Blow himself, would find repulsive, reprehensible, and proscribed.
I say this of course without rendering judgment on the particular sexual tendencies noted in this editorial. As far as I'm concerned what folks do in their bedrooms is no business of mine. It is the disengenuous reasoning of the sort displayed over and over again by Mr. blow that I strongly object to. That's why, as much as I abhor the manners and messaging of Miss Cyrus, I respect the fact that she does not rely on slight of hand to justify her actions....she simply does what she wants to do because that's what she wants to do.
11
She also gets paid a lot to stick it up into the air for whoever walks by; when Charles calls that revolutionary I'm convinced he's lost himself in the trees with sunglasses that are entirely too dark to see through the woods.
I'm going to object on the basis that it makes sense to talk about our identities and realities to counter the fact they are largely "erased" and their existence is doubted or denied. We need more "beacons" like Mr. Blow reiterating that we bisexuals are not alone, and in fact are numerous far beyond popular expectation. There's much more "faulty logic" in the comment above (e.g., ergo "all ... are morally and socially acceptable") than in the column.
All this comes down to the war between the Abrahamic religions--powerful, rich, vigilant against the menace of progress--and the natural tendency of the human species to take two steps forward every so often.
We've grown so accustomed to the salacious, deliciously addictive scandals that, like clockwork, bubble up out of the bogs of piety (a ferocious advocate for "one man/one woman" caught in flagrante with a lovely boy even as he babbles on about the God who didn't create Adam and Steve, or else outed as an incestuous and sweatily brutal sex consumer while leading his Christian soldiers into battle against delight) that we hardly bother to ask ourselves what it might mean.
Instead, those of us who've moved beyond religion chalk it up to glib categories like "hypocrisy" while those whose bread and butter is the get-rich-quick promised land of the Dominionist Gospel--where a man can strike the mother lode if only he gets his own cable show--chalk it up to sin, secularism, the absence of prayer in school, and faithless parents who spare the rod (oi, Dr. Freud!) thus spoiling the child.
If the human species survives the next few centuries--an increasingly big "if"--it will be because it's figured out a way to liberate itself from the deadly nexus between religion and secular power. We should pay heed when the same people who give us apocalyptic warnings from God about sex simultaneously assure us that God wants us to burn that oil, mow down those trees and kill those bears.
We've grown so accustomed to the salacious, deliciously addictive scandals that, like clockwork, bubble up out of the bogs of piety (a ferocious advocate for "one man/one woman" caught in flagrante with a lovely boy even as he babbles on about the God who didn't create Adam and Steve, or else outed as an incestuous and sweatily brutal sex consumer while leading his Christian soldiers into battle against delight) that we hardly bother to ask ourselves what it might mean.
Instead, those of us who've moved beyond religion chalk it up to glib categories like "hypocrisy" while those whose bread and butter is the get-rich-quick promised land of the Dominionist Gospel--where a man can strike the mother lode if only he gets his own cable show--chalk it up to sin, secularism, the absence of prayer in school, and faithless parents who spare the rod (oi, Dr. Freud!) thus spoiling the child.
If the human species survives the next few centuries--an increasingly big "if"--it will be because it's figured out a way to liberate itself from the deadly nexus between religion and secular power. We should pay heed when the same people who give us apocalyptic warnings from God about sex simultaneously assure us that God wants us to burn that oil, mow down those trees and kill those bears.
5
The problem with humans and sexuality is that "it's complicated". To the basics of sexual attraction at an instinctive level and the spectrum of attraction people experience in different ways, there are a number of other elements layered on top of it.
Humans as animals driven by status complicate sexuality by adding in factors such as economic status, social standing, cultural identity, religious beliefs, etc. Those with celebrity, wealth and power have always had much more leeway in their sexuality - if only because they've had the resources to pursue it as they please, sometimes openly, sometimes covertly - whatever the conventions of their time. Those without comparable resources vary from the 'norm' at their peril.
At a basic level, sexuality is about creating the next generation and raising it to sexual maturity. In a subsistence level economy, anything that gets in the way of that works against survival; the genetic material inside us using us as packages to continue its existence has a real incentive to maximize that process.
But, it's not just about individuals either. As members of society, sexuality used in a way that enhances group survival is also a benefit to individual members of that group - unless the needs of the individual conflict with the needs of the group. Societies under stress for whatever reason have a lot less tolerance for individuals whose preferences are seen as counter-group survival.
Cyrus says such as much about the times as sexuality.
Humans as animals driven by status complicate sexuality by adding in factors such as economic status, social standing, cultural identity, religious beliefs, etc. Those with celebrity, wealth and power have always had much more leeway in their sexuality - if only because they've had the resources to pursue it as they please, sometimes openly, sometimes covertly - whatever the conventions of their time. Those without comparable resources vary from the 'norm' at their peril.
At a basic level, sexuality is about creating the next generation and raising it to sexual maturity. In a subsistence level economy, anything that gets in the way of that works against survival; the genetic material inside us using us as packages to continue its existence has a real incentive to maximize that process.
But, it's not just about individuals either. As members of society, sexuality used in a way that enhances group survival is also a benefit to individual members of that group - unless the needs of the individual conflict with the needs of the group. Societies under stress for whatever reason have a lot less tolerance for individuals whose preferences are seen as counter-group survival.
Cyrus says such as much about the times as sexuality.
1
Pope Benedict was prescient in 1985 when he wrote that "it logically follows from the consequences of a sexuality which is no longer linked to motherhood and to procreation that every form of sexuality is equivalent and therefore of equal worth... it is, in fact, logical that pleasure, the libido of the individual, become the only possible point of reference of sex."
1
A phenomenon I have noticed is that some postmenopausal women become more fluid in their orientation. Intuitively, that seems comprehensible. I only wish it had happened to me. To those who insist that sexuality is a choice one makes, I say, if it were a choice, I would make it. Imagine a partner who already expects to do at least half the housework!
13
This is the first column I've read by Mr Blow in a very long time that I can agree with 100%.
At various times in my life I've worn every 'label', or should I say rather, accepted having it pinned on me because people become uncomfortable with the unwillingness to join a 'tribe'. Nothing has ever really fit right (though I'll answer to 'gay' just to end the discussion). I love being postmenopausal because no one really expects me to have a sexual identity anymore and a set of norms to fail to conform to. Free at last, free at last, thank god almighty, I'm free at last.
That said, I become uncomfortable with the current trend to define prepubescent children, even toddlers, as 'transgender'. Particularly when the 'label' will eventually involve extensive surgery and a lifelong hormone regimen in an attempt to make the kid into what he or she was supposedly 'born this way' (!?). It's actually a step backward to impose gendered roles on little kids - to assume, e.g., a boy who likes 'girly' clothes and Barbie is 'transgender'.
At various times in my life I've worn every 'label', or should I say rather, accepted having it pinned on me because people become uncomfortable with the unwillingness to join a 'tribe'. Nothing has ever really fit right (though I'll answer to 'gay' just to end the discussion). I love being postmenopausal because no one really expects me to have a sexual identity anymore and a set of norms to fail to conform to. Free at last, free at last, thank god almighty, I'm free at last.
That said, I become uncomfortable with the current trend to define prepubescent children, even toddlers, as 'transgender'. Particularly when the 'label' will eventually involve extensive surgery and a lifelong hormone regimen in an attempt to make the kid into what he or she was supposedly 'born this way' (!?). It's actually a step backward to impose gendered roles on little kids - to assume, e.g., a boy who likes 'girly' clothes and Barbie is 'transgender'.
11
"Free at last, free at last, thank god almighty, I'm free at last. That said..."
That's the problem isn't it. Freedom (especially sexual) is just so easily... said.
That's the problem isn't it. Freedom (especially sexual) is just so easily... said.
I'm glad the column states, "...attraction may never manifest as physical intimacy, nor does it have to..." Women have always been fluid in this regard. Women usually have strong, meaningful, supportive relationships with other women that sometimes last for years - though marriages, child rearing, sorrows and joys. Women have grown used to depending on and loving other women. These non-physical relationships can be just as strong and meaningful as any relationship that includes sex.
Now we're seeing it much more between men, too, in many the "bromances" we've seen lately, and not just among celebrities. Many men also have close, supportive, meaningful relationships with other men, but would be horrified to have those strong attractions classified as homosexual. It's wonderful that men are realizing it's ok to love other men and it doesn't have to mean anything more than that. Nothing wrong with love.
Now we're seeing it much more between men, too, in many the "bromances" we've seen lately, and not just among celebrities. Many men also have close, supportive, meaningful relationships with other men, but would be horrified to have those strong attractions classified as homosexual. It's wonderful that men are realizing it's ok to love other men and it doesn't have to mean anything more than that. Nothing wrong with love.
11
FREUD, in 1920, wrote his book Beyond The Pleasure Principle, where he wrote that bisexuality is universal. By that, Freud was referring to erotic attraction, as opposed to genital sexual relations. Still to be discovered was DNA in the 50s. All of us have 50% male and 50% female DNA in every cell. Our bodies produce both female and male hormones. We all have genitals from both sexes, most often with one gender prevailing. So on a physical, genetic and biochemilcal level we're all bisexual. By contrast, on a social level, there is more polarization. Sexual politics fairly well dictate that socially you must be either homo- or heterosexual. Those who assert that the social level of sexuality is the only one present incomplete arguments. Alfred Kinsey found that, while a minority of people surveyed, reported having exclusive attraction only for the same or the other sex, the majority of people felt attraction for both. Kinsey found our, surprisingly, that 39% of males had sex to orgasm with another male once; 10% more than once. That was back in the repressive 50s. I think that a significantly larger proportion of teens probably explore their sexual feelings with a partner of the same sex. But the gay or straight communities strongly prefer exclusive membership in only one. The social stricture that is inconsistent with the bisexual mixture of genes, hormones and genitals we've all got. Time will tell if many wish to change its prevalence for B's in LGBT..
7
"All of us have 50% male and 50% female DNA in every cell. . . We all have genitals from both sexes, most often with one gender prevailing."
I'm sorry but this is nonsense.
I'm sorry but this is nonsense.
Before today, I never saw the word "pansexual." Is the prefix "pan" supposed to mean something like "across," or "all-encompassing," like pan-American, for example? When Miley Cyrus is "down for anyone, anything", etc. it seems from this cheap seat in the balcony that she's less understanding of gender fluidity (love the term) than she is determined to exploit the delights afforded on the various palettes. Ms. Cyrus' breezy summations about sex speak less to an open and frank discussion about the complexities of an individual's sexual nature. On the contrary, she tells the world that freedom of sexual choice is divorced from every responsible social norm (family, school, church and work, for example). This subject is too serious to make light of. The sexual appetite begins with selfish need, but it should broaden to welcome the other(s), if that is one's preference. Ms. Miley uses her celebrity to hawk the goods and thereby cheapens them.
9
I read your memoir, Charles, and found it moving. And despite my own experience as totally heterosexual, I agree that who people are attracted to, or how they feel, is not my business. Nor is it my business to judge their relationships, unless, as Cyrus, qualified, they involve someone under age.
But I would add one important thing that in a sense you glossed over except the last line, and that's this: I think when people think of bisexuals, they associate their behaviors with promiscuity. Or random encounters without a ton of meaning.
For me, the worst thing you can do to another human being you're attracted to is not be honest. Consensual behavior is fine unless the expectations aren't defined. So, whether gay, straight, or bi, for me the moral code is total honesty and an overabundance of caution to hurt or exploit the other.
While many think rejection is the ultimate hurt in rejections, I'd venture to say betrayal--because of tacit but not openly discussed assumptions--is far worse.
But I would add one important thing that in a sense you glossed over except the last line, and that's this: I think when people think of bisexuals, they associate their behaviors with promiscuity. Or random encounters without a ton of meaning.
For me, the worst thing you can do to another human being you're attracted to is not be honest. Consensual behavior is fine unless the expectations aren't defined. So, whether gay, straight, or bi, for me the moral code is total honesty and an overabundance of caution to hurt or exploit the other.
While many think rejection is the ultimate hurt in rejections, I'd venture to say betrayal--because of tacit but not openly discussed assumptions--is far worse.
21
One wonders what exactly is the purpose of this article. Nor so long ago most North Americans would deny sexual attraction toward someone of another race. Now few would say so.
To say one is attracted to one sex rather than to another probably depends more on what one likes or dislikes in their sexual fantasies than on anything else other than perhaps a childhood of strong aversion therapy or, conversely, one in which gender roles are conditioned on sexuality.
In a university class on the psychology of women, the professor said that the first thing students noticed upon entering the classroom was the sex of other students. Students of colour - brown, black, red, and yellow - however, said that the colour of the students was the first thing they noticed. Why? It seems that the "facts" on which the instructor made her statement were based largely on the results of surveys based on the responses of university students who, at that time, were predominantly not persons of colour. A possible hypothesis is that social conditioning, including personal histories, influences outlooks.
If Mr. Blow is advocating a libertarian principle, in his words "people must be allowed to be themselves," is he willing to adapt that principle to individual choices that he doesn't like, such as racism?
To say one is attracted to one sex rather than to another probably depends more on what one likes or dislikes in their sexual fantasies than on anything else other than perhaps a childhood of strong aversion therapy or, conversely, one in which gender roles are conditioned on sexuality.
In a university class on the psychology of women, the professor said that the first thing students noticed upon entering the classroom was the sex of other students. Students of colour - brown, black, red, and yellow - however, said that the colour of the students was the first thing they noticed. Why? It seems that the "facts" on which the instructor made her statement were based largely on the results of surveys based on the responses of university students who, at that time, were predominantly not persons of colour. A possible hypothesis is that social conditioning, including personal histories, influences outlooks.
If Mr. Blow is advocating a libertarian principle, in his words "people must be allowed to be themselves," is he willing to adapt that principle to individual choices that he doesn't like, such as racism?
10
One take on some of the concepts beyond Blow can even be found in a Gang of Four punk lyric, and I believe someone claiming to be the band is on tour. Something like
"Fornication makes you happy, no escape from society
Natural is not in it, your relations are of power
We all have good intentions, but all with strings attached"
Blow has undoubtedly heard the song, it is used a bit in pop culture, but bet your life, missed the meaning.
"Fornication makes you happy, no escape from society
Natural is not in it, your relations are of power
We all have good intentions, but all with strings attached"
Blow has undoubtedly heard the song, it is used a bit in pop culture, but bet your life, missed the meaning.
4
Every person must define their own existence, language, culture, orthodoxy, religion.
Uh Chuck, how do they do that? What is their starting point? Their finishing destination? See the problem? I doubt it. One of the few good things about the false consciousness once as popular as Blow's twaddle was at least people were exposed to some genuine fundamentals of the human condition. That could think through it if they chose. Now, twaddle rules with no guard rails for the lazy solipsistic hard of thinking.
Way to go Higher Education. The liberal arts and sciences are so whipped and abused and ignored and irrelevant to the VSPs.
Uh Chuck, how do they do that? What is their starting point? Their finishing destination? See the problem? I doubt it. One of the few good things about the false consciousness once as popular as Blow's twaddle was at least people were exposed to some genuine fundamentals of the human condition. That could think through it if they chose. Now, twaddle rules with no guard rails for the lazy solipsistic hard of thinking.
Way to go Higher Education. The liberal arts and sciences are so whipped and abused and ignored and irrelevant to the VSPs.
13
Sorry dears, but anatomy is destiny.
A woman was given a womb to hold a child.
A woman was given breasts to nurture that child.
A woman who willfully makes a decision not to have any children becomes a study in tragedy and sorrow when she ages in an empty home.
So sad.
So tragic.
So selfish.
What is the purpose of sex? Is is just for pleasure or "fulfillment" of the individual? Or do people have some obligation to the propagation of the species or to their own actual progeny? The ultimate purpose of a sexual bond - that is lasting beyond one encounter - is to provide for rearing of children. This is the norm for most birds and mammals. It is not something dictated by religious writings it is a biological, evolutionary imperative. Perhaps a single permanent heterosexual marriage is not the only way to rear children or even the best in all cases, but shouldn't the interests of children be given some consideration when it comes to sexual-attraction or gender preference?
18
Sure, if we were primitive creatures where sex had nothing more than a reproductive purpose. But consider the sheer complexity of human society, as well as other anomalies such as relatively strong pair bonds (for primates), female sexual desire even in the absence of ovulation, strong female orgasms, and modified sexual displays becoming a part of normal social interaction.
I think it's safe to say that reproduction is only a secondary purpose of human sexuality. Social cohesion and pair bonding appear to be the primary purposes. Besides, it takes a village to raise a child. Leaning too heavily on two parents to raise children without adequate external social support is bad, both for the children and the parents' pair bond
I think it's safe to say that reproduction is only a secondary purpose of human sexuality. Social cohesion and pair bonding appear to be the primary purposes. Besides, it takes a village to raise a child. Leaning too heavily on two parents to raise children without adequate external social support is bad, both for the children and the parents' pair bond
5
I'm no expert in the human purpose of heterosexual mating, but I am a pretty keen observer of nature. One day, sitting on my screened porch, overlooking feeders and bird baths in a lovely natural setting, I observed two female cardinals flirting with each other as they eschewed the repeated attempts of a male to distract one of them. He was dispatched by the other in an aggressive charge. I was so intrigued that I undertook quite an investigation into the question of homosexuality in the animal kingdom. I found that homosexuality and bisexuality are, in fact, quite common in the animal kingdom and most common among giraffes. I also learned that community wide nurturing of the young is very common among our fellow travelers on the planet. Go figure.
5
Which came first -- sexuality or the egg?
What if a more generalized sexual attraction came first that allowed sexual reproduction to evolve?
I imagine we will never know for sure, but sexuality clearly performs more functions than making babies, including so-called "straight" male bonding that enables cohesion among groups of men.
In his 1999 book, Biological Exuberance, Bruce Bagemihl point out that there is far more homosexual activity among animals than can be explained by perversion. In fact, it seems to be limited more by the biases of scientific observers than the animals themselves.
What if a more generalized sexual attraction came first that allowed sexual reproduction to evolve?
I imagine we will never know for sure, but sexuality clearly performs more functions than making babies, including so-called "straight" male bonding that enables cohesion among groups of men.
In his 1999 book, Biological Exuberance, Bruce Bagemihl point out that there is far more homosexual activity among animals than can be explained by perversion. In fact, it seems to be limited more by the biases of scientific observers than the animals themselves.
1
Those figures are spectacularly revealing of the change in attitude, though not surprising to those of us who are familiar with the history of human sexuality: the most common human sexual orientation seems to be bisexual with a heterosexual preference rather than heterosexual. This is because in man, sexuality plays a major role in social bonding, as is readily apparent from the behavior of our closest relative, the bonobo.
One of the ways we do differ from other animals is in the degree to which our sexuality can be modified by social pressure. Thus there are societies in which homosexuality is widely and openly practiced -- the ancient Greeks being the most famous example -- and others in which it is rigorously suppressed. It is that suppression -- what Freud called "repressed homosexuality" that creates the upset when heterosexuals in our society see evidence of homosexuality. As social attitudes change, that will inevitably wither. People will not turn gay as the homophobes think, but they will be more bi.
As an older gay/bi guy I've found that this causes confusion and conflict even in those of us who as young people were forced to confront the complexities of our sexuality. To this day, I don't really know how to describe myself in conventional terms, because sexuality, gender identity, and romantic attachment are complex rather than binary. I think Miley Cyrus's attitude is wonderful and I'm glad that younger people are freer and more open minded than we were.
One of the ways we do differ from other animals is in the degree to which our sexuality can be modified by social pressure. Thus there are societies in which homosexuality is widely and openly practiced -- the ancient Greeks being the most famous example -- and others in which it is rigorously suppressed. It is that suppression -- what Freud called "repressed homosexuality" that creates the upset when heterosexuals in our society see evidence of homosexuality. As social attitudes change, that will inevitably wither. People will not turn gay as the homophobes think, but they will be more bi.
As an older gay/bi guy I've found that this causes confusion and conflict even in those of us who as young people were forced to confront the complexities of our sexuality. To this day, I don't really know how to describe myself in conventional terms, because sexuality, gender identity, and romantic attachment are complex rather than binary. I think Miley Cyrus's attitude is wonderful and I'm glad that younger people are freer and more open minded than we were.
110
@Josh
Our closest relatives the chimpanzee and the bonobo both evolved in tropical rain forests on opposite sides of the Congo River. Humans evolved along the Great Rift valley grassy plains with some scattered tree groves and rocky outcrops, seasonal rivers and active volcanoes. What explains the differences among the three species of African ape/human is time, space and place.
Bonobo society is a matriarchal peaceful sex based sisterhood. Chimpanzee society is a patriarchal violent sex based brotherhood. Human society is much closer to our chimpanzee brotherly kin than out bonobo sisterly kind.
Josh you are brother human being by any biological, theological, sociological, political, educational, empathetic and humane conventional terms.
Our closest relatives the chimpanzee and the bonobo both evolved in tropical rain forests on opposite sides of the Congo River. Humans evolved along the Great Rift valley grassy plains with some scattered tree groves and rocky outcrops, seasonal rivers and active volcanoes. What explains the differences among the three species of African ape/human is time, space and place.
Bonobo society is a matriarchal peaceful sex based sisterhood. Chimpanzee society is a patriarchal violent sex based brotherhood. Human society is much closer to our chimpanzee brotherly kin than out bonobo sisterly kind.
Josh you are brother human being by any biological, theological, sociological, political, educational, empathetic and humane conventional terms.
3
They are far more repressed in many ways. I think because if things like MTV, they were exposed to that behavior, and somehow feel obligated and pushed by peer pressure to support various causes, but you're looking at a generation that can't even bear to shower together as a team after a soccer or football game. Don't tell me about openness and confidence.
1
Blackmamba,
Good to hear from someone who is familiar with human evolution!
My sense is that we are somewhere between the chimpanzee and bonobo in terms of sexuality and social organization, which suggests from the perspective of cladistics either that we are closer to the chimpanzee or that the chimpanzee reverted in some regards from a common ancestor.
Chimps and humans are as you say both patriarchal, and they are both aggressive. On the other hand, chimpanzees bond through grooming, while both humans and bonobos bond through sex. Human and bonobo females are always/usually in heat. Bonobos establish dominance hierarchies with sex, chimps with violence; humans again are in-between, establishing them both through sexuality (active vs. receptive partner) and physical aggression.
I believe that our baseline sexual instincts are closer to those of the bonobo than people typically believe. Note the content of our worst curses, behavior in prison or aboard ship, the frequency in human society of incidental homosexuality and pederasty, the pecking order distinction between passive and penetrative partners.
Human society has found it useful to depart in varying degrees from this baseline sexuality but to our distress, it keeps popping up!
Good to hear from someone who is familiar with human evolution!
My sense is that we are somewhere between the chimpanzee and bonobo in terms of sexuality and social organization, which suggests from the perspective of cladistics either that we are closer to the chimpanzee or that the chimpanzee reverted in some regards from a common ancestor.
Chimps and humans are as you say both patriarchal, and they are both aggressive. On the other hand, chimpanzees bond through grooming, while both humans and bonobos bond through sex. Human and bonobo females are always/usually in heat. Bonobos establish dominance hierarchies with sex, chimps with violence; humans again are in-between, establishing them both through sexuality (active vs. receptive partner) and physical aggression.
I believe that our baseline sexual instincts are closer to those of the bonobo than people typically believe. Note the content of our worst curses, behavior in prison or aboard ship, the frequency in human society of incidental homosexuality and pederasty, the pecking order distinction between passive and penetrative partners.
Human society has found it useful to depart in varying degrees from this baseline sexuality but to our distress, it keeps popping up!
Fluidity is fine, and so are varying degrees of attraction to those of both genders. But Blow's piece, as written, overstates the data. There is a big difference between flickers of attraction to those of the same gender and B.
72
I think the point is that it's fine to do whatever you want, as long as nobody's getting hurt. You don't need to be in a box.
Is there?
It will be interesting to see what happens with this more fluidly accepting younger cohort as they age. Will their acceptance persist? Will the paths they take in their own personal lives look different from past cohorts' pattern of paths taken? How much of it is an amplification of a phenomenon of youth and how much of it is a cultural shift that will eventually permeate all age groups? Perhaps both dynamics are factors. But whatever it is, it will be nice to stop being asked, once enough people say the framework is an inaccurate social construct for them, to put everybody into such a constricting framework.
55
REDIANAMOSES, inter alios: Try writing in plain old English, rather than in that pretentious gibberish that so many academics resort to when they really have nothing to say. Remember:What is not clear is not English. For u as well as others whose writing is as lucid as Talcott Parsons, which is to say, not understandable or transparent at all, I advise u to re-read ELEMENTS OF STYLE (Strunk and White) as well as some of the great writers of the past, and not just ERNEST Hemingway,but Morely Callaghan, Ford Maddox Ford , Albert Camus, Emmanuel ROBLES, Mouloud FERAOUN , James BALDWIN among others--the Francophone writers r all available in translation if u r monolingual-- to return to the roots, rediscover what good writing is all about. Being an academic and being someone who writes clearly so the average person can understand is not necessarily contradictory. By the way, I admire the fact that your children r black, and that u want the best for them. But in your "for interieur,"would u not be a trifle queasy if one of them came home and announced ,"Mom, I'm gay!" Hopes betrayed as far as I am concerned, and I think that, although I don't know,you, these would be your sentiments as well.
If your gut reaction to Mr. Blow's column is to rage against Miley Cyrus, you're missing the point.
Early in the 20th century, people began rebelling in earnest against centuries of enforced silence and shame regarding sexuality. Pop stars have always picked up on the leading edge of this rebellion and incorporated it into their art. Often they gave mainstream America its first clue that the rebellion was even happening.
Elvis physically moved in a way that suggested sex, at a time when sex was never supposed to be suggested. The long-haired British Invasion bands struck many red-blooded American males as grotesquely effeminate in 1964. David Bowie called himelf gay while doting on his (female) wife, and most early '70s rock stars flirted with transvestism. The '80s were the golden age of androgyny, when teen boys like myself could emulate our lipstick- and mascara-wearing idols without thinking it said anything at all about our sexuality.
Things took a dark turn toward conformity and oppression in the '90s and early '00s, but first Lady Gaga and now Miley Cyrus have reclaimed the pop star's rightful role as pusher of sexual boundaries. But they are only taking the social/sexual changes revealed in Mr. Blow's stats and interpreting/validating them for the masses.
Early in the 20th century, people began rebelling in earnest against centuries of enforced silence and shame regarding sexuality. Pop stars have always picked up on the leading edge of this rebellion and incorporated it into their art. Often they gave mainstream America its first clue that the rebellion was even happening.
Elvis physically moved in a way that suggested sex, at a time when sex was never supposed to be suggested. The long-haired British Invasion bands struck many red-blooded American males as grotesquely effeminate in 1964. David Bowie called himelf gay while doting on his (female) wife, and most early '70s rock stars flirted with transvestism. The '80s were the golden age of androgyny, when teen boys like myself could emulate our lipstick- and mascara-wearing idols without thinking it said anything at all about our sexuality.
Things took a dark turn toward conformity and oppression in the '90s and early '00s, but first Lady Gaga and now Miley Cyrus have reclaimed the pop star's rightful role as pusher of sexual boundaries. But they are only taking the social/sexual changes revealed in Mr. Blow's stats and interpreting/validating them for the masses.
85
"Red-blooded American males" were hardly red-blooded except in caricature. They were repressed, either effectively neutered by their post-WWII crewcuts and military-issue-style heavy rimmed glasses conformity to the post-Victorian/post-Depression/postwar emotional desert, or covertly homoerotic, as in cowboy culture, military culture, Hollywood culture, the Wild Ones/Hell's Angels, the Hemingway cult, etc. In either direction, there was no room for natural, authentic emotionally-relaxed and honest male sexuality, no room for reality - it was all denied except to be the black or the white: the married eunuch or the dissolute rake by default. And we wonder why we have leadership problems in this culture?
4
King Solomon wrote "Look at the end of things…"
Let's see what happens to these celebrities if they reach old age without destroying themselves.
Let's hold our kudos until then.
They are not 'pushing sexual boundaries', just the same old tired publicity stunts that only a teenager or repressed middle aged male would fall for.
1
As usual, Woody Allen puts all this in perspective with one pithy quote:
"Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night." -
"Bisexuality immediately doubles your chances for a date on Saturday night." -
227
Gore Vidal theorized their is an infinite range of sexual relating and hetero and homo and bi are just the most common 3 types. A decent knowledge of anthropology and the variety of sexual relationships observed, supports this view. And these anthropological findings should be part of sex education but don't hold your breath expecting republican states to do that!
1
Anyone quoting Woody Allen (and his child molesting proclivities) on sexuality may want to reconsider his/her own particular stance on the matter.
1
Ah, Woody Allen. Now's here's another superb choice as an example to all of us.
We would all be well-advised to watch what Mr. Allen is doing and then conduct our own lives as far from his example as possible.
We would all be well-advised to watch what Mr. Allen is doing and then conduct our own lives as far from his example as possible.
1
Fluidity of sexual attraction? States of sexual being between heterosexuality and homosexuality (bisexuality)? Asexuality?
To answer these questions I refer primarily to myself (primary source of evidence)--and ironically probably much of the confusion in answering types of questions such as these is because people narrowly refer to themselves...I recollect all through my life--and I base this on spontaneous, natural upsurge of fantasy--a variety of attractions and I break myself down to approximately 80/20 heterosexual/homosexual. In short a measurable degree of bisexuality.
This has been a permanent aspect of my life and this is probably why even being narrow and taking only my own sexuality and not that of others I can easily see why a person can be bisexual. I can also understand why strict heterosexuals or homosexuals would have trouble understanding bisexuality or each other: Locked into one's own sexuality it is difficult to understand a different type of sexual paradigm. This is made most obvious to me when I contemplate the concept of asexuality. I simply cannot believe such a thing exists. I harbor no ill will toward the asexual if they exist but it seems to me impossible that a person would have no sexual feelings at all. But I must be wrong on this count because people report the existence of asexuals. How far we humans must be from honest and fearless contemplation of ideas when we cannot even get a picture of sexuality and politics is cramped left and right.
To answer these questions I refer primarily to myself (primary source of evidence)--and ironically probably much of the confusion in answering types of questions such as these is because people narrowly refer to themselves...I recollect all through my life--and I base this on spontaneous, natural upsurge of fantasy--a variety of attractions and I break myself down to approximately 80/20 heterosexual/homosexual. In short a measurable degree of bisexuality.
This has been a permanent aspect of my life and this is probably why even being narrow and taking only my own sexuality and not that of others I can easily see why a person can be bisexual. I can also understand why strict heterosexuals or homosexuals would have trouble understanding bisexuality or each other: Locked into one's own sexuality it is difficult to understand a different type of sexual paradigm. This is made most obvious to me when I contemplate the concept of asexuality. I simply cannot believe such a thing exists. I harbor no ill will toward the asexual if they exist but it seems to me impossible that a person would have no sexual feelings at all. But I must be wrong on this count because people report the existence of asexuals. How far we humans must be from honest and fearless contemplation of ideas when we cannot even get a picture of sexuality and politics is cramped left and right.
27
Not any harder to understnad than whether someone is theist, atheist, or agnostic. My father was I'm not interested in religion or I don't care, you do what you like. The same goes for asexual. I had a good friend in graduate school who was not interested in men, or women, but linguistics. No interest in sex.
Charles Blow seems to be engaging in a kind of wishful thinking that society is becoming more accepting of his own sexual orientation- and I believe it is. But sexuality is much more defined by practice than hypothesis or fantasy. A poll of actual sexual practice is the only true gauge of sexual cultural trends, otherwise you might say that a very large percentage of people are rapists because they have fantasies about it- fantasies that in no way resemble actual rape.
I wonder if the percentage of men who watch male homosexual porn is on the rise. That would seem to be an relatively easy statistic to formulate and perhaps a more accurate assessment of the change being discussed here. There is a strong possibility that young people are claiming to be open to sexual possibilities they aren't actually attracted to because fashion icons like MS say it is so cool to be that way.
I wonder if the percentage of men who watch male homosexual porn is on the rise. That would seem to be an relatively easy statistic to formulate and perhaps a more accurate assessment of the change being discussed here. There is a strong possibility that young people are claiming to be open to sexual possibilities they aren't actually attracted to because fashion icons like MS say it is so cool to be that way.
50
I think there are several issues here.
For one thing, bisexuality occurs on the Kinsey continuum and that isn't reflected in the figures Blow has given. What that means in practice is that while there are some bi people who are genuinely 50-50, most people have a primary sexuality -- a preference. So a guy may be mostly straight but still react sexually or emotionally to men. And in our choice of porn, we generally go with our preference.
For another, I don't think you're right about the coolness factor. Everything we know about human behavior and that of our closest animal relative says that we are intrinsically bisexual to some degree, and that this is strongly affected by upbringing and social pressure. To someone familiar with human sexuality, it would be surprising indeed if this change *hadn't* occurred, given society's changing attitude towards homosexuality and the stigma that prevented people from acknowledging their gay impulses, often even to themselves (an issue Kinsey came across when he did his original research. Ad on balance, there is still probably more pressure for a young person not acknowledge homosexual impulses than to acknowledge them -- particularly in backwards areas.
For one thing, bisexuality occurs on the Kinsey continuum and that isn't reflected in the figures Blow has given. What that means in practice is that while there are some bi people who are genuinely 50-50, most people have a primary sexuality -- a preference. So a guy may be mostly straight but still react sexually or emotionally to men. And in our choice of porn, we generally go with our preference.
For another, I don't think you're right about the coolness factor. Everything we know about human behavior and that of our closest animal relative says that we are intrinsically bisexual to some degree, and that this is strongly affected by upbringing and social pressure. To someone familiar with human sexuality, it would be surprising indeed if this change *hadn't* occurred, given society's changing attitude towards homosexuality and the stigma that prevented people from acknowledging their gay impulses, often even to themselves (an issue Kinsey came across when he did his original research. Ad on balance, there is still probably more pressure for a young person not acknowledge homosexual impulses than to acknowledge them -- particularly in backwards areas.
2
I agree strongly with you. I think the nature of sexuality (particularly young sexuality) is one of experimentation, and Cyrus is less a measure of a changing cultural zeitgeist and more an individual case of identity in-process (or crisis, as the case may be).
2
"because fashion icons like MS say it is so cool to be that way."...and because MS's agent knew it would lead to some high-profile press.
I think you nailed it.
I think you nailed it.
I get that people can be Bisexual. I just don't want to be in a relationship where I can't ever totally or near totally satisfy my partner. One needs to be upfront about being bisexual with any partner as many would prefer not to be in a long term relationship with someone so fluid. Miley is young and single so go for it but any permanent partner will always wonder.
17
Why do you suppose that you can't totally satisfy a bisexual? That's a basic misapprehension. Bisexual people just happen to be turned on by partners of *either* sex. They don't have a need to be with partners of both sexes, any more than gay and straight people have a need to be with more than one partner.
78
A colleague whispered to me recently that a co-worker was gay. I found it of no interest as I am happily monogamous. Were I not so, perhaps that would affect me otherwise. Note that my comments are completely gender and orientation free.
2
Actually, that is the dilemma bi-sexual people face. I can be heterosexually faithful to my wife, but over the years this becomes enforced celibacy for e vital need in my life. Unless you believe that sexuality is optional, or celibacy and burning is holy, this leuads to pain and depression. As one bi-sexual woman once wrote, it is like having two cars and a one car garage. It is not that one does not love and lust for the heterosexual partner, and kstruggle with the usual attractions of other heterosexuals for security amid attractions. But there is an ongoing desire that, in a homosexual person, one would say should be accepted. The pain of celibacy strikes the bi-sexual as well as the celibate homosexual.
I would hypothesize that each persons moral acceptance of LGBT is directly proportional to his/her acceptance of his/her own sexuality.
As the historically incredibly macho US culture has moved away from acceptance of all things violent, "manly" and paternal, LGBT acceptance has increased. The chart of US sexual identity supports this (older people are more "binary"), as does the higher acceptance of LGBT in countries that are less testosterone soaked.
As the historically incredibly macho US culture has moved away from acceptance of all things violent, "manly" and paternal, LGBT acceptance has increased. The chart of US sexual identity supports this (older people are more "binary"), as does the higher acceptance of LGBT in countries that are less testosterone soaked.
32
To borrow from Thoreau, most people lead lives of quiet desperation, struggling to survive in an ever difficult environment. The last thing we need to hear about is the pansexualism of the attention starved outrageous Cyrus. Sex has its place, among many other things in our universe. An obsessive preoccupation with anything is never healthy and, where sex is concerned, it gets some people in a lot of trouble.
61
preoccupation with sex has its time and place. It waxes and wanes like the moon, and it does not readily submit to regulation.
Nicely put. I think NYT's recent fixation on Cyrus is pathetic. The woman's so-called pan-sexualism is more symbolic of identity crisis and dysfunction than it is suggestive of new tolerance in our society.
Commentators who posit that the idea of fluid sexuality blows holes in the idea that gay marriage should be allowed have entirely missed the point. they are mixing up sex and marriage. While sex is an important part of marriage it is far from the only part. In my life I have been sexually attracted to a lot of people, but I have only met one person I have wanted to marry. Luckily he also wanted to marry me. So I am part of a heterosexual monogamous relationship. But if I had fallen in love with (not just fallen in lust with) someone of my own gender I would like to be in a homosexual monogamous relationship. And yes, I would like that to be a legally sanctioned martiage because that is the only way to get all the full legal benefits of marriage.
124
No, it is not. There are many legal ways to get or give those same benefits without marriage.
It does well to remember that today, a majority of STRAIGHT couples cohabitate without marrying, even though they could and always could have done so. If the "benefits" were that obvious or great, they would all marry.
It does well to remember that today, a majority of STRAIGHT couples cohabitate without marrying, even though they could and always could have done so. If the "benefits" were that obvious or great, they would all marry.
So I guess Blow is saying that people can decide whether they are homosexual or not.
16
no, that they can decide to acknowledge more nuanced and mixed feelings than they might have acknowledged in an earlier moment in history.
I wish that were true. I would love to have a partner who already expects to do half the housework.
No, he is pretty clearly stating that people should be honest as to whether they are homosexual or not.
If every human in loving relationship has the right to get married why can't the bisexuals and pansexuals marry two or more people and be in polygamous relationship/ Think.
11
It's all about free will, choice and action as for every one of us to a certain degree. Many believe choice does not enter the picture, it's all genetics and that gayness if a quality of birth. The individual gets to decide what he or she thinks of that idea and their own sexuality whatever it may be or become. It's about choice in many if not most instances, and if two or more people consent? It happens all the times in some quarters, whether against the law or not, open marriages and so forth. You decide there too, two mates at the same time too much? Divorce court or separation. We get to consent or say, hello or hell no, depending. I do not believe Western culture for the most part and the Judeo-Christian religions will welcome such unions but free will is out there. The law will not allow for the legal benefits of multiple marriages, property rights and so forth, however, other countries where it is standard practice may.
If there is sufficient political will to make it happen, it probably will/ In the meanwhile, we are generally promiscuous as a species.
No reason why they shouldn't be able to, as long as everyone involved consents to it.
After survival needs are met, the deepest need for a human is a profound connection to another human. Sex may or may not be included. And this need is not for serial brief relationships. It's in our developmental code: as babies and children, to survive we MUST be attached deeply to at least one other human. It's in our survival code: for millennia it was necessary to belong to a group of humans. "Beyond the pale" meant outside the city wall and was a death sentence.
We are coming to realize that our "group" (or tribe) does not necessarily require an increase in numbers in order to survive. White supremacists and other political tribes may dispute this. But we now know that too many people is destructive to a group/tribe. The carrying capacity of the land/Earth is finite.
So we are now free from the need to reproduce for the good of our tribe. This means that the individual we love may be of any gender. Our sexual feelings will contribute to this, but we are now free to allow love to prevail.
However, a good long life requires not only depth but longevity in our deepest relationships.
Pansexuality or bisexuality does not mean that we will benefit from promiscuous behavior. When Miss Cyrus is no longer young and beautiful with suitors of all sorts knocking at her door, her choices may be different. Of course she will be rich which brings another sort of suitor. Good luck Miley!
We are coming to realize that our "group" (or tribe) does not necessarily require an increase in numbers in order to survive. White supremacists and other political tribes may dispute this. But we now know that too many people is destructive to a group/tribe. The carrying capacity of the land/Earth is finite.
So we are now free from the need to reproduce for the good of our tribe. This means that the individual we love may be of any gender. Our sexual feelings will contribute to this, but we are now free to allow love to prevail.
However, a good long life requires not only depth but longevity in our deepest relationships.
Pansexuality or bisexuality does not mean that we will benefit from promiscuous behavior. When Miss Cyrus is no longer young and beautiful with suitors of all sorts knocking at her door, her choices may be different. Of course she will be rich which brings another sort of suitor. Good luck Miley!
15
"The carrying capacity of the land/Earth is finite."
Global food Armageddon started with Thomas Malthus in the late 1700's. He predicted global starvation in 100 years.
In the 1850s intellectuals and scientists predicted that by 1900 there would be no food for an increased population. They did not foresee the developments of new kinds of corn and grain that would increase productivity of farms.
Paul Ehrlich, in 1908, received a Nobel Prize in Medicine for his contributions to immunology. His vastly influential book, "The Population Bomb," began with the words,
"The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now."
Noble prize winner Linus Pauling, the only person to win two unshared Nobel prizes (chemistry and peace), predicted no food by the 1960s. The Italian Council of Nations predicted the same.
Pre 1940s corn was planted in a checkerboard pattern with enough space between rows so horses could traverse the field. This allowed 7,000 plants per acre. Yield per acre: 27 bushels.
Present: 35,000 planta per acre. Yield 150 bushels.
Planned (Stine Seed plan): Breeding corn plants with genetics primed for less space (shorter plants with more upright leaves) with rows 10 inches apart. 60,000 plants per acre. Yield 230-260 bushels er acre.
(source Forbes. April 14, 2014)
Usually there are no prophets around who live to see their prophecies fail.
Global food Armageddon started with Thomas Malthus in the late 1700's. He predicted global starvation in 100 years.
In the 1850s intellectuals and scientists predicted that by 1900 there would be no food for an increased population. They did not foresee the developments of new kinds of corn and grain that would increase productivity of farms.
Paul Ehrlich, in 1908, received a Nobel Prize in Medicine for his contributions to immunology. His vastly influential book, "The Population Bomb," began with the words,
"The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now."
Noble prize winner Linus Pauling, the only person to win two unshared Nobel prizes (chemistry and peace), predicted no food by the 1960s. The Italian Council of Nations predicted the same.
Pre 1940s corn was planted in a checkerboard pattern with enough space between rows so horses could traverse the field. This allowed 7,000 plants per acre. Yield per acre: 27 bushels.
Present: 35,000 planta per acre. Yield 150 bushels.
Planned (Stine Seed plan): Breeding corn plants with genetics primed for less space (shorter plants with more upright leaves) with rows 10 inches apart. 60,000 plants per acre. Yield 230-260 bushels er acre.
(source Forbes. April 14, 2014)
Usually there are no prophets around who live to see their prophecies fail.
>
Freud said the id was bisexual, which goes a long way in explaining a lot of things as to the Crazy Ape e.g., homophobia .......
For a detailed and dialectical account of human sexuality and a host of other interesting issues regarding the Crazy Ape's psychology, I'd suggest you read the greatest book of the 20th Century, Norman O. Brown's, "Life Against Death". Kindle it.
Don't read this book without your helmet and seatbelt on.
I offer $100 to anyone that can name me a better book to read.
Freud said the id was bisexual, which goes a long way in explaining a lot of things as to the Crazy Ape e.g., homophobia .......
For a detailed and dialectical account of human sexuality and a host of other interesting issues regarding the Crazy Ape's psychology, I'd suggest you read the greatest book of the 20th Century, Norman O. Brown's, "Life Against Death". Kindle it.
Don't read this book without your helmet and seatbelt on.
I offer $100 to anyone that can name me a better book to read.
4
Bambi, a life in the woods, by Felix Salten.
Lots of intelligent commentary on nature and the differences of animals.
Send the $100 to a Syrian refugee resettlement charity, thx.
Lots of intelligent commentary on nature and the differences of animals.
Send the $100 to a Syrian refugee resettlement charity, thx.
1
It should be noted that Brown himself repudiated the book and many of its ideas later in his life.
How about the Bible?
1
I had no idea Charles Blow identified as bisexual, and am delighted to see this piece, reiterating his "coming out" in his memoir and providing basic information about bisexuals, who are all too often ignored or caricatured. Kudos to him for this brave column, and to the Times for highlighting the existence and experiences of bisexual people, a group as diverse as all Americans (ranging from very cool Miley Cyrus to African American Times columnist Blow and well beyond).
64
I, too, had no idea, and at least until I surprisingly find him in my bed, it's of no consequence. Much like Ms Cyrus's likes and dislikes.
Are you saying Charles is not cool? Just kiddin'
Gender is what we are, sex is what we do. The tragedy of our verbal inaccuracy is that we use a fraught word as a descriptor. Freeing ourselves from the binary of our societally approved sexual behavior could enable more of us to understand the sexual part of human behavior as a place where humans play and express a range of emotions, sometimes loving and sometimes exploitive and even violent. Freeing ourselves to see sex as part of human play sounds like a good thing to me. It allows us to regard each other as people rather than as good or bad, and could help liberate us from the tyranny of all religion. Imagine a world in which the values we impose upon sexual play are of prevention of disease and unplanned pregnancy, respect for the physical safety of the other, respect for the emotional safety of the other.
26
Freud explained some homosexuality/bisexuality as a refusal to be completely defined by our gender-based biological sexuality- a resistance to this pure creature definition of what we are.
The human imagination is one of the things that seems to set us apart, and in sexuality it continues to express itself and dream up alternatives.
I think it was Roth who described a young man in one of his novels, having sex with a piece of raw liver.
The Old Testament details and prohibits everything but heterosexual activity, calling it confusion. Over 2000 years have flown since those days in the tents, tending the sheep, and life now can be much more confusing.
The human imagination is one of the things that seems to set us apart, and in sexuality it continues to express itself and dream up alternatives.
I think it was Roth who described a young man in one of his novels, having sex with a piece of raw liver.
The Old Testament details and prohibits everything but heterosexual activity, calling it confusion. Over 2000 years have flown since those days in the tents, tending the sheep, and life now can be much more confusing.
6
The OT probably indicates indirectly that life was pretty confusing then too. Otherwise why the prohibitions?
"and life now can be much more confusing"...... only if you believe what you read in the Bible.
If we are going to write or talk honestly about sexual desire, then we need to start by acknowledging that sexual desire does not start at midnight at the moment we turn eighteen. Or twenty-one. Or sixteen. Or whatever the jurisdiction of the time and place currently demands.
Even in 2015, non-Anglophone Europeans do not usually get especially hot under the collar about this. Americans of all political shades, however, seem to get very agitated at this notion. Only, of course, Americans over eighteen; or twenty-one; or sixteen. It's apparently part of the national psyche — open-minded, broad-minded, and ingenuous hypocrisy at its most flagrant.
Even in 2015, non-Anglophone Europeans do not usually get especially hot under the collar about this. Americans of all political shades, however, seem to get very agitated at this notion. Only, of course, Americans over eighteen; or twenty-one; or sixteen. It's apparently part of the national psyche — open-minded, broad-minded, and ingenuous hypocrisy at its most flagrant.
4
Mr. Colenso:
I don't think we have any problem acknowledging that sexual feelings "can" occur in underage persons. Nonetheless, adults are legally prohibited from engaging in any kind of sexual contact with those underage persons. PERIOD. Children cannot give consent, and adults who have sex with underage persons are committing a crime.
The rights of children to be free from rape, sexual assault, and sexual exploitation have only been recognized fully in this country in recent years. Child rape still occurs all over the world, and is often cloaked in the disingenuous claims of rapists and exploiters that children are seductive and desire sex with adults. NO.
I don't think we have any problem acknowledging that sexual feelings "can" occur in underage persons. Nonetheless, adults are legally prohibited from engaging in any kind of sexual contact with those underage persons. PERIOD. Children cannot give consent, and adults who have sex with underage persons are committing a crime.
The rights of children to be free from rape, sexual assault, and sexual exploitation have only been recognized fully in this country in recent years. Child rape still occurs all over the world, and is often cloaked in the disingenuous claims of rapists and exploiters that children are seductive and desire sex with adults. NO.
2
No sex with children/minors, Colenso.
Even Miley Cyrus is not down with that, yo.
Even Miley Cyrus is not down with that, yo.
"… open-minded, broad-minded…"
Debra Hauser, president of Advocates for Youth stated that "Ninety-five (95%) percent of all Americans have sex before marriage. About half of all young people begin having sex by age 17."
That's where amoral "open-minded" thinking takes you.
It is disappointing that Mr. Blow's decision to use quotes by Miley Cyrus to illuminate his point was so distracting to many who commented on his piece that the point itself was lost in translation. That is all.
71
Some like Boeuf Bourguignon, others like Tom Yum soup. Very few people who like Boeuf Bourguignon also like Tom Yum soup, and vice versa. But in New York many like them both, equally.
11
Having sex is like slurping a bowl of soup, and enjoying the flavors?
(You lost me there, Abram.)
(You lost me there, Abram.)
There are 2 axes to sexual feeling : intensity (none to hyper) and direction (from completely straight to completely gay). We are now moving from a point to a line, but need to look at the whole 2-dimensional space.
7
We are now moving from a point to a line, but need to look at the whole 2-dimensional space.
---------------------------
Why do we need to publicly examine private sex lives, celebrity/columnist or otherwise?
If Miley were really happily pansexual, and not doing this Lady-Gaga-style to promote her career, why not be having sex instead of informing others of your practices, or advocating that others join in your movements?
I think Mr. Blow is being public because it's copy. But, who cares about your private business just because you are a NYT columnist? Is your word, or Miley's, more important than others?
Have all the sex you like, with whomever you want, but plese: don't make the rest of us look and address these issues. We want our news to be about unemployment/interest rates, the rising crime rate in our cities and inability to curb gun shootings, the refugee migrant crisis in the Middle East spilling over to Europe and eventually the US, the upcoming elections and the slap-in-the-face to Washington that is the Trump campaign, the backlash from the gay marriage cases (Kim David is a clerk, and she's gone public, but how many teachers/health care nurses/police and first responders have issues with serving, equally, gay populations and how does that affect those publicly served in smaller jurisdictions?)...
When we think of the news issues that affect us all, Ms. Cyrus and Mr. Blow's sexual identity issues seem small, not a public concern for the NEWSpapers. Hth.
---------------------------
Why do we need to publicly examine private sex lives, celebrity/columnist or otherwise?
If Miley were really happily pansexual, and not doing this Lady-Gaga-style to promote her career, why not be having sex instead of informing others of your practices, or advocating that others join in your movements?
I think Mr. Blow is being public because it's copy. But, who cares about your private business just because you are a NYT columnist? Is your word, or Miley's, more important than others?
Have all the sex you like, with whomever you want, but plese: don't make the rest of us look and address these issues. We want our news to be about unemployment/interest rates, the rising crime rate in our cities and inability to curb gun shootings, the refugee migrant crisis in the Middle East spilling over to Europe and eventually the US, the upcoming elections and the slap-in-the-face to Washington that is the Trump campaign, the backlash from the gay marriage cases (Kim David is a clerk, and she's gone public, but how many teachers/health care nurses/police and first responders have issues with serving, equally, gay populations and how does that affect those publicly served in smaller jurisdictions?)...
When we think of the news issues that affect us all, Ms. Cyrus and Mr. Blow's sexual identity issues seem small, not a public concern for the NEWSpapers. Hth.
2
Miley Cyrus is your lead example? She'll say or do anything to get attention. It's tough to take in the rest of your opinion when you start out with that.
253
Too bad you dismiss a nuanced argument because one amplifier of that argument offends you in her lifestyle choices.
Miley Cyrus, eh...talk about a person who has brought absolutely nothing of consequence to our society.
Charles, better that you had written a column about Larry Kramer.
Charles, better that you had written a column about Larry Kramer.
159
Listen to Ms. Cyrus's rendition of Dolly Parton's "Jolene" on the Backyard Sessions (its on Youtube) and tell me this woman is not a very talented artist.
The casual dismissals of Ms. Cyrus in the comments here are grounded in ignorance.
Her Happy Hippie Foundation may have a lighthearted name, but its work in support of homeless and LGBTQ youth is saving lives, something I imagine Larry Kramer would appreciate.
I don't have much time for pop music celebrities, but I do know that young women who are unashamed of their sexuality often cause otherwise sensible people to blow a gasket and say quite vicious things.
Charles Blow had good reason to cite Ms. Cyrus in this column. She is emblematic of a generational sea change in attitudes towards gender and sexuality. A column about Larry Kramer would also be welcome. They needn't be posed against each other.
The casual dismissals of Ms. Cyrus in the comments here are grounded in ignorance.
Her Happy Hippie Foundation may have a lighthearted name, but its work in support of homeless and LGBTQ youth is saving lives, something I imagine Larry Kramer would appreciate.
I don't have much time for pop music celebrities, but I do know that young women who are unashamed of their sexuality often cause otherwise sensible people to blow a gasket and say quite vicious things.
Charles Blow had good reason to cite Ms. Cyrus in this column. She is emblematic of a generational sea change in attitudes towards gender and sexuality. A column about Larry Kramer would also be welcome. They needn't be posed against each other.
While I support without reservation the rights of individuals to be sexually active as described by Ms. Cyrus, it seems to me that playing the part of the sexual libertine provides support to those who have long claimed that people choose their sexuality.
21
How on earth does that follow?
4
Humans don't choose their sexuality. They do choose with whom to have sex.
14
Sometimes you just fall in love. Read May Sarton.
4
While I'm heartened to know that today's kids are increasingly open to recognizing that they may be bisexual, I'm even more encouraged to see that they are aware of the fluidity of gender. We make a mistake if we confuse these two things. Who one chooses to have sex with and what gender one does or doesn't identify with, while related, are in fact two very different things.
18
Interesting column. Many years ago, my mother told me that she believed that humans existed on a continuum of sexuality. Everything I have seen since confirms this, though some people fall more heavily on one end of the spectrum or the other. Nonetheless, I would not put too much stock in the idea that young people today are more sexually fluid. They may be, but I also think it is true that young people are still in the process of working out their sexual identities. Once they do so, they will probably lean more strongly towards one end of the spectrum or the other. I base this on the belief that people do need stable foundations from which to lead and build their lives and, ultimately, making choices is necessary for that foundation. However, I also suspect that the number of "pansexual" people in our society will increase with time as this becomes more of a viable option.
9
It's an interesting point but I think there's a lot of evidence to suggest that the incidence of bisexuality will actually increase -- human sexuality is very sensitive to social mores. See the ancient Greeks for a famous example but if you look around the world you will find that 40% of societies have some form of sanctioned homosexuality and that yes, this affects the sexuality of the members of the society.
1
If young people follow the median their sexuality it will only lead to perdition.
Suggestions for sexual success have been touted by a lot of social hypocrites.
Years back the book "Open Marriage" came out telling us to share our spouse with others for a better marriage.
Ten years later the same husband and wife team espoused "The New Fidelity" of staying true to one's spouse.
How many lives were ruined in-between these two books.
Read the tragically sad case of Simone de Beauvoir and her open relationship with Jean Paul Sartre to realize the deep pain caused by liberal thinkers to each other—mostly other (meaning women).
One women on Joan Hamberger’s radio show told of having an open relationship with fifteen different lovers. She admitted ending up feeling like an empty shell of a zombie.
Most people end up in the spiritual—if not physical—trash can emotionally as well.
This kind of thing just doesn't work with human beings despite the facade of pleasantries presented in front of others.
If their is no love nor fear of God nor commitment then people run after the latest insanity of how to conduct oneself morally—sexual or otherwise.
1
Leaving my son, last summer, at his college campus after his Freshman orientation weekend, I sheepishly offered my two cents worth of parental advice on the subject of sex: pal, I said, just try to get to a place where you can view and treat your sexual experiences as a precious gift, one you are both receiving and providing. If Mr. Blow and his model for sexual clarity, Miley Cyrus, seem not to have the faintest clue that each and every sexual encounter one experiences is akin to playing with red hot fire, then they both haven't a clue about the nature of sexuality, whose deepest roots are emotional, not physical. When Mr. Blow green lights every sexual impulse one may have with the word "fine", my response to him is, "Fine for who?"
162
But Blow didn't say that. He quoted Cyrus, who ruled out animals, and people not of age, and illegal behavior. And, of course, there are many other situations in which sexuality is not appropriate, e.g., cheating on a loving partner.
I don't think this column was about free love in the 60's sense, and I don't think it was about illegal or amoral sexual activity. Rather, it was about being free to acknowledge the many facets of human sexuality, the fact that it isn't always entirely straight, that it isn't always missionary position in a dark room. We've spent so much energy trying to suppress every non-Biblical aspect of our sexuality (and some Biblical ones), and experienced so much distress as a result. What's wrong with being a bit freer, as long as the behavior is legal, responsible, consensual, and doesn't harm anyone?
I don't think this column was about free love in the 60's sense, and I don't think it was about illegal or amoral sexual activity. Rather, it was about being free to acknowledge the many facets of human sexuality, the fact that it isn't always entirely straight, that it isn't always missionary position in a dark room. We've spent so much energy trying to suppress every non-Biblical aspect of our sexuality (and some Biblical ones), and experienced so much distress as a result. What's wrong with being a bit freer, as long as the behavior is legal, responsible, consensual, and doesn't harm anyone?
7
You insult Mr.Blows intelligence and mine by dismissing his stance on bisexuality as "greenlighting every sexual impulse." You assume what most homophobes always do, that l, g, and b's are all unable to control impulses, achieve true intimacy, or commit to a long term relationship.
7
... for whom? you mean, since the distinction between a subject and an object is significant, especially when speaking abut human sexuality!
3
Miley Cyrus? Little Miss sex-on-the-stage is supposed to be the heroic example we are to emulate? Please.
The rest of us are just doing our best to raise our children as safely and as honorably as possible and to stay clear of the weird stuff. I'm very sorry about your condition but, no - for society to exist and families to have the stability they need, your position is the same as jumping off a cliff.
The rest of us are just doing our best to raise our children as safely and as honorably as possible and to stay clear of the weird stuff. I'm very sorry about your condition but, no - for society to exist and families to have the stability they need, your position is the same as jumping off a cliff.
78
Independent,
How intolerant of you. And more than a little ignorant, especially of the fact that what is wierd, and what contitutes the makings of a stable society, are conventional. That is, they change and are formulated by society itself. So, you see, it turns out that, in fact, a strong society may include people who were once considered sinners. Lighten up, it will all be ok !
How intolerant of you. And more than a little ignorant, especially of the fact that what is wierd, and what contitutes the makings of a stable society, are conventional. That is, they change and are formulated by society itself. So, you see, it turns out that, in fact, a strong society may include people who were once considered sinners. Lighten up, it will all be ok !
5
What a bigoted post. "Weird stuff?" "Condition"?
I think you'll find that people throughout history have managed to acknowledge their sexuality without jumping off a cliff, or damaging the stability of their families.
As in all things sexual, a bit of common sense is necessary; even the straightest guy has to restrain himself from damaging sexual activities. It's hard to see how acknowledging one's bisexual impulses as young people are now doing prevents that. Indeed, the people who get in trouble with those impulses are typically the people who try to hide or suppress them.
I think you'll find that people throughout history have managed to acknowledge their sexuality without jumping off a cliff, or damaging the stability of their families.
As in all things sexual, a bit of common sense is necessary; even the straightest guy has to restrain himself from damaging sexual activities. It's hard to see how acknowledging one's bisexual impulses as young people are now doing prevents that. Indeed, the people who get in trouble with those impulses are typically the people who try to hide or suppress them.
7
Oh sure. Wonderful things like ridiculously high STD rates, failed marriages, children raised with only one parent, children being sexually abused, obsession with pornography - I mean, how could a functioning society have gotten along without these things?
Sorry - sexual attraction was part of the design to make humans reproduce, not to make it the centerpiece of our existence.
Sorry - sexual attraction was part of the design to make humans reproduce, not to make it the centerpiece of our existence.
8
Pansexual is very different than Bisexual. There are no predetermined parameters.
2
It comes as no surprise Mr. Blow that whatever gets many people through the night is often not sex and frequently involves functions beyond the pleasure of that procreational activity.
A lot of time, newsprint and money is and will continue to be blown on a pleasant function most of us are involved with but hardly to the extent devoted by people who have a forum where much more pressing issues than "feel good" can be addressed.
There are much more important problems facing too many people, like where is the money for the next meal or the rent coming from, than prompting a discussion about who gets off with whom.
Miley isn't hungry and neither are you.
Get your soap box down with that.
A lot of time, newsprint and money is and will continue to be blown on a pleasant function most of us are involved with but hardly to the extent devoted by people who have a forum where much more pressing issues than "feel good" can be addressed.
There are much more important problems facing too many people, like where is the money for the next meal or the rent coming from, than prompting a discussion about who gets off with whom.
Miley isn't hungry and neither are you.
Get your soap box down with that.
28
Just because Blow didn't right about your pet topic doesn't mean that he should be criticized for it. These sexual issues are important to many of us and it's hard to see why they shouldn't be covered, particularly given that the paper is filled with trivia about everything from fashion shows to recipes to baseball scores. Besides which, I found the figures on the huge change in attitude by age enlightening and interesting.
8
There are plenty of LGBTQ youth living on the streets who will go to sleep hungry tonight or who will be forced to prostitute themselves to avoid that fate. Somewhere, one of them is committing suicide. Its too bad that none of them have columns in the New York Times or big recording contracts that might lend them a soapbox from which to insist on their humanity. But until they do, I am glad that there are non-hungry people, like Mr. Blow and Ms. Cyrus, who are willing to stand up against the bigotry that drives many from the family homes that should protect them. (For the record, Ms. Cyrus runs a foundation that feeds and clothes young people facing these circumstances.)
It is true that we live in a shallow celebrity-obsessed culture unable to focus on important issues of poverty, hunger and extreme economic inequality. It is not true, however, that the question of accepting the full range of loving human sexuality and gender expression has nothing to do with those issues.
It is true that we live in a shallow celebrity-obsessed culture unable to focus on important issues of poverty, hunger and extreme economic inequality. It is not true, however, that the question of accepting the full range of loving human sexuality and gender expression has nothing to do with those issues.
11
I accept both critiques at face value and only submit that there are issues such as food clothing and shelter here and throughout the world that affect people of whatever sexual persuasion far more than those who have not had the opportunity to express a choice of any lifestyle but that of living.
If the men who beat their chests and other's heads, would stop with their manly pandering of might long enough to consider they are one very small part of a much larger community which includes far greater numbers of those who end up as targets in their vacuous game, the world would be a place in which all of us could live happily and in peace.
If ever both mother and father, throw their children out or for any reason cause them to leave they should be held responsible until the child is grown
I do have a "pet topic" and fear of death is it.
The most frightened are those who resort to killing as the solution of any problem which they cannot surmount in another way and they are invariably men; very disturbed, very well clothed, very well fed and very well read men who use every empty argument to justify sticking the barrel of a gun down the throat of any one who raises the voice of reason in opposition to their long standing tenet of Might Makes Right.
Guns are clearly phallic and unfortunately used by far too many men throughout the world as a symbol of superiority, sexual or otherwise. It is past time for them to holster their weapons so we can all have a better sex life
If the men who beat their chests and other's heads, would stop with their manly pandering of might long enough to consider they are one very small part of a much larger community which includes far greater numbers of those who end up as targets in their vacuous game, the world would be a place in which all of us could live happily and in peace.
If ever both mother and father, throw their children out or for any reason cause them to leave they should be held responsible until the child is grown
I do have a "pet topic" and fear of death is it.
The most frightened are those who resort to killing as the solution of any problem which they cannot surmount in another way and they are invariably men; very disturbed, very well clothed, very well fed and very well read men who use every empty argument to justify sticking the barrel of a gun down the throat of any one who raises the voice of reason in opposition to their long standing tenet of Might Makes Right.
Guns are clearly phallic and unfortunately used by far too many men throughout the world as a symbol of superiority, sexual or otherwise. It is past time for them to holster their weapons so we can all have a better sex life
2
Cyrus has boundaries? Of course not. Don't pay attention to anything she says or does. If there is a boundary it is money. Her brand is anything outrageous that will make money for her. For Cyrus, sex, any kind, sells. Blow, to try to transfer Cyrus to be some kind of civil rights icon, as you do here, shows you are stuck in bankrupt ideology. Anybody who defines themselves by their sexual orientation is mentally sick and in need of professional help.
30
Blow got in a plug for his own book too.
He's down with the commercial angle of this openness about sexuality too, you know. Don't think he'll go as far publicly as Miley though to promote himself and his career, but who knows what people will do when the talent well starts running runs dry. He appears to be running out of diverse subjects to cover, beyond race and sex and personal characteristics.
I think Mr. Blow is too sheltered/wealthy at this point to understand the issues that the American people are discussing, and their primary, non-sexual needs. When the journalists go celebrity, they become the story and the work suffers.
He's down with the commercial angle of this openness about sexuality too, you know. Don't think he'll go as far publicly as Miley though to promote himself and his career, but who knows what people will do when the talent well starts running runs dry. He appears to be running out of diverse subjects to cover, beyond race and sex and personal characteristics.
I think Mr. Blow is too sheltered/wealthy at this point to understand the issues that the American people are discussing, and their primary, non-sexual needs. When the journalists go celebrity, they become the story and the work suffers.
2
Exactly right. Homosexuality places this feature of a multi- faceted personal características as the primary self-identifier rather that, say, kíndness empathy, integrista, competence, loyalty, etc and is sadly decadent.
1
The problem with human beings' understanding of sexuality is that historically, and until fairly recently, the Bible, the Torah and the Koran have been the best selling books in human history.
If humans had the same exposure to a zoology book as they have had with medieval religious textbooks, we would have caught up to the true nature of sexuality and reality much quicker than our current snail's pace.
Homosexuality and/or bisexuality has been witnessed and documented in 1500 different species.
Penguins, dolphins, lions, bonobos, giraffes, sea lions and killer whales are just a few of the swingers out there.
It turns out that homosexuality and bisexuality is in fact very natural in the animal kingdom... of which humans are a part.
Bruce Bagemihl's 1999 book Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity describes this reality in great detail.
The one book that seems to be holding people back from understanding the reality of the sexual spectrum has been the medieval religious textbook.
And because of that, the only sub-species in the world that suffers from homophobia and biphobia is the lowly religious human.
Learn about zoology instead of theology, people - homosexuality and bisexuality are perfectly natural, in spite of all the religious objections.
If humans had the same exposure to a zoology book as they have had with medieval religious textbooks, we would have caught up to the true nature of sexuality and reality much quicker than our current snail's pace.
Homosexuality and/or bisexuality has been witnessed and documented in 1500 different species.
Penguins, dolphins, lions, bonobos, giraffes, sea lions and killer whales are just a few of the swingers out there.
It turns out that homosexuality and bisexuality is in fact very natural in the animal kingdom... of which humans are a part.
Bruce Bagemihl's 1999 book Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity describes this reality in great detail.
The one book that seems to be holding people back from understanding the reality of the sexual spectrum has been the medieval religious textbook.
And because of that, the only sub-species in the world that suffers from homophobia and biphobia is the lowly religious human.
Learn about zoology instead of theology, people - homosexuality and bisexuality are perfectly natural, in spite of all the religious objections.
398
You're completely missing your own point. Our society has grown, come together, and been enjoined morally and legally through these books.
Does it not even cross your mind that without these books we'd still be on the plains, having sex all day, and picking our feet?
Modernity seeks to undo the past because it has failed utterly to continue to innovate. So it must reinvent. And hey, who doesn't want more sex? Who isn't at base a monkey?
The best way to learn about zoology is to join the zoo.
Does it not even cross your mind that without these books we'd still be on the plains, having sex all day, and picking our feet?
Modernity seeks to undo the past because it has failed utterly to continue to innovate. So it must reinvent. And hey, who doesn't want more sex? Who isn't at base a monkey?
The best way to learn about zoology is to join the zoo.
6
As usual, Socrates, you make excellent points. Nonetheless, some of the most intriguing stories of queer love, lust and infatuation are in the Bible: Eve and the Serpent; Lot and his daughters; Abraham and Sarah; Abraham, Sarah and Pharaoh; Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar; Abraham, Sarah and Abimelech; David and Jonathan; David and Saul; David and Bathsheba; Judah and Tamar; Ruth and Naomi; Jesus and the disciple whom Jesus loved.
6
Yes Socrates, name of a philosopher. But we human beings are much more than our biology. I do not see animals looking up at the sky in wonder at the stars and engaging in art, science, and philosophy trying to make sense out of the universe. We human beings yearn for something more than just mating, reproducing, and eating. What this essay proves is that sexuality might just be a choice after all. And that animals that engage in bisexuality, not transgender acts, might be confused or just going for the flow out of boredom and limited scope in their lack of awareness of the universe.
6
Current discussion on acceptance of sexuality as not necessarily gender oriented has avoided more serious research on the physiological and emotional basis of sexual orientation. After all society is still based on hetrosexual relationships. Variation complicates social control. Moral codes developed over millenia as a a survival response. It would be well to better understand the consequences of a change of attitude and practice for the future of society.
9
"After all society is still based on hetrosexual relationships."
Is it? According to Mr. Blow's essay, your statement is perhaps more truthful when expressed in the past tense.
In an overcrowded world, heterosexuality is not essential.
Is it? According to Mr. Blow's essay, your statement is perhaps more truthful when expressed in the past tense.
In an overcrowded world, heterosexuality is not essential.
13
I admire Mr. Blow and his clarity about the fluidity of sexuality and sexual attraction. I'm less clear about Miley Cyrus and other younger folks. Her development appears to be in the context of the highly sexually charged world of today's teens and young adults. They are saturated in porn, much of it violent. Many teenagers and young adults, perhaps Cyrus among them, are narcissistic and self-indulgent.
I don't experience her "casual, carefree" comments as "both charming and revolutionary." Celebrities who can carouse through life with material excess, outrageous public behavior and constant stimulation are not models for anyone.
Accepting . . . embracing one's authentic sexual being can still be accompanied by modesty, deep relationships and restraint. Her pansexual idea seems hedonistic and shallow, all about easy sensation, not love and respect.
I don't experience her "casual, carefree" comments as "both charming and revolutionary." Celebrities who can carouse through life with material excess, outrageous public behavior and constant stimulation are not models for anyone.
Accepting . . . embracing one's authentic sexual being can still be accompanied by modesty, deep relationships and restraint. Her pansexual idea seems hedonistic and shallow, all about easy sensation, not love and respect.
395
Steve, Excellent comment. You wisely and without judgement put the sexuality/sexual orientation/fluidity issue into a rational/realistic/thoughtful/cautionary framework. Also, even though sexuality and everything related is only one part of the human experience, it can easily get blown out of proportion as if it's a novelty or something newly discovered. Also, sexuality can become pathological. Consider for example sexual assault and what is known as sexual addiction and other forms of sexual acting-out behavior. Those kinds of behaviors are usually outward expressions of some underlying unresolved psychological baggage. So, in a way it could be said that one's particular sexual expression (not orientation) can be a barometer that either indicates psychological health or, if out of control, a sign of some psychological issue that has nothing directly to do with sexuality but with some other unmet need (for example unmet childhood love and affection needs from same or opposite sex parent) or some other dysfunction that is begging for attention.
4
Well said!
2
That is the business model that Miley Cyrus is effectively using to get rich and the model is very successfull in US, and there are worse way to accumulate wealth (i.e. incessant wars and war machines). So can't put entire blame on Ms. Cyrus as our society is responsive to such things. Not sure I know how she is as an individual so I can't be judgemental here.
3
What happens to "I was born this way" and "I didn't choose to be gay" when sexual orientation becomes more of a constantly changing smorgasbord of tastes and interests rather than a fixed biological characteristic? As for Mikey Cyrus, I'm not so sure she represents anything other than self-promotion. "Pan-sexuality" is just something she sells and is about as interesting as her tasteless outfits and general tackiness. So she's eclectic in the bedroom. Who cares?
313
Obviously, you do Ed. Why else would you bother publicly commenting?
5
Human sexuality is more complex than you, or most people, understand. We *know* that some people are "born this way" because scientific research shows that if one identical twin is gay, the other has a 50% chance of being gay, whereas the figure is lower for fraternal twins. So there is a significant hereditary component in being gay.
We *also* know that our species has a certain intrinsic degree of bisexuality and that this is largely socially determined. Thus you have societies such as ancient Greece in which homosexuality is practiced in preference to heterosexuality. Often, the distinction made is between penetrative and receptive sex -- we see the same distinction here, in prison, for example.
I could go on because it's a complex topic but suffice it to say that "I was born this way" does *not* conflict with bisexuality or pan sexuality. As in all things, we are a mixture of nature and nurture, acquiring some characteristics in the womb and then modifying them to a certain extent on the basis of parental and social interaction.
We *also* know that our species has a certain intrinsic degree of bisexuality and that this is largely socially determined. Thus you have societies such as ancient Greece in which homosexuality is practiced in preference to heterosexuality. Often, the distinction made is between penetrative and receptive sex -- we see the same distinction here, in prison, for example.
I could go on because it's a complex topic but suffice it to say that "I was born this way" does *not* conflict with bisexuality or pan sexuality. As in all things, we are a mixture of nature and nurture, acquiring some characteristics in the womb and then modifying them to a certain extent on the basis of parental and social interaction.
5
Bisexuality is a form of biologically-driven sexual orientation on a spectrum. When conservative or religious ideologues says they believe "being gay is a choice" vs "born that way", they may be sincere based on personal experience: it often means (although not always) that they are natural born bisexuals who have repressed their bisexuality and "chose" to behave heterosexually only, because of their internalized homophobia. Repression of bisexuality (no matter where you land on the scale) is no more healthy or honest than repressing exclusive feelings of homosexuality or heterosexuality.
8
I think that when you are attracted to somebody intellectually, or even
emotionally, you long to give everything to that person-- love, even sex.
It doesn't have to be physical, as you say, but your whole being is attracted
to that person.
emotionally, you long to give everything to that person-- love, even sex.
It doesn't have to be physical, as you say, but your whole being is attracted
to that person.
64
This expressed the feeling very well.
However, it expresses what more women have said and showed me.
Men tend to have a different take on this. It is very strong too, but not quite the same.
There is of course room enough in human variation to make this no absolute. But this expression of it strikes me as especially female.
However, it expresses what more women have said and showed me.
Men tend to have a different take on this. It is very strong too, but not quite the same.
There is of course room enough in human variation to make this no absolute. But this expression of it strikes me as especially female.
3
Uh, not really.
3
I had a friend 40 years ago, a 'bisexual' man, who said that sex was a seamless garment and that in the future this would simply be taken as the norm. Well, I guess he was right. I always believed he was and that in fact, this change in perception may be new but people haven't changed. People used to hide the fact that they felt attractions because they were ashamed or because they feared censure. Today it's easier to be honest, I guess, especially for young people. Whether their frankness has opened the discussion or vice versa I don't know, but it is refreshing to think that people will have more fun anyway being able to be who they are and do what they want without so much self-doubt and fear of ostracism. I just hope heterosexuals will not start to feel there is something wrong with them for being straight!
12
One is gratified to see that the pundits are endorsing the stance I had initially adopted as an adolescent in the 1970s. Men and women are aroused by all kinds of sexual stimuli, each other for example, in all the wonderful permutations and combinations that our humanity can muster. Why exclude the amorous possibilities that arise from being open to these experiences, as long as they don't entail breaking up an established relationship, disseminating diseases or inflicting grievous bodily harm? I could never comprehend why some people have such rigid delineations of a state as nebulous as one's own sexuality, and don't think that a human should be compelled to maintain them.
37
Because being sexually selective is what differs us from the dogs.
21
You imagine that sex cannot be addictive. How quaint.
3
The Abrahamic religions come from a dessert region that was very conservative about some aspects of sexuality (not others -- look at all the concubines and wives in the Bible!).
Sexual restrictions can serve an important role in society, the incest taboo being perhaps the most famous.
Our instinctive tendency is to minimize such restrictions but we tend to impose them when they are perceived as beneficial. In the Victorian era, for example, an out-of-wedlock child was economically disastrous for mother and child and syphilis was a terrible risk for everybody.
Conversely, in the 60's, our society became much freer sexually when the birth control pill and safe abortion reduce the adverse consequences. And then we became more conservative in the early 80's when the AIDS epidemic made sex risky again.
So I think there's a balance between our social bonding/reproductive instincts and the social equivalent of the superego.
I envy you though the freedom you achieved in the 70's, when I was still struggling with the reality of social condemnation and my own conflicts (some of which are still with me).
Sexual restrictions can serve an important role in society, the incest taboo being perhaps the most famous.
Our instinctive tendency is to minimize such restrictions but we tend to impose them when they are perceived as beneficial. In the Victorian era, for example, an out-of-wedlock child was economically disastrous for mother and child and syphilis was a terrible risk for everybody.
Conversely, in the 60's, our society became much freer sexually when the birth control pill and safe abortion reduce the adverse consequences. And then we became more conservative in the early 80's when the AIDS epidemic made sex risky again.
So I think there's a balance between our social bonding/reproductive instincts and the social equivalent of the superego.
I envy you though the freedom you achieved in the 70's, when I was still struggling with the reality of social condemnation and my own conflicts (some of which are still with me).
3
Some years ago there was a most interesting column by Ann Landers. She had received literally thousands of letters of women who had married someone who described himself as bisexual; the letters were complaints that their husband had turned entirely homosexual. Ann reported that she had never received a letter reporting the opposite: that the husband had turned straight or had stayed happily in the marriage.
Ann wrote to her immense readership to ask if there were any such cases: she received NO responses. This led her to wonder if there were any male bisexuals. I wonder how this more recent research relates to Ann's report. Do male bisexuals actually exist, or isa bisexuality a passing phase that inevitably turns into homosexuality.
I have no doubt that female bisexuality does exist, and is even common.
Ann wrote to her immense readership to ask if there were any such cases: she received NO responses. This led her to wonder if there were any male bisexuals. I wonder how this more recent research relates to Ann's report. Do male bisexuals actually exist, or isa bisexuality a passing phase that inevitably turns into homosexuality.
I have no doubt that female bisexuality does exist, and is even common.
95
I've never known a man who was 'bi' who didn't eventually wreck his marriage and family. I've known at least half a dozen, and I lead an unusually sheltered life. Just sayin'.
26
What Ann was seeing was guys with a gay preference who said they were bi because of social pressure to marry. This was very common at one time. Indeed, marriage was sometimes mandatory, as when Leonard Bernstein was told that if he wanted to become conductor of the Boston Philharmonic he would have to marry. (He did, and like many gay men in that situation ended up leaving his wife years later.)
Anyway, the scientific research to which you refer has in fact been done and it found that yes, there are genuinely bisexual guys, as measured by physiological arousal (penile plethysmography) when looking at images of both men and women. That same research, interestingly enough, found that all women are bisexual insofar as their physiological arousal is concerned, demonstrating that there is more to object choice than physiological arousal.
Anyway, the scientific research to which you refer has in fact been done and it found that yes, there are genuinely bisexual guys, as measured by physiological arousal (penile plethysmography) when looking at images of both men and women. That same research, interestingly enough, found that all women are bisexual insofar as their physiological arousal is concerned, demonstrating that there is more to object choice than physiological arousal.
11
I suspect that those men were actually homosexual, but in an era where that was so unacceptable, were trying to convince themselves, and society, that they could "become" heterosexual, or at least exist in a straight relationship for the sake of appearance. I personally know several men who tried to live that was, but for most of them, eventually their need to live an authentic life won out and they had to stop trying to "pass." The others remain married but live as closeted gays, having "discreet" gay relationships.
9
I'm at the old end of that 90% category, but that does not correctly reflect my experience of my age group.
Closer is when Mr. Blow writes, "21 percent of women 20-24 years old and 7 percent of men in those ages said that they were somewhere in the middle."
Women were more conflicted, more of both. Maybe we could say more lesbian women tried to be straight? But I've known more straight women who've tried it. Meanwhile, men I've known could not even think about it.
I'd like to know how younger age groups are now. Who is in that 39%? Is it more men now? It is a lot more women now? Is Miley Cyrus speaking for more people, or mostly more women?
I don't know. I'd like to learn. More on this, please.
Closer is when Mr. Blow writes, "21 percent of women 20-24 years old and 7 percent of men in those ages said that they were somewhere in the middle."
Women were more conflicted, more of both. Maybe we could say more lesbian women tried to be straight? But I've known more straight women who've tried it. Meanwhile, men I've known could not even think about it.
I'd like to know how younger age groups are now. Who is in that 39%? Is it more men now? It is a lot more women now? Is Miley Cyrus speaking for more people, or mostly more women?
I don't know. I'd like to learn. More on this, please.
22
I'd like to know more about the gender breakdown too.
That being said, research has shown that, physiologically, anyway, women are bi. And this is not true of all men -- though that can to a great extent be changed by social example (see for example the ancient Greeks).
That being said, research has shown that, physiologically, anyway, women are bi. And this is not true of all men -- though that can to a great extent be changed by social example (see for example the ancient Greeks).
3
Women in modern society -- certainly the last 30 years or so -- have learned to play-act at lesbianism because straight men consider it "hot".
Of course, it is only "hot" if the lesbians are slender, young, and good looking. If they look like Rosie O'Donnell, then it is not "hot" at all, but repellent.
BTW: women playact at this regardless of their own feelings or sexual drives. You can't overstate enough how much of this is due to "fashions" in culture and sexuality.
Of course, it is only "hot" if the lesbians are slender, young, and good looking. If they look like Rosie O'Donnell, then it is not "hot" at all, but repellent.
BTW: women playact at this regardless of their own feelings or sexual drives. You can't overstate enough how much of this is due to "fashions" in culture and sexuality.
1
It is true that--on a personal, individual level--people owe the world no explanation or excuse for their sexual attraction and behavior.
Still, on a meta level, it presents a burning question about statistics. Are attitudes changing because our social environment is now less restrictive? Or are attitudes changing--at least in part--because people are changing at a deeper, molecular level? Science looks to adaptation as our ability to survive environmental stress; overpopulation seems a key factor likely to bring about gene mutation that improves our quality of life and chance of survival. A lessening of heterosexuality (and the attendant procreation) may just be nature's response to this crisis.
But I suspect the explanation moves beyond the context of biology and includes a social--even spiritual--aspect that invites acceptance over rejection, openness over xenophobia. Perhaps this increase in non-discriminant love moves us all--including heterosexuals--as humans towards more tolerance.
Still, on a meta level, it presents a burning question about statistics. Are attitudes changing because our social environment is now less restrictive? Or are attitudes changing--at least in part--because people are changing at a deeper, molecular level? Science looks to adaptation as our ability to survive environmental stress; overpopulation seems a key factor likely to bring about gene mutation that improves our quality of life and chance of survival. A lessening of heterosexuality (and the attendant procreation) may just be nature's response to this crisis.
But I suspect the explanation moves beyond the context of biology and includes a social--even spiritual--aspect that invites acceptance over rejection, openness over xenophobia. Perhaps this increase in non-discriminant love moves us all--including heterosexuals--as humans towards more tolerance.
15
Maybe in the absence of a God of any meaning we are left with sex as our closest intimation of the divine.
In the end, it means that our culture, such that it is, is increasingly addicted to sex. This can only lead to the detriment of our society as a whole.
We're obsessed enough, I think. No need to make our whole culture about sex.
In the end, it means that our culture, such that it is, is increasingly addicted to sex. This can only lead to the detriment of our society as a whole.
We're obsessed enough, I think. No need to make our whole culture about sex.
5
Well, while that may be true George, but you can console yourself with the thought that you have a shot at making it with a hot twenty-something.
Excellent point. There are multiple dimensions to sexual preference, not just straight or gay, or even a continuum between them, but the degree of sexual desire, and the manner of expression, etc. By analogy, we wouldn't ask people if they like food or not, or if they like this type of food or that type of food and expect everyone to fall neatly into one of two categories. We expect every individual to have a range of tastes in types of food and appetites, and for those tastes to change with time and circumstances as well. Food, movies, hobbies, careers, friends, sex: tastes in things generally are multi-dimensional and can't be described by single words.
52
Hear! Hear! I have long maintained that we are moving toward the point where all that is important is that the joining of humans is Miley Cyrus's position. That is good. Yet there is a large segment of society, primarily religious adults, who feel they have a right to not only know what others are doing sexually but that they have a right to legally dictate the sexual activities of others. That is abhorrent and unacceptable.
Mr. Blow is absolutely correct and we must reach toward non-judgmental acceptance.
Mr. Blow is absolutely correct and we must reach toward non-judgmental acceptance.
133
I would agree, the last thing anybody wants today is 'truth'. It is abhorrent and unacceptable to be 'trapped' by it. Sex has nothing to do with it. The last thing anybody should be is 'judgmental', it gets in the way of having fun.
3
Well, if that is all that is important....
An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex. - Aldous Huxley.
An intellectual is a person who has discovered something more interesting than sex. - Aldous Huxley.
17
Well, that would mean that someone was wrong, and you cannot tell a millennial that they are wrong without dire consequences.
2