Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ubc-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!ubc-cs!manis
From: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vince Manis)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: Bisexuality anyone?
Message-ID: <1220@ubc-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 16-Aug-85 15:04:47 EDT
Article-I.D.: ubc-cs.1220
Posted: Fri Aug 16 15:04:47 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 04:51:03 EDT
References: <1302@hound.UUCP>
Reply-To: manis@ubc-cs.UUCP (Vince Manis)
Organization: UBC Department of Computer Science
Lines: 32
Summary: 

I recently was talking to a man who claimed to be very happily married, yet
wanted some kind of gay sexual experience. As we talked, I became quite
convinced of two things: 1) that he was indeed happily married,  wanted to
do nothing to jeopardise that marriage, and judged gay sex to be very
threatening to his marriage, and 2) that he considered his same-sex
inclinations to be less strong than his opposite-sex ones. Yet he still felt
that he was gay. After a lengthy discussion, I suggested the ''If it ain't
broke, don't fix it'' philosophy, and he very dubiously agreed. I suggested
that he contact me from time to time, but I've never seen him since.

I don't know what to make of bisexuality, myself. Apart from the normal
bisexuality that all of us experience, professed bisexuality seems to be
something very different. I have often heard bisexuality used as a
justification for a series of inconclusive relationships (yes, I know that's
a cliche, but...). It must, however, be fairly difficult for someone to make
a serious commitment to another person if s/he assumes that his/her sexual
makeup requires continuing experiences with other people. (Yes, that makes
me a closed relationship bigot, but these *are* the eighties, you know :-)

On the other hand, do we want to draw lines so finely? After a long period
of being on the outside looking in, the last thing I want to do to someone
else is to marginalise her/him.  I was recently reading (in The Body
Politic) of the political squabbles at the Greater London Gay Community
Centre. Apparently, there was a strong sentiment that S/M people and
bisexuals, among others, not be allowed the use of the Centre. It was with
some embarrassment that about 1/4 of the Centre's staff confessed to being
bisexual. 

At the risk of flogging a dead horse, let me suggest yet another reason why
we should prefer ''gay'' to ''homosexual''. I have known gay bisexuals,
non-gay bisexuals, and (strangest of the lot) non-gay homosexuals. It all
has to do with how you identify yourself, not whom you sleep with.