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.