I get what you're saying, and there is group identity politics going on which is alarming more generally, but I think pinning these observations on our drive to conform is a little heavy handed when the movement is explainable just by removing cultural stigma.
Everyone is, as you said, to some extext "bi" due to "normal" experimentation, but nowadays there is little pressure to stop experimenting. If you are open to gay sex, even if you are not primarily gay, it makes sense to label yourself 'bi' and roll it into your identity, even if just for the practical purpose of communicating you sexual preferences.
I know if I was of my father's generation, I would identify as straight because sex isnt important enough for me to endure any stigma. Am I lying to myself, or just being more honest about the messy nature of sexual attraction?
In some sense it's probably semantics, I think my defintion of "bi" is different from yours. I view it as a classification of a sexual behavior, one which may become part of an identity if you choose. If you view it as strictly a category to signal your membership to the group of other bisexuals (which I argue is too cynical), then the SDB explanation makes sense.
When it comes to nontraditional sexuality, that identity and activity largely becomes the center of their existence.
I doubt you are bi. You're a hetero with some gay experiences, clearly chosen and not born into.
How can I determine this over the internet? Your writing demonstrates you are too normal and thoughtful to be part of a supremely aberrant class fixated on their identity and sexual activity.
The study precisely viewed these as self-identified categories. You are probably right the survey failed to distinguish between people who feel bi and those who marked bi after mere experimentation. Thus, bi would be grossly over counted. This is distinguished from all other categories.
"Your writing demonstrates you are too normal and thoughtful to be part of a supremely aberrant class fixated on their identity and sexual activity". This is precisely my point (that I made in the other thread about theory of mind)
You think these people see sexuality as you do, and thus think they are irrational for disagreeing. When confronted with someone who is clearly normal and rational with a carefully considered argument, opposed to concede that I may have a point, you say IM LYING TO MYSELF (sorry for yelling, cant italicise).
Like bro, there's a dude in bed sleeping as we speak lmao. Im bi. Period.
I can't comment on the methodology since I haven't seen the questions, but my argument is it is valid and not overcounting. The spike is expected and not alarming at all.
I never accused YOU of lying to yourself. Quite the opposite, you seem very self aware.
My comment was cautioning you to not discount that a large number of the non-hetero respondents, especially Bi, are lying to themselves. It's also possible self reported heterosexuals are actually gay.
I'm confused by one thing in the table maybe you can explain. It shows the percentage of men and women identifying as gay and lesbian. Doesnt gay exclusively apply to men and lesbian exclusively to women? How can a man be a lesbian? What am I missing here?
I guess I would then ask "So what?". If "they are mostly just conforming with the identity trend and seeking the social prestige it confers" what does that matter for them as individuals or for society?
Yea, It seems to hinge on an empirical fact about how people define bisexuality, which is something that neither of us probably care enough to figure out lol.
I get what you're saying, and there is group identity politics going on which is alarming more generally, but I think pinning these observations on our drive to conform is a little heavy handed when the movement is explainable just by removing cultural stigma.
Everyone is, as you said, to some extext "bi" due to "normal" experimentation, but nowadays there is little pressure to stop experimenting. If you are open to gay sex, even if you are not primarily gay, it makes sense to label yourself 'bi' and roll it into your identity, even if just for the practical purpose of communicating you sexual preferences.
I know if I was of my father's generation, I would identify as straight because sex isnt important enough for me to endure any stigma. Am I lying to myself, or just being more honest about the messy nature of sexual attraction?
In some sense it's probably semantics, I think my defintion of "bi" is different from yours. I view it as a classification of a sexual behavior, one which may become part of an identity if you choose. If you view it as strictly a category to signal your membership to the group of other bisexuals (which I argue is too cynical), then the SDB explanation makes sense.
When it comes to nontraditional sexuality, that identity and activity largely becomes the center of their existence.
I doubt you are bi. You're a hetero with some gay experiences, clearly chosen and not born into.
How can I determine this over the internet? Your writing demonstrates you are too normal and thoughtful to be part of a supremely aberrant class fixated on their identity and sexual activity.
The study precisely viewed these as self-identified categories. You are probably right the survey failed to distinguish between people who feel bi and those who marked bi after mere experimentation. Thus, bi would be grossly over counted. This is distinguished from all other categories.
"Your writing demonstrates you are too normal and thoughtful to be part of a supremely aberrant class fixated on their identity and sexual activity". This is precisely my point (that I made in the other thread about theory of mind)
You think these people see sexuality as you do, and thus think they are irrational for disagreeing. When confronted with someone who is clearly normal and rational with a carefully considered argument, opposed to concede that I may have a point, you say IM LYING TO MYSELF (sorry for yelling, cant italicise).
Like bro, there's a dude in bed sleeping as we speak lmao. Im bi. Period.
I can't comment on the methodology since I haven't seen the questions, but my argument is it is valid and not overcounting. The spike is expected and not alarming at all.
I never accused YOU of lying to yourself. Quite the opposite, you seem very self aware.
My comment was cautioning you to not discount that a large number of the non-hetero respondents, especially Bi, are lying to themselves. It's also possible self reported heterosexuals are actually gay.
I'm confused by one thing in the table maybe you can explain. It shows the percentage of men and women identifying as gay and lesbian. Doesnt gay exclusively apply to men and lesbian exclusively to women? How can a man be a lesbian? What am I missing here?
Idk, I'd have to look at the actual data (i don't really care that much, sorry gotta work lol).
Wow, I've never seen anyone pull off a reverse "No True Scotsman" maneuver before. That's like the triple Axel of argumentative fallacy.
> When it comes to nontraditional sexuality, that identity and activity largely becomes the center of their existence.
[citation needed]
Most Americans, regardless of their sexual orientation, treat their employment as the center of their identity and existence.
I guess I would then ask "So what?". If "they are mostly just conforming with the identity trend and seeking the social prestige it confers" what does that matter for them as individuals or for society?
Good points, and I think it also ties in with the explosion in other identities such as deaf, autistic, disabled, etc.
Yea, It seems to hinge on an empirical fact about how people define bisexuality, which is something that neither of us probably care enough to figure out lol.