Everyone Is A Little Bisexual, Even If They Claim Otherwise, Study Finds

Feb 2010
35,126
25,289
between Moon and NYC
Interesting article, what do you think?
The conclusion was based on eye dilation.

Sounds to me more like a research study that started with a sensational result and then looked for any "evidence/correlation" to confirm their discovery.


Not on board....




..
 
  • Like
Reactions: One

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
78,215
70,176
So. Md.
I find it believable. And I don't find it threatening or a scary thought. It doesn't mean you're going to jump someone's bones. Or that you're going to change your basic sexual orientation. It just means you find them attractive at that moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo2 and Hollywood
Nov 2007
2,161
1,399
Prague, Czech Republic
The conclusion was based on eye dilation.

Sounds to me more like a research study that started with a sensational result and then looked for any "evidence/correlation" to confirm their discovery.


Not on board....
Try not to conflate the study with the press release. What the study was actually about is quite interesting (I thought so, anyway).

From their earlier studies on arousal based on pupil dilation, the researchers had noticed the same pattern as others had - that women and men have different arousal patterns. Women tend to be more catholic in their tastes. That is, women who identify as straight demonstrate more subconscious arousal to women than men who identify as straight show to men.

This does not hold true for lesbians, though. Lesbian arousal patterns are very similar to those of straight men. Other psychological research has demonstrated that lesbians tend to exhibit more masculine traits in non-sexual behaviours as well (lest someone object about very feminine lesbians they know, this is a tendency - as in men tend to be taller than women. There are still very short men).

What they wanted to test, then, is 'are these two tendencies caused by the same thing' - does the developmental or psychological or social or genetic influence that makes lesbians react to sexual images the same way as straight men also make them adopt more masculine behaviours.

And the findings suggest this is not necessarily the case. Though their studies confirmed that lesbians, on average, are more masculine in non-secual behaviours and also that, on average, they have arousal patterns much more similar to straight men; these two traits were not distributed in the same way amongst lesbians. So the most butch lesbians are not necessarily the ones whose arousal patterns were most like straight men; and vice versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DanTexas
Jul 2015
33,413
25,031
Florida
You know, I've never thought about this before. Of ALL the autonomic bodily functions, I can't imagine how you control pupil dilation. Breathing, heart rate, perspiration, digestive functions, urination, sexual arousal--we CAN exert a level of control over all of those. I wouldn't even begin to imagine how you could control pupil dilation. Well, other than SHUTTING your eyes.

Maybe spycraft trainers can teach people how to do it.
 
Aug 2018
3,652
6,006
Vancouver
Most of sexuality is a social construct.

If we were born in ancient Greece we'd be wrestling nude and castrating young servant boys to make them more visually appealing during playtime.
 

jacobfitcher

Former Staff
Nov 2014
8,821
7,959
Canada
There is also a difference between finding a person objectively attractive and being attracted TO that person.

I can find a woman visually appealing, but in her presence, no spark.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo2 and HCProf
Jun 2013
18,795
16,813
Here
Some people like broccoli, some people don't..........can science tell us why we "like" or "dislike" a lot of things that are not obvious, such as having a traumatic experience that causes us to, perhaps in most case, dislike something, from mildly to phobic fear?

I don't know if there is a known or absolute way to know what causes any attraction or abhorrence when it comes to many, many things, again, aside from the obvious "environmental" or "experiential" causes.

It is interesting to note that some seem to fear even the possibility that they might even have subconscious bisexual tendencies. I believe simply having them does not mean someone has or will consciously act upon them. I'm not sure why some people may seem to be uncomfortable, with who they are when it comes to what draws them to anything. Perhaps what is needed is a definition of what "bisexual" actually means. Heterosexual people generally means people are attracted to the opposite gender, but "attraction" can cover a whole spectrum of things and ways someone is attracted to anything, including sexual attraction. Certainly, if one is heterosexual, it does not mean they want to have sex with any and all people of the opposite gender. There are other specific "attractions" that narrow their being drawn to others, based on more specific features. Being heterosexual does not mean one cannot be repulsed by a member of the opposite gender. Plus, there are varying degrees of sexual attraction, from next to nothing to raging arousal.

Study or not, conceptually and based on all the physiological things all genders share, for those they don't, it does not seem far fetched that we might share elements of attraction to our own gender. Unless one is having conscious feelings of attraction they aren't sure about acting upon, then there would seem no reason for concern about knowing one has any degree of bisexuality. Even if one does have conscious feelings of attraction for someone of their own gender, what's wrong with it, other than what some in society think?

If you have never had any compunction to wonder about any sexual feelings toward someone of the same gender, then why would there been concern about this study? The mere fact there are so many humans that have never had any homosexual engagement would suggest that even if the study is accurate, it does not mean all heterosexuals are going to run out and engage in sex with someone of the same gender. Knowing I might have elements of bisexuality in my being, does not change who I am and have been, when it comes to who I have ever been attracted to or will continue to be attracted to. I seriously doubt I am going to be attracted to someone from the same gender before I leave this earth, but the possibility that something could happen where that changes, doesn't bother me at all. If it were to happen, it would happen. But for any humans who see it as something other than a part of nature, it would be, a part of nature. No one would be forcing any attraction I might have. I really don't understand any phobia about such a finding or even the concept. For now, I know where my attractions have always been. I don't think they will change, but if they do, will it be because I willed them to or because of what's already a part of me? Where attractions are concerned, what is, is and what will be, will be. Why lose sleep over it?

To be clear, there are "attractions" that can be and are harmful to others or even to one's self, but where "attractions" are benign and any acting upon them are mutual and consensual, who cares if it's men and men, women and women? If you aren't sexually attracted to someone of the same gender, is someone forcing you to be? If you do have an attraction at any point in your life, for someone of the same gender, is someone forcing you to have that attraction? If you don't like broccoli, don't eat it. If you don't like homosexual sex. don't engage in it or watch others engaged in it.
 
Last edited:
Jan 2018
831
474
Houston, TX
Some people like broccoli, some people don't..........can science tell us why we "like" or "dislike" a lot of things that are not obvious, such as having a traumatic experience that causes us to, perhaps in most case, dislike something, from mildly to phobic fear?

I don't know if there is a known or absolute way to know what causes any attraction or abhorrence when it comes to many, many things, again, aside from the obvious "environmental" or "experiential" causes.

It is interesting to note that some seem to fear even the possibility that they might even have subconscious bisexual tendencies. I believe simply having them does not mean someone has or will consciously act upon them. I'm not sure why some people may seem to be uncomfortable, with who they are when it comes to what draws them to anything. Perhaps what is needed is a definition of what "bisexual" actually means. Heterosexual people generally means people are attracted to the opposite gender, but "attraction" can cover a whole spectrum of things and ways someone is attracted to anything, including sexual attraction. Certainly, if one is heterosexual, it does not mean they want to have sex with any and all people of the opposite gender. There are other specific "attractions" that narrow their being drawn to others, based on more specific features. Being heterosexual does not mean one cannot be repulsed by a member of the opposite gender. Plus, there are varying degrees of sexual attraction, from next to nothing to raging arousal.

Study or not, conceptually and based on all the physiological things all genders share, for those they don't, it does not seem far fetched that we might share elements of attraction to our own gender. Unless one is having conscious feelings of attraction they aren't sure about acting upon, then there would seem no reason for concern about knowing one has any degree of bisexuality. Even if one does have conscious feelings of attraction for someone of their own gender, what's wrong with it, other than what some in society think?

If you have never had any compunction to wonder about any sexual feelings toward someone of the same gender, then why would there been concern about this study? The mere fact there are so many humans that have never had any homosexual engagement would suggest that even if the study is accurate, it does not mean all heterosexuals are going to run out and engage in sex with someone of the same gender. Knowing I might have elements of bisexuality in my being, does not change who I am and have been, when it comes to who I have ever been attracted to or will continue to be attracted to. I seriously doubt I am going to be attracted to someone from the same gender before I leave this earth, but the possibility that something could happen where that changes, doesn't bother me at all. If it were to happen, it would happen. But for any humans who see it as something other than a part of nature, it would be, a part of nature. No one would be forcing any attraction I might have. I really don't understand any phobia about such a finding or even the concept. For now, I know where my attractions have always been. I don't think they will change, but if they do, will it be because I willed them to or because of what's already a part of me? Where attractions are concerned, what is, is and what will be, will be. Why lose sleep over it?

To be clear, there are "attractions" that can be and are harmful to others or even to one's self, but where "attractions" are benign and any acting upon them are mutual and consensual, who cares if it's men and men, women and women? If you aren't sexually attracted to someone of the same gender, is someone forcing you to be? If you do have an attraction at any point in your life, for someone of the same gender, is someone forcing you to have that attraction? If you don't like broccoli, don't eat it. If you don't like homosexual sex. don't engage in it or watch others engaged in it.
This was a little hard for me to follow but your point is reasonable. To make a long story short a client of mine, a highly educated Vietnamese businessman that builds and owns a few "glory-hole" and pornography businesses here in the county told me once that it is primarily middle-aged and older "straight men" that are his biggest customer base. I asked him once if he thought they were all gay or were they just curious and he said "No, probably not after so many repeat visits; I think they are just lonely." He and his businesses support his ever growing family and what started as an effort just to make a living as an immigrant has enabled him to expand into other business ventures including grocery stores, motels and now eateries. I don't know whether he is right but one has to wonder if the need for human contact could be that strong to overcome all the societal taboos that exist for those men to engage in anonymous homosexual encounters?