Jump to content

Signs, Signs Everywhere Signs...


56 replies to this topic

#31
Lise441

  • Members
  • 162 posts
BlueBlaze, you hit my point right on the nail. I don't believe there's a such thing as two primary relationships. You are 100% right, someone has to take the back seat because there cannot be two passengers. The female half of the relationship cannot be primary if you make a point of verbally/mentally saying that you will not leave your male half no matter what. The person you refuse to leave is obviously your primary relationship or you would leave the option open to being with him or her long term. It's like you can take or leave the female half, but the male half stays no matter what. Persephone, you make a goo point too, thanks for chiming in. When I thougt I was bisexual (the things we do to find out who we really are :roll: ) I never dated a man and woman at the same time out of respect for myself and for them. I felt that if I was going to be with a man I was with him and him ONLY, and if I was going to be with a woman I was hers and hers ONLY, but I was never satisfied with dating a male and soon discovered that I was a lesbian. I understand that relationships have degrees of complication no matter what, but at the same time why would you set three (or four or five, etc, etc) people up in a situation where somebody is going to get hurt? Maybe it's crazy of me to think this way, but I'm not sadistic and don't want to put anyone in the position to get hurt. I go out of my way to preserve a persons feelings/emotions.
Sometimes you stand on the edge of a cliff and you jump. You jump because you're tired of being scared. Sometimes you jump just to feel the fall

#32
kahloeyes

  • Members
  • 43 posts
in response to the latter post, again, I emphasize that for me personally, I would seek out one in a relationship (married, or coupled with a man) rather than one who is single, etc....

but, I've been thinking on this (and time is limited right now but I am going to address this further in depth later, especially this notion about privilidge, that women keep or choose male relationships, speaking of bisexuals here, etc., and which I think that assumption is bourgeousie, if being married was a priviledge, etc., then how do you explain the poverty (rise in bankruptcy in married families/with children, the double burden, the fact that womens till make 70cents to a dollar that man makes, etc etc...I think that marriage is more an economic necessity for thousands because of the economic system in which we live...don't think so, think we are so liberated, take a good look at statistics of the numbers of women and children in poverty, both married and single, the whole set up of the institution of marriage is a bourgeousie practice, same goes for the imposing this monogamy on women, to ensure the economic dependence and that market of exploitive labor, its one thing when you are single without children, its a whole other situ when you have children to support, as sole supporter...which by the way, are the Number one segment in this nation that are in dire poverty...one reason why women will stay in abusive relationships, the support systems are not there, instead of knocking women who are married to the 'enemy' per se, its about time we stand in solidarity with them, because its that same system that works against them that works against the lesbian, bisexual, gay male, etc etc etc. will touch on that later -- ),

but in regards to bi, monogamy, etc etc...

for one, I would choose that type of relationship for myself not solely for the reasons listed here, But because, for me whats most important, whether male or female, is whether we could connect, relate on a mental basis, because for me, if there isn't an intellectual connection, forget it, don't care how hot or sexy or whatever, sex for me is more than just the body functions. Nothing turns me on more than when I am intellectually stimulated, challenged, and so forth...

now that aside, another important element, for me personally, is that there is some common ground, not identical, but some common, and being that I am married, and have children, have been divorced, single parent as well as single for several years, I have gone through many life phases therefore, it would be I think, important that my partner could relate to those life experiences, somewhat. Being married (and my marriage isn't a bed of roses, let me assure you, there are times its good and times that are not so good, etc., and since I do have a relationship with a man, one who though liberated can still be chauvinistic at times, added to that the complexities and challenges of raising children and in my case, blended family, etc., and to the fact that as a feminist, there are challenges and obstacles that I face often, in combining family unit, etc and still retaining my own identity, self, woman self, etc etc etc...), it would be difficult I think, having a relationship with someone who would not relate to those experiences, etc. My point is, I think it would be easier, healthier to form a relationship with one in similar situ because there would be understanding on things on a deeper level, you get what I am saying?

I mean the same goes for friendships (platonic), I have friends of all ages, male and female, but the closest ones are those that of course can relate to the life experiences, they don't have to be necessarily married but I do find that if they have been or are married, with children, etc., then of course, they know (can relate, etc) the issues that I face, etc...and vice versa (me understanding their situ, etc).

But, all that aside, this is my 'preference', However, I do not believe that this is the Only option, and I'll clarify why. To say that a woman would be maschocist if she were in a relationship, by Her choice, with a bi woman, married or not, but focus here on the married, is to in a way say that woman's choices (the partner here) is not healthy or valid or whatever...

so I would ask, has it occurred to you that maybe some women choose to be in that type of relationship, not because they are masochist but because they are secure in themselves and do not need a sole commitment to feel loved and secure, or content, etc? Going to the one story I mentioned earlier about the lesbian that was in love with a married bisexual, who couldn't leave husband at the time due to other reasons, financial, etc...

this woman Chooses to be with this woman, she loves her, and she is very upfront about it. I don't think she's a masochist or less than, or in need of some protection here, I think she's made her decision, has found what makes her happy and so who are we to say whether its right or wrong? Do I think it could be better if there wasn't that complication, well sure, but is she not a consenting adult with just as much right as anyone to decide for herself what is best for her? And maybe, just maybe some women don't want to be in a monogamous relationship only, or maybe some women want to retain some independence and freedom, without the confinement and still be in a relationship, etc...

but my point is, when we set restrictions on what is right, good, or what is not, bad, etc., are we then not attempting to set controls over a woman's sexual behavior, her choices? To say that if one was to have a relationship with a woman while married, and how unfair and unright that would be, is to somewhat say that women aren't capable of making their own destiny, choices about what is good or desirable for them. I think women are smart enough to know the risks involved, to make wise and capable decisions, and not have to feel guilty because maybe their decisions don't meet with the status quo...

its like, I see this sort of bad girl and good girl type of philosophy here, in regards to the being faithful, not having more than one love partner, etc etc., and honestly, I don't see alot of difference from that and the type of good girl bad girl type of mentality in traditional patriarchial thinking. And another thing, that I think is important to add, that I am talking about women, such as myself, who are open with their husbands about their sexuality, etc., its not like I'm hiding behind closed doors here,

so, I guess, the implication that bi women who are married are this sort of selfish creature with no consideration or love for other women, is presumptious and that women who have relationships with this women are somehow victims? Sure, there are those who are seeking only physical connections, or threesomes, etc., but I have to say, in all the requests for such that I have read, its not like they are hiding that, they just come right out and say it...

now, as a woman that is capable of making decisions, etc., I can either say no or yes, etc. Now if someone is being not truthful, then sure, thats another matter altogether.

I think, if you really love women then you allow them the freedom to choose and respect their right to do so and not put some form of restrictions on their sexuality or types of relationships they seek, etc, nor do you judge them for those choices, its called, liberation. Women have been dictated to long enough by patriarchial and the male dominated society about what is correct behavior and what isn't, and I see a tad bit of transference of that pious religious type of controlling women's sexuality here and there...

if the type of relationship isn't for you then its not for you, etc., but that doesn't mean that what works for you, or me, or any of us here, should be the all prequisite for all women, and that includes heterosexuals too. When will we begin to allow women the freedom to decide what works for them, for them personally, regardless of whether its our preference or not, and love them unconditionally regardless, rather than try to set some kind of mold that women should fit into? Isn't there enough of those in the fanatical movements that are fighting to put homosexuality in the closet, put women back into the dark ages and into the subjugated roles already.

It really does work both ways, in regards to tolerance for choices, lifestyles, etc...like I said, both Frida and Simone, both powerful and influential women I might add, and I also would add that they, with many others like them, fought the status quo so you and I Could have that freedom to choose,

well many of them were bisexuals and married, and many of their female partners were just fine with that...they weren't victims, etc. They were women, both bisexuals, lesbians, and heterosexuals who bucked the male dominated system and said to hell with the restrictions and social mores, and embraced their sexuality,

and were not afraid to love, to live, with all the passion they could muster. Not only that, they dedicated a big part of their lives and energy in fighting for the rights of all women, people, against many forms of oppression and subjugation, and exploitation....

and yes, I am new to this community, and I sure don't understand alot, but one thing I do understand, and that is that a woman, and only that woman, has the right to decide and take ownership of her sexuality and choices, not by the standards imposed on her by others, including other women, but by her own standards and without retribution or being looked down upon because her standards or choices may not be what you would choose.

In solidarity,

Kahloeyes
"Both the oppressed classes, women and the immediate producers, must understand that their emancipation will come from themselves. Women will find allies in the better sort of men, But the one has nothing to hope from man as a whole" Eleanor Marx

#33
Lise441

  • Members
  • 162 posts
Isn't it the 1950's/19060's mentality to believe that you have to be married to make it in this world? I don't believe anyone, male or female, needs another person to make it in this world, children or no children. If you get into the habit of thinking "I need him...her to make it." then you will never know what it's like to stand on your own two feet because you're so used to having someone carry you along through life. But I guess to each its own :roll:
Sometimes you stand on the edge of a cliff and you jump. You jump because you're tired of being scared. Sometimes you jump just to feel the fall

#34
kahloeyes

  • Members
  • 43 posts

Quote

BlueBlaze, you hit my point right on the nail. I don't believe there's a such thing as two primary relationships. You are 100% right, someone has to take the back seat because there cannot be two passengers. The female half of the relationship cannot be primary if you make a point of verbally/mentally saying that you will not leave your male half no matter what. The person you refuse to leave is obviously your primary relationship or you would leave the option open to being with him or her long term. It's like you can take or leave the female half, but the male half stays no matter what.

Who said anything about taking or leaving the woman? Thats not what I said...when I said I wouldn't leave my husband, what I am saying is that I wouldn't just toss him aside because I am bisexual or that I am in a relatioship with a woman, if I ever were to leave my husband, who is, by the way, my comrade, it would be because our relationship wasn't working or for some other reason...

but that doesn't mean, that the woman, I could just take or leave her, which is why I emphasized for me, personally, two primary relationships...(with another married bisexual), and yes, it has been done. The implication that bisexual women just take or leave the other woman, is the insinuation that bisexual women are just looking for a fling, etc...

and that is not true in all cases. There are bisexual women who want both male and female partners, committed relationships with both, it isn't as common as lesbian relationships, sure, but they do exist, and they are more common of course in nations that are a tad more tolerant or more sexually free, etc.

Maybe it depends on the marriage, too, I am married and while its a joining, its retained alot of independence, my life and purpose doesn't center around my husband...we are friends, we love each other, we share our life, experiences (and btw, will tell you that for long time we lived together without marriage, but got married by legal standards because our insurance wouldn't cover the children unless we went that route...again, that capitalist institution and I detest it...because Every child has the right to health care, regardless...)

but anyhow, let me put it this way, is it then, not possible for a married woman to have a lifelong friendship with a woman? Then how is it that if intimacy is involved, then somehow, that bond cannot be, for long term and/or lifetime?

That doesn't make sense...and something else, there is alot of monogamous relationships out there, where the one partner is not primary in the life...could be that work is primary or the person's own interests is primary...monogamy isn't some guarantee that you are the one priority, at any or all times...if that were the case, there wouldn't be divorces.

And how do we define what primary is? Constant attention, time, etc...well, some do not like that, some like their space, etc (my husband and I are both the wanting space, time apart, our own selves, etc., very liberal marriage, I guess you could say...and there is a mutual understanding and respect for that...we are both academics/writers, activists, and both of us, are very independent, etc., emotionally that is, well, hard to explain, but we don't fit into the norm of marriage here according to our society, etc),

maybe its that whole thing about monogamy, maybe thats what I have issues with...its so constricting, (particularly on women, funny how the double standard still applies, etc),

there is a matriarchial society, small, in China, I was told by another female comrade (who lives in Canada) and she said, they (the women) choose their partners nightly, they are bisexual and heterosexual (she's in India right now working to help with Tsunami Aid, but when she gets back I'll ask her which clan it is), and the children have extended family, etc., but it seems to work for them,

The women I have met, that are married bisexuals, are not looking for one primary and one secondary, but two primaries that are 'different', because the relationships are different. There are things characteristic about the relationship between a man and woman that are different from the things characteristic about the relationship between woman and woman (speaking in terms of bisexual marrieds here)...

and the posts (like on those sites that people say what they are looking for, etc) they will say, in relationship/or marriage with man, etc etc., want someone that can be accepting of that, etc.,

and I do know those posts, like that, I see them more and more...(really alot of the male side of it...which surprised me), I don't know, really, how to explain it, but if you're looking for a committed relationship with a woman, with no others in the picture, then of course, you wouldn't want to be in a bisexual relationship with a married woman, nor would you, if you were a single heterosexual woman looking for a committed relationship with a man, look to get into a relationship with a married man...

sure, that makes sense, of course, but I'm talking about two bisexual married women, having a relationship, (not a fling, not a one nighter, etc) maybe short term, or longterm, maybe even a lifetime through death of spouse, etc (and yes, it has been done), that can love two people at the same time, the love is different, yes, but it doesn't mean that the love is 'less than'.

[not saying that bisexual women who are married that are looking for casual only -- that there is anything wrong with that, its up to the people involved and if it works for them, I say great...because people are different, what maybe the needs of some may not be the needs of others...heck, there are people out there that are happy being celibate, go figure]
"Both the oppressed classes, women and the immediate producers, must understand that their emancipation will come from themselves. Women will find allies in the better sort of men, But the one has nothing to hope from man as a whole" Eleanor Marx

#35
kahloeyes

  • Members
  • 43 posts

Quote

Isn't it the 1950's/19060's mentality to believe that you have to be married to make it in this world? I don't believe anyone, male or female, needs another person to make it in this world, children or no children. If you get into the habit of thinking "I need him...her to make it." then you will never know what it's like to stand on your own two feet because you're so used to having someone carry you along through life. But I guess to each its own

Economically speaking, statistically Proven, that single heads of households are more likely to be in poverty...does that mean they 'need to be married to make it', or that they are used to having someone carry them, NO,

what it means is that there is economic inequality and there are the majority of working class that bust their asses and still don't make it, and its worse for women, especially women with children. THAT IS FACT.

so yes, in that regard, because of the way our system is set up, marriage for many is an economic necessity, should it be that way, hell no, and why I fight to end the system and to abolish capitalism...

there are women who have children who work two jobs and still are not making it...there are women who are in abusive relationships and do not have the support system there to leave, because frankly, we have this mentality today that we have arrived, well, we haven't. Not by a long shot, we have numbers of homeless, children living in poverty, on the rise and with speed in this nation, many of whom the parents/or mothers, and single heads of household fathers I might add, that are Working,

they aren't looking for anyone to carry them,

they are looking for a living wage. FACT, numbers of bankruptcies filed by Two parent working families with children increased in 2004 and in single heads of households with children. FACT, sociological studies show that women are more apt to get out of poverty if married, etc., even with education. FACT, having an education doesn't gaurantee that you will not be in poverty.

So, yes, because of how the system is set up, for many, marriage (and there is that element of lack of extended and communal famillies that is contributor as well) is an economic necessity for many women, not all women make a 40,000 K, nor can all women afford to go to college (and even if they do, by time they load up the student loans they are in debt for life, such as myself) and even if, lets say, they make good income, by the time childcare swallows it up, and housing costs, etc etc., is it any wonder then why many opt for marriage?

Does that mean I am promoting 50s mentality, NO, it means that until economic exploitation, via capitalism, is overthrown, there is not such thing for liberation for all women...FACT. Sure, it would be nice to deny the FACTS, but the facts are very there, and if one doesn't see that, then they aren't paying attention...

and which is why I am a Marxist Feminist and not just a Feminist. Women are the most likely to be exploited as cheap labor, both domestically and internationally, FACT...and I'll fight it till the day I die.
"Both the oppressed classes, women and the immediate producers, must understand that their emancipation will come from themselves. Women will find allies in the better sort of men, But the one has nothing to hope from man as a whole" Eleanor Marx

#36
Lise441

  • Members
  • 162 posts
Like I said, to each its own...

But I did want to touch on this:

Quote

monogamy isn't some guarantee that you are the one priority, at any or all times...if that were the case, there wouldn't be divorces.

Actually monogamy is just that. When does monogamy no longer qualify as monogamy? When someone steps outside of the relationship, hence the reason for divorces. People in monogamous relationships don't get a divorce because they were both faithful to the other (there are other reasons why monogamous couples get a divorce), but couples do where one or both people are unfaithful. Monogamy is no longer monogamy when one or both people involved committ an act the dissolves the monogamy.
Sometimes you stand on the edge of a cliff and you jump. You jump because you're tired of being scared. Sometimes you jump just to feel the fall

#37
kahloeyes

  • Members
  • 43 posts
in regards to monogamy, I see what you are saying, but what I meant, is that, just because you are in a monogamous relationship, doesn't necessarily mean you are the priority in your partner's life...other things can take priority, such as work, interests, etc...

and can be just as damaging to a relationship as affairs, etc. I understand what you are saying, about faithfulness, etc...but too, on the other hand, I also understand how open marriages, if both parties are consenting and in agreement, can work for them...and if they are both consenting and there is mutual understanding, then I don't see that as cheating, alternative lifestyle, yes, but not cheating...cheating, I would think, is when you or your partner are having a relationship behind the other's back, being dishonest and not having an open consentual agreement to such.

Let me put it this way, I wouldn't sleep with another man, but, too, if I had relationship with a woman, I wouldn't sleep with another woman either...speaking in terms of bisexuality here...but the important thing would be that all of this would be out in the open, mutual consent (no hiding or illusions or promises of other than), understanding and agreement...thats how I think any relationship should be, singular or multiple.
"Both the oppressed classes, women and the immediate producers, must understand that their emancipation will come from themselves. Women will find allies in the better sort of men, But the one has nothing to hope from man as a whole" Eleanor Marx

#38
UNKNOWN

  • Members
  • 1 posts
I LOVE YOUR COMMENTS! I TOO LOVE MEN & WOMEN. I AM MARRIED TO A MAN, BUT HAVE STRUGGLED WITH MY SEXUALITY SINCE I WAS A YOUNG GIRL. LIKE I SAID, I LOVE MEN, BUT THE THOUGHT OF BEING WITH A WOMAN, GETS ME VERY HOT. I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO DO WITH MY FEELINGS!! I'M PROUD OF YOU FOR BEING ABLE TO ACCEPT YOUR OWN FEELINGS AND DOING WHAT MAKES YOU FEEL GOOD!!

#39
kahloeyes

  • Members
  • 43 posts
Thank you Unknown for the words of encouragement. I still, of course have questions and doubts [don't we all?] but I have found that in my studies (empirical and materialist dialectics, etc) on the institution of marriage and the control of women's sexuality, etc., that the there is alot of areas [in sexuality] that I think are still not understood...and I don't think its simply a matter of the physical, urges, per se, but I think there is that issue of power, powerlessness, emotional attachment and detachment, need for affirmation, and vice versa, etc etc etc...

all those combined, and of course other variables, including social conditioning, religious upbringing, cultural beliefs, and so forth all play a part.

I have though, decided that the best way to understand is to research scientific studies (rather than opinions because opinions of individuals/groups are often attributions, prejudice, misinformation, or information not based on empirical studies, and so forth...

so anyhow, I am now reading these studies on bisexuality, and found some really interesting ones (these are done by experts in the field of psychology and sciences, i.e., sociology, culture studies/anthropology, and so forth) and several dissertations have been written on bisexuality, so thought I'd post them here...

Also found that the term for prejudice and/or attribution towards bisexuals is called 'biphobia', yes, its actually a term, and a recent study in Germany, with empirical data, reveals that people under 30 tend to be more open about bisexuality (speaking of in gay/lesbian community) but that it varies towards male/female, also education level, exposure, and so forth...but this study was on 'attitudes' towards, not about what was normal, what wasn't, etc etc...

I think its good to understand and to seek out answers, and I do believe, that the more empowered women become, the more barriers are broke down, and the more we learn to be tolerant, etc of differences, the more we will understand the complex nature of human sexuality, love, relationships, etc (because when you read these studies, its not so black and white) and I find, it helps me to understand myself...so, here is a few recent studies, dissertations, etc., on bisexuality. I think you could probably find these studies and the journals in libraries -- check the reference and journals sections, or do online search...

Ault AL (1995). Science, sex, and subjectivity. Ph.D Thesis, The Ohio State University, DAI Vol. 56:04A, p. 1550, 180 pages.

Abstract by author: This research theorizes the emergence and institutionalization of a politicized bisexual identity category among women in the United States within the context of broader historical and social processes, and explores figure of the bisexual as a site of social contestation. The study examines the relationship between the institutionalization of modern science and the scientific construction of the body, sex, and sexual identity, and the congruence of these understandings with European masculinist and imperialist interests. The dissertation argues that the bifurcated homosexual/heterosexual categorization system associated with modern scientific discourse foreclosed on the emergence of a bisexual identity category until the destabilization of both gender and science in the late 20th Century. Substantively, the dissertation explores negative constructions of bisexual women in lesbian feminist discourse, demonstrating how the discourse of the dominant system is rearticulated in an oppositional community endeavoring to legitimize itself against a marginalized 'Other.' Bisexual women's own constructions of bisexuality and bisexual politics are examined to evaluate bi activists' claims that bisexual identity disrupts the dualistic sex/gender/sexuality system. This work, which relies on data collected from interviews and electronic (e-mail) questionnaires, extends social research on the constructed nature of the sex/gender/sexuality system, the mechanisms through which identity categories are controlled in relationships between social structure and subjective experience, and the relationships between identity and identity-based social movements. Because the dissertation uses both classic and postmodern sociological theoretical frameworks, the research delineates the continuity between these two broad theoretical approaches often described in oppositional terms. This strategy results in the identification of insights unique to both approaches as they address issues of categorization, marginalization, and social control. The direct focus of this study is the creation of a social identity category that violates the dichotomous structures of the sex/gender/sexuality system and its implications within that system; however, the dissertation holds relevance for other areas of study. The insights from this research should prove useful, for example, in research on other stratification systems based on identity categories, such as the racial stratification system in the United States.
Publication No. 9525988
Baltar JF (1998). The baltar sexual identity inventory – female form: a multidimensional measure of sexual identity. Ph.D. Thesis, Loyola University Of Chicago, DAI Vol. 58:12B, p. 6799, 198 pages.

Abstract by author: In 1991, this author developed a multi-faceted and quantifiable measure for sexual identity in males. A need was assessed for such an instrument given the inconsistent and often contradictory use of terminology in the study of sexual identity as well as a lack of awareness and/or attention to the complexity and multi-dimensionality of human sexuality. Research and theory has indicated that sexual identity should be examined on a continuum rather than in a dichotomous framework (homosexual or heterosexual). Further, it has been suggested that sexual identity can be viewed as multidimensional. The need for an adequate assessment tool has been identified. To date, instruments other than the BSII are either limited to components of sexual orientation, limited to one item per dimension which precludes an examination of the nuances which comprise the dimension, or are not quantifiable. This study attempts to construct a quantifiable instrument which will measure female sexual identity in terms of its dimensions using a series of items hypothesized to correspond to a specified construct. It additionally explores personality variables that are commonly associated with sexual identity such as self-esteem, feelings of guilt associated with sexuality, substance use, and fear of negative evaluation. The study resulted in the construction of the Baltar Sexual Identity Inventory - Female Form (BSII-F). The resulting measure consists of 10 dimensions totalling 102 items. The items comprising the measure have been arrived at through expert ratings and statistical analysis. This has resulted in very high inter-item correlations adding evidence to the content and construct validity of the BSII-F. Convergent and discriminant validity are indicated. The following dimensions were assessed by the BSII-F: (1) Current Lifestyle and Relationship Status; (2) Self-Perceived Sexual Orientation/Attraction; (3) Discomfort with Sexual Orientation; (4) Gender Identity; (5) Sex-Role Identity; (6) Emotional Attraction; (7) Sexual Behavior; (8) Alcohol/Drug Use; (9) Social Behavior and Attitude; and (10) Bisexuality. Other established measures used to assess sex-guilt, fear of negative evaluation, and self-esteem. Participants consisted of 118 female volunteers obtained from the undergraduate human subjects pool of a large, urban, Mid-western university and its surrounding community. The subjects represented a wide demographic range, including age, race/ethnicity, marital/relationship and socio-economic status, education, and religious affiliation. This study has resulted in a measure which seems to be valid and more comprehensive than other available measures assessing sexual identity. The findings lend support to Troiden's (1984) model of sexual identity acquisition in which he addresses the complexity of sexual identification. More specifically, he targets the issue of self-esteem and self-concept in relation to sexual identification, viewing one's internal awareness and acceptance of self-identification in relation to societal, or external, acceptance and support. The less the discrepancy between an individual's present identification and 'ideal' identification, the less guilt, fear of negative evaluation, and subsequent discomfort should be experienced, regardless of sexual identification.
Publication No. 9819591
Bradford M (1997). The bisexual experience: living in a dichotomous culture. PH.D. Thesis, The Fielding Institute. DAI, Vol. 58-03B, p. 1520, 262 pages.

Abstract by author: This is a study of the experience of being bisexual. It examines how bisexually-identified individuals experience cultural attitudes toward bisexuality, how they establish a sense of community for themselves, and how their experience has affected their self-concept. Twenty people self-identified as bisexual - 10 each women and men, ranging in age from 22 to 54 - were interviewed for this descriptive study, based on the model of naturalistic inquiry. The research method was qualitative, using open-ended-question interviews and a content/thematic approach to analyzing the data. Participants collaborated in evaluating the findings; their feedback was incorporated into the final results. The data indicate that cultural attitudes toward bisexuality affected the participants' sexual identity development, self-definition, visibility, and relationships. Three steps in establishing a sense of community emerged from the data: perception of outsider status, location of bisexual individuals and community, and formation of new community. The effects on self- concept of forming and maintaining a bisexual identity included enhanced self-reliance, openness, and enrichment. Both gender and cultural minority status had an impact on their experiences of bisexuality. The findings suggest that bisexual identity inVolves a process of questioning one's own reality, inventing one's own identity, and maintaining that identity through encounters with cultural bias, denial, and personal invalidation, which carry constant threats of isolation and invisibility. For those women and men who manage to achieve a positive bisexual identity despite these challenges the experience is character- strengthening, and some transform the adversity of their experience into social action, becoming leaders in the formation of bisexual community and role models for others.
Publication No. 9724081

These are just three studies, there are numerous others...and I will post more...

In solidarity, love and struggle,

Kahloeyes
"Both the oppressed classes, women and the immediate producers, must understand that their emancipation will come from themselves. Women will find allies in the better sort of men, But the one has nothing to hope from man as a whole" Eleanor Marx

#40
captainjhimmie

  • Members
  • 5 posts
i'm sure all of this has already been said, or at least something close, but i want to have my say anyway. i'm an 18 year old bisexual in a long term relationship with a man, and while i do want to explore my sexuality with a woman, i tried being with a single woman and, as has been said, it did not work out. she became too close and, while not identifying it as "love", she did not want me to leave, which i will have to once i am married.

however.

i have friends, two women and a man, who are all in a relationship with each other. the man and one of the women are legally married, and the other woman is in a loving, caring relationship with both members of the couple. this, i'm sure, is not terribly common as it would be difficult for most people to handle without much argument and strife. i would just like to throw that out there and say, yes, it is possible for such a relationship to exist.
at the moment i am looking for another woman who is in a committed relationship, or one who is willing to try a relationship with both me and my male counterpart.
i'm sure there are strong opinions on this subject; i know some feel that it's impossible, some feel it would take more maturity than most could handle, and most just say those people are greedy and oversexed. i, however, have seen such a relationship in action and have high hopes for my friends and myself.
on the topic of general bisexuality, i was not at first sexually attracted to women. i had always been more about men, but i knew that i could love women just as strongly and fiercely as i had ever loved a man. then, after years of this, i realized that i was strongly sexually attracted to my best friend. this past fall i realized that i'd been holding myself back, thinking that sex with women was wrong, as i had been brought up to believe.
i am not "having trouble making up my mind" or "not wanting to choose". i love women, and i love men. and i fully believe that people can love more than one person. i do not, however, think that anyone should hurt anyone through bisexuality. if this is causing barriers, but the woman feels unfulfilled with only a man, she should look for another woman with the same sentiments.
and an understanding boyfriend.

-Becca





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users