Comments on: Bisexuality stable in women https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Mon, 21 Jan 2008 03:41:14 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.3 By: Mary https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68924 Mon, 21 Jan 2008 03:41:14 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68924 No – I was thinking the same about you though? If you are making a joke – it is sort of in bad taste. If you are serious – it is sort of indicative of your definition of love, sexuality, and gender.

]]> By: Jim Phelan https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68923 Mon, 21 Jan 2008 00:15:43 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68923 Mary,

I think you missed the point.

-Jim

]]> By: Mary https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68922 Sun, 20 Jan 2008 18:51:50 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68922 Sexuality is different than love (so really it is not an oxymoron).

]]> By: Jim Phelan https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68921 Sun, 20 Jan 2008 14:28:13 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68921 “Bisexuality stable”, now that’s an oxymoron!

]]> By: Evan https://wthrockmorton.com/2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68920 Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:31:39 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com//2008/01/16/bisexuality-stable-in-women/#comment-68920 Ken, Jayhuck, Minty,

Would anyone go to bed with someone they are not attracted to in the least bit? I thought we were assuming a continuum (that means it is neither proved nor unproved), but that simply means that in nature discontinuity is usually not the rule. However, no one knows how this continuum, if proved to exist, would be shaped in each sex group: U-shaped, J-shaped… That would include your Howard Stern having some attraction for the Brad Pitt or your average gay man for the Angelina consort.

Joking apart — How do you objectively measure sexual orientation besides self-reporting scoring on scales? Plethysmographic response, neuroscans? You name it.

Now, I still find it interesting that they found a large response to same-sex phantasy in a very large sample of twins (9153) and that they found some general genetic suport for this in the studied population. They also asserted that this genetic support in the people who had some potential for homosexual response overlaps the genetic support of people who actually had homosexual behaviour in the last 12 months. So where are the gay genes if reponse is ‘prevalent’ but behaviour is specific? They posed a similar question: why only a very small group would act on their same-sex phantasies if the found genetic support for any same-sex phantasising is prevalent? It’s a question of behavioural genetics, not one of cultural fisticuffs. Can you address this issue in the light of all the available information?

]]>