AFriendlyFace

That's wonderful! Good luck! I'm sure it will be. Hmm, that's complicated, and the issue of open relationships is easily one I could devote an entire thread to. LOL, maybe I will start such a thread at some point too, but for now I'll try to be brief with my thoughts: -I truly don't think it is 'human nature' to be monogamous. But I think many of the things people do on a regular basis aren't their natural 'instinct', but never the less still meritorious and very possible. So that fact that it might be instinctual neither doesn't really play against the concept for me. -I have a very strong preference for monogamy in my relationships. As you said, I suppose one can never say never, but I can firmly say that I don't ever intend at this point to enter into an open relationship. -However, I'm also very open-minded about sexual matters, and I don't have a problem with casual sex in general. Thus, I can well imagine that it's very possible that a couple could enter into a serious relationship that they cared about, but be okay with and want to continue casual sex with others. This concept does not blow my mind, but I have a very strong gut reaction of "I don't want that for myself". -I definitely think sex and romantic love have the most potential to be REALLY good, intense experiences when they are combined. However, I'm also a firm believer in sex not equaling love; the two are separate (at least to me). They're really good when combined, but they can also both be very good without the other. -I tend to be more open-minded and liberal about such things than the majority of my friends and I frequently and sincerely speak up in support of couples who both want an open relationship. (for that reason I do believe myself to be sincere in my above expressed opinion). -I do however think that in most cases an open relationship has more potential for jealousy and complications within the primary relationship. I also think about the worst thing that can happen is when one partner really wants such an arrangement and the other doesn't particularly want this but grudgingly consents. For that reason my very firm caveat for supporting open relationships is "If it's truly what both people want and it works for them". If it is then I assure you I really am 'on board'. Well that was fairly brief for me Take care all and have a great day! -Kevin

Have you looked into medication and therapy? hope you feel better soon. Take care, Tim -Kevin

Hey Nick As you know I've been participating in that discussion. It is a very serious issue, I'm enjoying it discussing and was actually thinking perhaps we ought to start a new thread specifically for it. I will say that I personally think it's a bit of an over-simplification to pinpoint Africa's problems on environmentalism (or any one cause), but I'll also concede that that's one of the major factors. I'm sure you'll check out what I said in the Soapbox, but here's the relevant bit regarding the cause again: Sure, but don't you think that a lack of jobs, industry, access to technology have contributed to these problems? What other continent do you know of whose inhabitants are exposed to so many of nature's ravages? People in Africa need industry, jobs, a working economy, access to education and the same healthcare that's available to the rest of the world. Do you honestly think that the reason the AIDS virus is spreading so rampantly throughout Africa is because its people have kept pace with the rest of the world and have the same educational opportunities? Do you think that malaria would be a problem if they cleared out the rain forests and built factories and created jobs? Would the tribes be fighting amongst each other if their men and women had jobs and incomes to they could build houses and own nice cars? I have to make one comment at this point, the 'ideal' you're proposing sounds wonderful, and certainly a lot better than the flip side. However, what you're essentially proposing is a completely Westernizing of Africa. From almost any Westerner's personal point of view that would objectively be better. However, the problem there is that we're being ethnocentric. Africa's culture is completely different from the Western world's. I dare say that the lifestyle you're proposing wouldn't be that appealing to a great many Africans (just speculating). Pragmatically it's probably an inescapable eventual set of motives for Africans since obviously Western culture has more power than traditional African culture. So eventually you're going to have Africans wanting those things, but a lot of them would probably be very distasteful to a traditionally minded African. Of course they want the disease and violence to end, but the majority of them would probably then prefer to go back to their traditional life sans these problems (versus in addition to our 'added quality'). That's mostly an irrelevant aside though because as I said pragmatically it's probably all but impossible to stop Western culture and values from eventually dominating Africa (in certain parts it already does). I suppose that's a very dour view on the whole thing, but I really think the problems are too complicated to pinpoint any one major cause beyond general exploitation from first world nations, which has taken place since colonial times and continues to this day. I also don't think there's any simple or expedient solution. I studied this issue extensively in multiple sociology classes and unfortunately the entire global economy is set up to facilitate first world nations exploiting third world nations, which essentially boils down to the Western world exploiting Africa. It's completely inexcusable, but it's majorly entrenched and complicated, we'd just as soon tackle peace in the Middle East. To offer some explanation for why it began happening in the first place and why it continues I'll offer up the concept of diffusion of guilt. Basically, yeah Americans, Canadians, Western Europeans, and people in some Eastern Asian countries are largely to blame in a multitude of ways for a multitude of Africa's problems, but you do have several countries that are to blame, and you have several governments, and BILLIONS of people who are very very indirectly to blame. The average American (or Frenchman or Japanese person or...) doesn't feel a whole lot of personal guilt for what's going on in Africa because he/she number 1) probably doesn't even think about it at all, and number 2) could legitimately share the blame equally with everyone he/she knows. As a result most people don't feel much personal responsibility to do anything about it. Admittedly, I at least don't think there is a lot an individual person could do about it. It's beyond the scope of even the politicians of individual nations. In my opinion a serious effort would requite a major synergy of several of the world's most powerful countries, and even there they would still run into major obstacles regarding international diplomacy and international business. They were also run into a lot of internal obstacles related to the upheaval and instability of the various African nations, plus disease and generally poorly established infrastructures. Of course such a major effort is unlikely to happen in the first place because it would require several powerful nations working together in a concerted effort, and I just can't see getting the various governments of these nations behind it. Personally I think the best individuals can do is let their government know that they should be something about the problems (which will bring about a very slow and gradual change, which is still better than nothing) and basically focus on humanitarian efforts. We can do simple good works that will help to some extent, but until the major underlying problems are addressed that's just putting a band-aid on the wound...but that too is probably better than nothing. It's just a very bleak situation. Personally I don't think it's directly related to racism to a great extent today. In the early colonial times, which is what set the groundwork for all of this, it definitely was in that the Europeans felt themselves superior to the Africans and felt they had the right to exploit them. Today I think it's mostly just an entrenched system that was never broken out of and I'm inclined to think it would continue to perpetuate regardless of the people's skin colour. Also, I think the big thing is that, as I said, most people in the first world nations don't think about this at all or realize their government/country's implicit role in it (and on the country level the role is implicit and not explicit). OR if they think about Africa's problems at all (which really most people don't on a regular basis) they're inclined to pin the blame on something else. To be completely honest I think blaming it on "environmentalists" is a form of that. As I said that's probably one piece of the picture, but this is WAY bigger than just that. Even if any and every environmental issue were removed major inequities would still exist, and most people don't even get to the point of thinking it has anything to do with their own country, they instead conclude it has to do with internal conflict, disease, or simply a different culture...all of which is also very true. Anyway, it's a very heartbreaking thing and it's worth discussing, but my honest opinion is that the problems are just too complicated, pervasive, and bleak to be solved by any one major thing (or heck any FIVE major things). This is going to take some time. On the other hand it's certainly time to do something about it, we've been doing nothing about it for over 500 years now and that's obviously not helping. -Kevin

Woo HOO, Welcome aboard, dude! It's great to have you Let me know if you have any questions or concerns -Kevin

Exactly, but to me the point of bisexuals (or anyone really) coming out would be to spread tolerance and reduce prejudice through an increase in visibility and public integration. I still believe this, but I'll concede the 'argument' that coming out is a good thing to do socially if the people to whom I'm making this point don't believe that tolerance and reduced prejudice would result through an increase in the number of 'out' bisexuals (or gays, lesbians, and transgenders). Of course that's from a social perspective, which has been my focus up until now, of course there are personal reasons for a bisexual to come out and I do believe that the majority of people, if circumstances are favourable, end up being happier if they can be out, so that's certainly a good reason. However by its nature this is a more personal thing and while I'm comfortable and confident saying that society and the GLBT cause benefit from an individual's coming out, I can't really say the same about a specific individual from a personal standpoint, because I do firmly believe that the individual themselves will know far better than I whether or not they themselves will benefit from coming out. It is my belief that most people will psychologically and emotionally benefit from coming out, and I further believe that being out is naturally more inclined to lead to greater support and affirmation for (most) any romantic relationship in which the person is engaged. Occasionally it may make a relationship harder, however. For example if the people are somehow tied to unsupportive parents who try to stop the relationship once they find out, or if society as a whole otherwise conspires to wreck the couple's relationship. In general though I think relationships are more easily conducted outside of the closet. Specifically regarding bisexuals coming out, I'll say that my original premise that bisexuals face a unique set of social obstacles is also closely tied to the fact that I believe that these social obstacles will begin to be knocked down - both for the specific bisexual in question and for bisexuals as a whole - when the individual comes out, but again I was premising this belief on the concept that it's easier to discriminate against a vague, faceless enemy, "bisexuals" than it is to discriminate against "Uncle Tom" or your co-worker Sue, etc. I would actually agree with your original statement, Dion, that coming out as a bisexual would boil down to essentially the same factors as coming out as gay or lesbian person if one were to discount these unique social circumstances bisexuals face and the possible boon coming out could have on them. There would still be some big differences, especially regarding interaction with other GLBT people, but removing the social aspect would equate it more to standard homosexuality/homophobia issues. I think at this point it might be worth mentioning two basic kinds of discrimination (there are certainly a lot more but I want to contrast these two): discrimination received in a somewhat 'anonymous', indirect manner versus discrimination received from a personal acquaintance or from someone in a direct manner. "Anonymous", indirect discrimination may indeed be slightly more likely to rise for a specific individual after he/she comes out. Obviously it's easier to shout vulgar comments at someone walking down the road who is obviously and openly GLBT than it is to pick out a closeted individual and do the same. However, I think that in polite society at least personal discrimination is much less likely to occur after someone has come out. As a society it isn't socially acceptable to be rude and vulgar to people, even people you don't like, directly to their face, especially if this is taking place in a public setting or in any kind of 'official' or 'businesslike' setting. I expect to be able to walk into the grocery store, even in a 'hick town', wearing a big rainbow pride shirt, and tight jeans and not have the cashier waiting on me make any remarks about gay people to my face (it might happen I suppose, but I think it's relatively unlikely, first of all he/she could probably be fired, second most people just aren't that directly confrontational in such a setting). Similarly if I work with homophobic, redneck people as long as some decorum of polite social interaction remains (and it usually does) I expect to hear less gay slurs than if I were still in the closet. Let's just assume they don't like gay people either (though again I think the fact that they now know and work with one will slightly help in this matter). If I'm in the closet and they truly don't know or suspect, then it's probably very likely that they'll make gay slurs in front me simply because that's how they think, act, and interact with each other. If they do suspect but I'm not out then they may push the envelop and do it in front of me on purpose, perhaps to bait me into outing myself or just to piss me off, in any case they may or may not increase or curb their natural use of gay slurs. Now, finally if I'm openly out, and again if this is at least a semi-polite, standard social environment I think they're much less likely to purposely say something in front of me, or to me, because that just isn't acceptable social behaviour and most people aren't that directly confrontational especially with someone they're going to have to continue interacting with on a daily basis in a professional manner. My own experiences bear this out. I heard a lot more gay slurs before I came out because people either didn't know or suspect, or figured they could 'get away with it' because I wasn't officially out. I've pretty much been completely out for the past two + years now (I don't go around saying "I'm gay", but I make no effort to censor my conversation, dress, or behaviour and I freely associate with gay people) and I haven't had a single person I personally knew say anything to me. I've heard much less anti-gay talk from random people in crowds (probably because they realized there's a 'queer' standing right there I'm assuming), and I've only had one experience of strangers saying anything offensive. Once I walking down the street with a friend and a car full of guys shouted "fags" at us, but that's once in two years, and that was hardly a big deal they'd already driven away before I even realized what was going on, and I was just pissed that I didn't get a chance to tell them off. It's honestly been alot easier and less hostile living as an openly gay person than a closeted person. No paranoia, or fear of being 'discovered', and people at least attempting to remain socially polite. Now I do admit that this also coincides with the time I moved to a very large city. I guess part of it might also be the way I carry myself. I think my personality and demeanor tends to convey that I am both friendly, pleasant and non-hostile, but also confident and disinclined to shrink into the background or be pushed around. So I think no one has any particular reason to be rude to me, or any particular reason to think that I'll let them get away with it unchallenged. I will also admit that anecdotally my shy, less assertive friends report more problems as do my very confrontational friends. In general I'm not looking for a fight, but I will stand up for myself. Anyway, I think those are good personal reasons to come out, either as gay or bisexual, but I tend to think the social ones, while less important to a person personally, are easier to discuss in a more generalized way. Take care all and have a great day, Kevin

That is so awesome, dude!!

Happy Birthday, Liddy! I hope you're having an excellent day and a fantastic birthday!! Miss ya, drop by soon Take care and all the best, Kevin

LOL! Amen to that! Awww thanks! An opinionated person?! *gasp* We've certainly never had one of those around here before! Personally I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'm sure this is a case of easier said than done. I also do agree with Procyon that sincerity makes a big difference too. It's possible that the majority of these parents of smokers weren't being sincere and/or weren't trying too hard. I would further hazard a guess that a great deal of that might have been because they themselves felt like hypocrites and like they're message wouldn't get through given the circumstances. I also hope we're not all being too offensive to smokers; I know we do have several around here. Anyway two new topics in this discussion: -I think I personally, and most people for that matter, have more understanding a patience with someone who is obviously being sincere about their message (whatever it may be), but still struggling with it. I think people would tend to understand in that circumstance that this is a case of someone only being human and not perfect. Thus it seems that the key to what makes someone a 'hypocrite' isn't so much a disparity between their actions and their message, but a disparity the sincerity of their intended or desired actions/behaviour (regardless of 'success') and their message. Thoughts on that? -Also, to what extent does secrecy and dishonesty play a role? It seems to me that people are quick to condemn individuals who 'hide' something inconsistent with their message and are then found out, than people who are upfront about their struggle - or at least for whom it is common knowledge that they are struggling. In some ways this is perhaps unfair or inaccurate since very likely in many cases it was extreme fear and personal feelings of failure which led them to hide their struggle in the first place. Granted they're still being deceptive and of course it's also possible that they never believed the 'message' at all and were simply pretending to believe and follow it for some ulterior motive, but I actually think in most cases it's guilt and shame which drives people to hide their struggles. Thoughts on this? Should people who are found to be 'dishonest' about their struggle face harsher consequences? -Kevin

Umbrella - Rhianna

I don't think it would. At least not overall for most people. There would be initial shock, but I think eventually if people were confronted with this reality on a daily basis to such a big extent most would gradually get used to it and grow more tolerant of it. Even if people never truly changed their feelings about it I think they would get desensitized to it and at least fixate on it less. I also think the sheer number of people (and remember these people would undoubtedly include some of their friends, family members, co-workers, church members, neighbours, doctors, etc) would make the homophobes/biphobes less likely to say or do anything much about it. Anyway, if we're supposing such unlikely scenarios let's suppose that all the gays and lesbians joined their bisexual brethren in proclaiming their orientation to the world, then there'd be even more people for the homophobes/biphobes to contend with The evidence would be to the contrary. Societies with higher numbers of out people tend to have higher levels of acceptance. Looking at the social history of the US it's also apparent that the more people have come out the better and easier things have gotten. And almost all studies and theories point toward greater exposure and personal experience as the number one factor in the reduction of prejudice (all prejudice, but specifically homophobia). I was rather assuming that everyone here was taking this point for granted. If you disagree with this basic point then I would certainly concede that there looks like very little point in coming out. However apart from saying that social theories, history, and simple intuition point to the likely benefits of exposure and prevalence in reducing prejudice there isn't much more I could say and no reason for me to continue discussing the virtues of coming out. I'll readily admit that the thread, and all my arguments, hinged on the fact that we were all in agreement that greater exposure, visibility, and open integration with society would reduce prejudice.

In an ideal world without the chance of negative repercussions I would agree with you wholeheartedly that no one has an obligation to come out, because at that point it wouldn't be necessary! It's precisely because there is still discrimination out there that people, who are ready, and safe, do have a responsibility to come out, to help end this discrimination! I'm not saying everyone is in a position in which they can safely come out, and I'm not trying to force anyone to come out. I always think the GLBT person in question has the ultimate say in these matters and should always do things when they're ready. I would never 'out' anyone nor would would I try to guilt or pressure anyone who obviously wasn't ready and/or was in a risky situation. All I'm saying is that a great many people who are okay with it and ready internally, who aren't going to face physical danger, and who aren't likely to face extremely crippling prejudice still don't come out because they have the attitude that 'it's no one's business' and that even a little, or the risk of a little, discrimination isn't worth it. It's those people who I'm urging to re-consider. Even if just for themselves. I truly believe most of those people would be happier if they 'took the plunge', but even ignoring that I think people with such a relatively nice set up (and there are quite a few people who fit these criteria) do have a social responsibility (or since so many seem to be dislike the term - though I still personally think it's the most accurate - we can call it a 'humanitarian responsibility') to come out and make things better for the countless individuals who would face extreme derision and serious obstacles. In so doing I believe they make society a better place for everyone, and not just themselves and other GLBT people, but for all people (thus why I think 'social responsibility' is the best term). I would object to that at all, quite the contrary I would actively support and laud such efforts. I believe 'one person at a time' is often the strategy to take. I never intended to imply that everyone should be out to everyone. Only that people who could be out in general society, to whatever degree, should be. Not to be cynical or to insult anyone but we only know that the ones who are happy with it and accept it are...happy with it and accept it. I assume that we wouldn't know about the ones who aren't happy with it and don't accept it. Also, I think that in any GLBT/friendly community you'll find a greater level of acceptance of this duality (I'm not specifically talking about bisexuality here, but a duality in general with regards to sex/sexuality/gender/roles/etc). I think the greatest reluctance to accept this duality of spirit is in the straight world. Many, if not most, straight men and women are reluctant to accept, embrace, and display their own potential for both very 'masculine' and very 'feminine' feelings, behaviour, and 'roles'. I dare say that if they did homophobia (and biphobia) would largely disappear. I'm not saying this because I'm assuming everyone would run out and 'experiment' with members of the same gender, most probably wouldn't. The benefits would come from the fact that there were no longer rigidly held beliefs about what it means to be 'male' or 'female', or for that matter 'gay' or 'straight' (and again so much of this isn't directly sex/intercourse related) as such it simply wouldn't rock their social world anymore. I agree. For me complete monogamy, for both parties, is a requirement in a romantic relationship. It's just how I prefer to conduct my own. However, I would never presume to tell other people what's best for their relationship in this matter. If they and their spouse/partner/S.O. have an open relationship, or any kind of 'arrangement', then more power to them and I'm completely behind them. I object to infidelity and cheating. However, if the people in the relationship are okay with sex with others and no one is lying or deceiving or otherwise breaking the terms of their unique relationship, then I certainly don't care and don't think it's any of my business. Take care all and have a great day! Kevin

Happy Birthday!

LOL, YES! Thank you! HAHA, almost every one of them was misunderstanding what I was saying! Obviously then it's very likely ineffective communication on my part, and probably also related to the fact that I took several text pages to say what you essentially said for me in one paragraph. As I've said before, brevity isn't really one of my virtues. One of the main points I *meant* to drive home with my post was that while I do think people have a social responsibility to come out if it's feasible for them, I do not want or expect people to come out if their physical or economic welfare will be negatively impacted, nor do I mean to "rush" people who aren't ready emotionally and psychologically just yet. Err, I never meant to imply that someone should receive special consideration just because they are GLBT nor did I ever mean to imply that we shouldn't help people who aren't. I'm honestly not sure what I said that might have given that impression, except that one person's 'coming out' is generally a good thing for the GLBT community as a whole. That's EXACTLY the what I meant in the first place! Once again phrased much more concisely Let me reiterate my thoughts on this. I think the majority of people are predominantly (and usually to a large extent) either 'gay' or 'straight', but that they do have some bisexual feelings. (I also meant to imply that very often they were not comfortable with this and did not acknowledge it to others or even themselves, but I did not mean to challenge anyone's assertion that they were completely gay. There's no way I could possibly know anyone other than myself well enough to know if that were the case or not, and most days I'm doing good to know myself that well) I also said that I thought a much smaller segment of the population (but still some people, and I'm certainly willing to concede that those people might be you guys ) are completely 'gay' or 'straight', and that further roughly the same number of people are 'completely bisexual' (in the even, truly no preference for either gender sense). In that way I actually meant to say that a 'true bisexual', and a 'true heterosexual/homosexual', in the horribly simplistic traditional way of understanding is an infrequent occurrence. I think most people are somewhere along a spectrum, but with a very clear preference. LOL, Robbie came closer to understanding what I meant on this subject than did most people. I did mean that it shouldn't be necessary for a person to come out (as any orientation at all), because such things shouldn't be assumed and should simply be largely irrelevant and incidental (like the concept of gender itself IMO), but I readily concede that that is under 'ideal' circumstances, in some perfect world. I definitely think coming out is necessary as things stand today, especially in scenarios like the one Robbie described above. I'm so sorry things are rough for you right now. I'm really really proud of you for confronting things as much as you have already! I'm also grateful that you did realize that I wasn't trying to pressure you - or anyone else - to do more before you were ready. It seems to me like you're doing an excellent job with your journey and I think you'll definitely reach the point where you can be very comfortable with yourself and your sexuality (I'm definitely getting that indication from you!). I think at some point, hopefully in the not too distant future, but regardless at some point down the line, you'll find that your sexuality is a wonderful, positive, and affirming thing for you. I really think you're going to be just fine, dude

Awww *gasp* All that long ago?! LOL, I'm just kidding with ya of course! I'm really really proud of ya, Robbie I went with my perpetually close friend, Claire. Of course this too was before either of us came out, so it was mostly a coincidental co-bearding. Prom was fun, the after party was more fun though I'm sure you'll have a great time, dude -Kevin

WOO HOOO! Happy Birthday, Myr!! I hope you have a truly fantastic day filled with wonderful delights! May the coming year find you in good health, high spirits, and continuous luck! Thank you for everything and for giving us all the opportunity to wish you a happy birthday! All the best to a great guy for a great day! Kevin

I've frequently found myself in similar positions, Tim. Take all the time you need, relax, get things in order, and we'll be waiting for you when you get back. -Kevin

Oops, I did!

Oh man! I don't know why, but I read that as Bardeara, one of our GA members! Anyway, why would you want Barbra shot? I thought it was Helen you didn't like? Oh my, ANOTHER goose! These geese chapters are getting to be more nerve wracking than the tequila chapters!

Ah, well then you are in luck for there are quite a few of them out there to be read Yes, that's what I meant, sometimes there IS such danger. Ah but there is such a think as 'social responsibility' which is a separate concept. This is the idea that people have a responsibility to others in their society and a general responsibility to the society itself to 'improve' it and make it better for everyone. Since GLBT are oppressed to some extent and often not very visible then I think it is the responsibility of other GLBT individuals to 'be out there setting a good example' so that society sees this and begins to react more favourably to other GLBT people. If someone knows me, like me, and respects me then even if it isn't any of their business whether I'm gay or not, even if it never comes up, even if it's easier to just avoid going into the issue, it's still my 'social responsibility' to let them know that I'm gay, because then they're faced with the information that this person they like and respect is gay. That then makes it harder for them to discriminate against other individuals and dismiss all gays in a blanket fashion with the notion that we're 'immoral' or 'perverted' or whatever. They have to face up to the fact that they know and like a gay person. Sure they can dismiss it as a 'fluke' or something, but if there are enough 'flukes' they have to eventually realize that it might not be a 'fluke' per se. Also, even if they do dismiss it as a fluke, it at least opens up the possibility in their minds that more 'flukes' might exist which would at least make things marginally better. This is thus a social responsibility in that my actions have implications for other similar people (it makes it better for other gays) within the society and for the society itself (the more people I impact in this way the more society benefits, and it has a 'ripple effect'). In that way I would say that it is different from my responsibility to myself or my responsibility to be honest, because I might be interpreting these responsibilities in a way that would exonerate me from having had to come out to these people if the topic had remained a non-issue. To answer this question, I would say that the simplest way is to not hide it and to be open about it. Don't censor your words, don't say "my friend and I say this movie" say "my boyfriend and I saw this movie". Don't say, "my friend is upset because his relationship ended" say "my friend is upset because he and his boyfriend broke up", etc. More simply if someone makes a homophobic - or gay-affirming for that matter - comment, that's a good opportunity to say "I'm gay". Homosexuality and related issues may simply 'come up' in everyday conversation, and that too is a good example to say "I'm gay". So that is how I would propose increasing visibility without dressing or acting in ways that might be uncomfortable or unnatural for someone. I would disagree with this point because first of all I would disagree with your statement people's only or main beef with bisexuality is the potential for homosexual behaviour. It would be nice if it were that simple, but I don't think it is. I think very often you get all that, but then you also get a whole other set of prejudices related specifically to the topic of bisexuality. People have all sorts of negative ideas about bisexuality, some of which you pointed out yourself and there are certainly a whole lot more, more even than either of us could sit here and list in their entirety. Almost all the prejudice you get from the gay community about bisexuality has to do with these beliefs and many of these things are also present in the minds of the 'biphobic' straight person. In this way bisexuals face homophobia (and perhaps to some degree 'heterophobia' in the gay community) AND their own unique 'biphobia'. Often times they face the homophobia to a lesser extent than gay people, and often times they can avoid being 'found out' completely, but nevertheless they do face their own unique form of prejudice. In this way the same idea I suggested above can be implemented here. When people make any of those 'gay' remarks or when 'gay' issues come up, it's easy for a bisexual person to say "well I'm bisexual, so I think...", but it's also important, probably more important for the bisexual themselves and other bisexuals, for a bisexual individual to actively combat 'biphobia'. If people make negative remarks about bisexuals, or any remarks about bisexuals, or if the topic simply comes up, I think it's good for bisexuals to take a stand. You also get the same benefit of having people, gay or straight, faced with the fact that "___ is a bisexual and I like him/her". Let's say people believe bisexuals are promiscuous and you've been in a committed, monogamous relationship for a long period of time, it's good to point out that you are bisexual and not simply a gay or straight person in a gay or straight relationship, because then the individual has to face the fact that "well, I guess bisexuals won't necessarily cheat on their partners" Or maybe someone believes that bisexuals are fickle and won't stick around through adversity. If you maintained a relationship with someone despite homophobia or other obstacles I think it's good to point it out so that people have to acknowledge, "Well here's a bisexual that committed and in it for the long-haul". Oh don't worry, I didn't feel attacked at all Perhaps I can help you then. When you want to quote multiple posts by multiple posters all you have to do is click the 'quote' button beneath each post (bottom right-hand side). It'll turn bright red and change from a "+" sign to a "-" sign. Don't do anything else at that point, simply read on, and repeat the process with each post you want to quote. When you're done reading and ready to make your reply click "Add Reply" at the very bottom of the page (do not click 'fast reply' or simply 'reply' to any of the posts). From there the screen that comes up will have all the posts that you wanted quote. It looks like you already know how to edit/format the quotes as you like You can quote up to ten times within a single response/post. Great points and a fun discussion! Take care and have a great day Kevin

"The Scientist" - Cold Play

This is an area in which I'm woefully ill-informed too. "Dear Mr. President" - Pink

Such thoughts are seldom far from my mind. Hmmm, "So I knew someone whose mother had a friend who had a friend who had a friend who was a med student and..." Wow! It sounds like this lady has a very interesting life and strives to be the mother she can be!

I would certainly agree with this statement. Regarding the first part about not really necessary unless they are dating someone of the same gender...well I find that more problematic. That's an implicitly heterosexist notion. Granted, the unfortunate truth is that most people are 'heterosexual until proven otherwise', but I think ideally people's sexualities shouldn't be assumed. In that way I could understand and agree if you said, "not really necessary unless they date someone of the atypical gender" in other words if the person tends to date guys or tends to date girls and then does the opposite it might warrant the explanation "oh I'm bisexual", but I don't care for the assumption (however true) that people will just naturally assume that someone is straight until they have evidence to the contrary. Indeed, to me the most natural and fair assumption should be that person is bisexual. I think if everyone practiced this belief there would be infinitely less prejudice and sexuality would essentially become a non-issue. If people really wanted to they could come out as 'gay' or 'straight', but it wouldn't be strictly necessary since their options and the expectations about them wouldn't be limited in the first place. As the system is currently set up I find it easiest and most accurate to explain my sexuality as 'gay', but however remote the possibility I find it very unfortunate that were I to meet a girl I wanted to pursue it would be a 'big deal'. I couldn't just start dating her and enter a relationship without completely shaking up my social world and people's expectations about me. That's a great pity in my opinion. I also tend to think that there are many instances in which a 'gay' person lets someone of the opposite gender pass them by, and just as many instances in which a 'straight' person lets someone of the same gender pass them by, when in fact they might have been a very good match for each other and had a very happy, satisfying relationship. I attribute this in large part to the problem I see with people assuming that these people are just 'off limits'. I guess it's true that very often people are predominately, or even exclusively, one way or the other, but far more often I think they tend to just delude themselves into thinking that, and close themselves off to other options. I'm not criticising the individuals themselves because given the society we live in it's extremely hard to think outside the box of sexual orientation, but I personally believe that the majority of human beings are naturally inclined to be 'straight' with some gay tendencies, that another fairly sizable contingent will naturally be 'gay' with some straight tendencies, and that three other, much smaller segments of the population, will naturally be exclusively straight, exclusively gay, and 'equally' bisexual. Well here's some of it

Hmmm, I wonder if I ever did that! Welcome electroken! It's awesome to have you here with us I'm not familiar with him, but if I come across his work I'll be sure to let you know Take care and have a great day all, Kevin

Excellent points, Kit! I hadn't completely looked at it from that angle. I rarely have more than two bottles a day Oh dear, that does sound complicated! It seems that a parent that drinks and smokes is very likely to have one or the other affect on their kids. Most all of my friends who are very vocal about not drinking and smoking have had parents who struggled with these things. On the other hand many others have themselves gone down the same road. You know that's exactly the thing I worked myself up into a frenzy about a few weeks ago. It was ridiculous, I don't have kids but I was completely worried about how I was going to deal with the drug issue with them. Basically I intend to instill in them a self-reliant, confident, intellectually curious mentality. I don't want them to do things or believe things simply because other people tell them to. I want them to do their own research and figure things out for themselves. Decide what they believe - with plenty of information at their disposal - on their own. It all sounds great, but then I got to thinking, "what about drugs?". I really don't want my kids experimenting with drugs to decide if they really are dangerous and unhealthy. So what am I supposed to do? Tell them, "I don't want you to blindly listen to people. I want you to make your own decisions. Now don't use drugs!" Talk about hypocritical. I decided all I could do was hopefully get them to not want to use drugs and to supply them the facts, but it's still risky business. -Kevin