RE: Argh!!

RE: Argh!! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

GYPZYQUEEN -> RE: Argh!! (5/6/2009 11:37:27 PM)
BI the way... BI-sexuality is sexual behavior with or physical attraction to both genders. SO then a virgin nun who will never have sex or kiss a wo/man could still be bi ( pls no nun jokes)[:'(] In a 600 page paper VICE VERSA ..GARBER states that we would all be bi** if it were not for "repression,religion,repugnance,denial and premature specialization" Edward De Bono writes about the same I AGREE There is sexual attraction..emotional attraction..and affectional attraction...you can have 1 2 or all with someone.Personal or social identity can be based on those attractions and HOW they are expressed by the person Sexual orientation falls along a continuim over a lifetime..so one does not have to be exclusively hetero or homosexual but can feel varying degrees of both. Heteros who engage in occasional homosexual activity could be considered bi but may not identify as such but as hetero..some who engage in bi may not identify as such... I do agree with others here that we are seeing KOOL trendy trend bull shit around bi...especially girl on girl as a preformance/pleasing men what next? [:o] missionary will be the new anal? [:-] bush will be the new shaved?[X(] GQ bi for now........[;)]

YoursMistress -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 12:26:13 AM)
I second Miss GQ's motion. yours

NihilusZero -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 12:51:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: missturbation 'I kissed a girl and i liked it, the taste of her cherry chap stick'............but i'm not bi [:D] I can't stand that song. Maybe the purist in me is just pissed because Jill Sobule did it first and did it better.

LadySweetOrSour -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 12:54:17 AM)
I just don't like cherry chapstick. Quite frankly, I don't want to kiss anyone wearing chapstick. Or vicks vaporub.

UglyTruth -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 1:16:56 AM)
Sorry, I have to disagree with the OP and GYPZYQUEEN, although I'm closer to agreeing with GQ. And I'd add that I don't find men attractive. Just penis.

HalloweenWhite -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 2:48:40 AM)
It may have been that this person thought they were bi, or didn't know and wanted to find out, maybe they just liked they idea and wanted to try it, then discovered they weren't bi at all.Maybe, like IronBear said there should be a "bi-curious" option, but there again what's wrong with just talking?, where does it end? a list of favourite colours? lol. (No offence IronBear, just using that as an example). You shouldn't assume people will follow through with anything they say just because they say it. You were et down-this time, so try again....and again....and again until you find what you're looking for. Or something close.

RCdc -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 4:21:16 AM)
Your idea is flawed because by your premise then experience is the only indicator of sexual preference and that just isn't true. I do not agree that bi-curious should be an option either. Otherwise you should also have slave-curious, dominant-curious, switch-curious... the list would just go on and on. the.dark.

MissJanice2 -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 5:28:15 AM)
*Label attack again. We all don' t fit into the little box.* *Best Wishes,* *Mistress_Jan*

tiinkerbell -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 5:36:34 AM)
quote: However, I will say I knew I was bi long before I kissed my first woman. You can know which genders you are attracted too sexual prior to having contact. This is something that I would have to agree with. I was in 8th grade when I discovered my liking for ladies;there was no being 'curious' about it. Yet, it was only less than a year ago that I had my first relationship with a woman. Allison

MissJanice2 -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 5:41:48 AM)
*Well,* *This term bi-curious has always confused me. I am basically straight; however, there are moments when I find myself looking at women, and them looking at me.* My slave swears I am a lesbian. It scares me to death. The one who said that if there were no religion or certain orders to keep us "rounded", we would have a lot more freedom to search these feelings. *The new generation is very lucky to be able to experience things that my generation had to keep locked inside.* *Best Wishes,* *Mistress_Jan*

SailingBum -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 5:49:05 AM)
what the hell is going on here????? I thought EVERYONE likes a VIRGIN sheesh ... send all those virgin bitches over my way....Ill teach em the error of their ways. BadOne

breatheasone -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 5:59:16 AM)
LOL ok well without beating the meaning of any one word to death, i wouldn't mind a bi-curious option. If only to show that someone is open to that, without having to claim it as a full time lifestyle preference.

GoddessTeaze -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:02:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SailingBum what the hell is going on here????? I thought EVERYONE likes a VIRGIN sheesh ... send all those virgin bitches over my way....Ill teach em the error of their ways. BadOne I'm on My way EG [;)] GoddezzT`

oceanwinds -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:06:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MissJanice2 *Well,* *This term bi-curious has always confused me. I am basically straight; however, there are moments when I find myself looking at women, and them looking at me.* My slave swears I am a lesbian. It scares me to death. The one who said that if there were no religion or certain orders to keep us "rounded", we would have a lot more freedom to search these feelings. *The new generation is very lucky to be able to experience things that my generation had to keep locked inside.* *Best Wishes,* *Mistress_Jan* The female form has always captured my eye, but I know that I am not a lesbian nor really bi-sexual. Maybe just the artist eye in me that finds the female form more captivating.

YoursMistress -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:20:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Darcyandthedark Your idea is flawed because by your premise then experience is the only indicator of sexual preference and that just isn't true. I do not agree that bi-curious should be an option either. Otherwise you should also have slave-curious, dominant-curious, switch-curious... the list would just go on and on. the.dark. Sigh. I continue to be exasperated by the notion that there are a fixed and finite number of subsets of sexuality that are important to maintain and that everyone must be identified and categorized into one. Even if I am heterosexual, it doesn't mean that I will be attracted to anyone else who also identifies themselves as hetero. If it is so darned important to categorize people, wouldn't it be easier to do so given more categories? The hardest thing for me is to get why it is important for someone who isn't gay, bi or God forbid, bi-curious to determine that anyone else in the world oughtn't to claim to be in one or another category. For all you know, the person who claims to be hetero dreams of nothing but dicks all night, and the one who claims to be gay is doing so strictly to seem trendy. I won't disagree that having broad categories (straight, gay, bi, dominant, submissive, switch) makes it easy to organize a website so that people can more quickly narrow their searches and raise their chances of finding compatible people or pertinent information with higher probability. However, when it comes to how individuals identify themselves, whether they want to call themselves bi-curious, 50% gay, demi-gay, in a gray area, gayish, bi-ish, or whatever, who's bloody business is it really? yours

IrishMist -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:25:25 AM)
quote: However, when it comes to how individuals identify themselves, whether they want to call themselves bi-curious, 50% gay, demi-gay, in a gray area, gayish, bi-ish, or whatever, who's bloody business is it really? [sm=applause.gif] Dayum straight Ma'am

SunNMoon -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:31:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomImus quote: ORIGINAL: darkclouds I am sick of all the profiles searching for a third cause the sub has suddenly decided she is Bi, and yet she has no experience with another woman. I clearly declared myself heterosexual before I had any experience with a woman (or girl - as the case may be). Most of us were aware of our sexuality or sexual orientation before we became sexually active. Please feel free to explain the difference to me. I so very much agree with DomImus. Really when does one get to have a sexual orientation?

breatheasone -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:41:51 AM)
i think the OP started out just maybe commenting that its probably a tad frustrating to think you are getting someone experienced, and at ease with being "bi-sexual", only to find that you have someone thats hesitant, or ill at ease, and that can be a little disappointing when its not what you were expecting.

OmegaG -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 6:50:22 AM)
I could have sworn it was here but maybe it was somewhere else that there was a bi-curious option, it doesn't solve any problems. I'd have people contact me that wanted a woman that was willing to be with women but weren't into women. When I told them that I definately like woman almost as much as I like men but had never had the chance to be with a woman, I was yelled at for misrepresenting myself and that I should clearly state tha I am bi. You can't please everyone all the time.

SailingBum -> RE: Argh!! (5/7/2009 7:45:09 AM)
Goddess You HAVE got to stop teasing me ... my heart can't take it... I did have to laff at the post that said there somehow is a dif bet a "exp bisexual and a virgin bisexual".... WTF over??? Were I to swing dat way. Doing the nasty whether boy or girl not any dif, cept one has a extra orfice for me to pound into to..... Note to self NO bald men... gotta have a hand hold BadOne

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875