Bi guys - hot or not?

[Chicup]

Originally Posted by Concupiscence

I am making an assumption here but Mrs.Chicup would probably lose respect for you because you had not been honest about that attraction, if you had been hiding it all this time. It isn't being PC, Tia Vampire actually DID put it on the table...is male bisexuality an ethical issue? For her it is and she stated it to be so without hesitation. If it is for you guys, then so be it, but that does not make the OPs question or the turn of the thread politically correct.

Well if I was bi and told her at the start of our relationship we wouldn't be married in the first place. She really doesn't like MM activity. She wouldn't think I was less of a person but I'd be less sexually attractive to her.

Originally Posted by Dooode

I'm sorry but get a grip. Sex between two conscenting human adults is NOT a comparable magnitude as having sex with animals--who are not capable of giving conscious conscent or recognizing a bonding relationship between humans.

I think that was an incredibly poor analogy.

I'm sure you do, but you have to understand where this is comming from. As a straight male I view the concept of a homosexual act of the same level, perhaps even worse than beastiality in terms of desireablity.

If you put me in front of a cow and another man, put a gun to my head and said 'do one' the physical reaction would be the same to me.

I also don't think beastiality is immoral. I think its gross, I don't understand the drive, and I have no desire to partake in it. Much like I would feel about homosexual activity.

Also we are talking in the context of swinging here, so pair bonding is a moot point. As for consent, I think thats a false argument as well. We are not talking about animal rape here, and anyone who has been around dogs enough know that dogs don't ask us for consent when they are humping our legs. Likewise as someone who has worked with horses, you can't really force a large animal to do anything they really don't consent to do. Hell part of a farmers job involves sticking their hands in 'odd' places as well as masterbating large animals for semen collection, which they are eager to have done to them. I've seen this argument used before when it comes to this subject and the facts don't match up with it.

[Dooode]

Originally Posted by Chicup

I'm sure you do, but you have to understand where this is comming from. As a straight male I view the concept of a homosexual act of the same level, perhaps even worse than beastiality in terms of desireablity.

If you put me in front of a cow and another man, put a gun to my head and said 'do one' the physical reaction would be the same to me.

I also don't think beastiality is immoral. I think its gross, I don't understand the drive, and I have no desire to partake in it. Much like I would feel about homosexual activity.

Also we are talking in the context of swinging here, so pair bonding is a moot point.

Chicup:

I can understand the desirability factor, but you could've just as easily said having sex with children (and for the record, I think both are grossly immoral). A dog running off of an instinct to hump a leg is NOT the same as a human being making a conscious decision to do the same.

Pair bonding is not a moot point, because you ARE looking for compatible people within the lifestyle, regardless that you're not having a relationship with them.

Or do you just have sex with any woman who comes along?

Seriously. Desirability factor aside, at least choose an analogy that makes sense! LOL

[WesternSwing]

Originally Posted by Chicup

As a straight male I view the concept of a homosexual act of the same level, perhaps even worse than beastiality in terms of desireablity.

So if you don't preceive a homosexual act on the same level or even worse then beastiality then your not a straight male?

I know what you are saying, BUT, you could have left the "as a straight male" part out of it. You're not speaking for all straight males.

Mr. WS

[Dooode]

Originally Posted by Chicup

This seems like PCing the thread a bit to me. Gay and as a subset 'bi' rights are fine and good, but if you found out your spouse liked to have sex with say animals/house plants, it would be accepted that you would lose 'respect' for them. For the most part beastiality doesn't harm the animals involved so no one is getting 'hurt' and they still might be good people right? Now this argument always inflames the gay community, how dare you compare beastiality to homosexuality, but when it comes to your own spouse its not so different.

Let's try this again, Chicup. We went off-track:

Firstly, if I were gay, I would be insulted by having my particular sexual orientation compared with what is illegal in all 50 states, not to mention wholly immoral in the United States and Canada.

If you fail to understand that, I don't know where else to go with this. But I can understand why it would irk them. It reeks of bigotry.

Secondly, if I found out my spouse were having sex with orangutans, chimpanzees, cucumbers, azeleas, cats, hawaian pathos, rubber tree plants OR any other human being without my knowledge or conscent, then yes I would lose respect for them. Worse than that, they would lose my trust. Further, the fact that it is happening at all demonstrates lack of communication in the relationship and it is already in trouble.

Umm... On second thought, let's take the cucumber off the list.

Thirdly, I don't know what your wife's sexual orientation is, but assuming that she's bisexual (as are many women in the swing community), it would be a fair assumption to say that she is a subset of gay, as you eloquently put it. Or maybe all these other married bisexual ladies are subset of gay. Were I them, I would consider it an insult to my marital relationship.

Lastly, I know that straight women have problems with being hit on by bisexual women at clubs. While this does bother them, I've rarely ever run into a hetero woman generalize by identifying bisexual women as lesbians.

I don't have a problem with heteros in general and I do understand the revulsion some can have toward same-sex contact. But you really should examine your thought process, Chicup. To my ears, it sounds ignorant and laced with bigotry.

[clutch]

I think I relate with a lot of guys who've written... in 7th 8th grade did a lot of sex play with guys (which always involved a playboy or two).

Strictly girls only until we found a couple that we swing exclusively with now. I personally don't think of myself (or the other guy) as homo sexual, but we are definitley are not homophobic either.

We see each other on average once a month, always at their farm--private farm. It's always a little funny to break the ice again to get back in the swing of things. But Friday night, we'll always begin with a group activity... often a 3 on 1 massage. But the baby oil gets to flowing easily, and generally our bodies are all slick before the end of the first massage.

All I can say is, we're all touching each other in every way from Friday, and we're all enjoying it enormously. And in the mix of squirmy bodies, we can all end up in some pretty interesting, intimate, and purely sexual tangles.

I believe the word would be orgy... and it's really great.

Now, I am not attracted to guys in any sort of sexual way, I don't dream about guys and making love with them... I am attracted to girls, and very attracted to my own beautiful wonderful amazingly sexy wife.

But we do like to have sex fun...

[Chicup]

Originally Posted by Dooode

Chicup:

I can understand the desirability factor, but you could've just as easily said having sex with children (and for the record, I think both are grossly immoral).

I had listed sex with children and removed it before I posted my post. The reason is that in my mind homosexuality is more like beastiality to me than pedophilia. The reason is that I do not think beastiality hurts anyone, animal or person, while pedophilia can be damaging to the child.

Pair bonding is not a moot point, because you ARE looking for compatible people within the lifestyle, regardless that you're not having a relationship with them.

While we are in fact looking for compatible couples, many in swinging are not looking for compatible besides being willing to swap. While I didn't bother to post it, my guess is people who have sex with their dogs may well love their dogs too. People bond with animals as it is when sex isn't involved, I can't see how they wouldn't if sex were involved.

Or do you just have sex with any woman who comes along?

Nope, but I know men who would. Personality doesn't matter to many. Even if its about sexual attraction only, you would have to admit that zoophiles are in fact attracted to animals. This argument really doesn't hold water.

Seriously. Desirability factor aside, at least choose an analogy that makes sense! LOL

The problem with the beastality analogy is that it makes perfect sense. I don't think beastiality is immoral, I don't think homosexuality is, I don't want to have sex with animals, I don't want to have sex with men, I find the thought of having sex with an animal gross, I find the thought of having sex with a man gross. I really don't think beastiality should be any more illegal than homosexuality. The difference is that most homosexuals would find beastality gross and just hate the comparison even if it is valid. I'd not be surprised if many true homosexuals find heterosexual sex gross and undesirable and much like beastiality in terms of how it makes them feel. I don't feel threatened by that analogy.

Firstly, if I were gay, I would be insulted by having my particular sexual orientation compared with what is illegal in all 50 states, not to mention wholly immoral in the United States and Canada.

This is in fact the issue. They would and are insulted by the analogy. I don't care, I'm not PC. I'm not 100% sure beastiality is illegal in all states, but I do know its legal in parts of Western Europe. Likewise homosexuality is illegal in many parts of the planet. The legal/illegality of the issue really doesn't matter.

If you fail to understand that, I don't know where else to go with this. But I can understand why it would irk them. It reeks of bigotry.

I do understand it, but I don't care. It is the most fitting analogy I can think of. I don't think it reeks of bigotry at all unless I felt they should be excluded because what they do for sex.

Secondly, if I found out my spouse were having sex with orangutans, chimpanzees, cucumbers, azeleas, cats, hawaian pathos, rubber tree plants OR any other human being without my knowledge or conscent, then yes I would lose respect for them. Worse than that, they would lose my trust. Further, the fact that it is happening at all demonstrates lack of communication in the relationship and it is already in trouble.

This is more of a cheating argument than anything else and I don't think it applies here. If I were bisexual and told my wife, even if I never acted on it, I'm not sure what her reaction would be. If I were bisexual and acted on it without her consent, she would look for a divorce as I would become undesirable to her. If I had had sex with another woman without her consent she would be extremely pissed but I think it would work out.

Thirdly, I don't know what your wife's sexual orientation is, but assuming that she's bisexual (as are many women in the swing community), it would be a fair assumption to say that she is a subset of gay, as you eloquently put it. Or maybe all these other married bisexual ladies are subset of gay. Were I them, I would consider it an insult to my marital relationship.

I mentioned in one of my posts that she was mildly bi. Meaning she likes men far more than women sexually but will play around with the right woman and is turned on by it. I'm not sure how anyones marital relationship has been insulted in the least, if you would care to explain I'll answer.

Lastly, I know that straight women have problems with being hit on by bisexual women at clubs. While this does bother them, I've rarely ever run into a hetero woman generalize by identifying bisexual women as lesbians.

You haven't been around enough clubs if you haven't run into the married lesbians That being said I still don't see the issue you are bringing up here. No one is generalizing bisexual as gay, in fact I think most women are bisexual in nature, far more than men. I only put bisexual rights with gay rights as they would face the same issues. I think there is a world of difference between being gay and bisexual.

I don't have a problem with heteros in general and I do understand the revulsion some can have toward same-sex contact. But you really should examine your thought process, Chicup. To my ears, it sounds ignorant and laced with bigotry.

You like to use bigotry and insult a lot. What I don't see is a lot of logic, and if we are talking about thought processes then we need to talk logic. My logic seems pretty flawless to me. What you are doing is putting your own bias against beastiality and transferring it to my feelings about homosexuality. The problem is I don't feel any ill will to people who are into beastiality any more than I do people who are homosexual. I've never even claimed that the two are the same only that as a sexual practice they are analogous to me with my sexual orientation. No one (or thing) gets hurt, I don't understand the urge, but I am willing to accept it as natural to others. Had I included pedophilia as you suggested then I could be accused of ignorance and bigotry as pedophilia to me is a destructive act.

[couplewanting50]

Originally Posted by Tia Vampire

If men were able to have babies,the world would come to an end because of the pain they would have to go through during labor.Now if you can't stand that pain, why would you want a dude inside of you.It might just be me, but i don't understand the logic in it.

Speaking of not understanding logic, that made absolutely no sense at all.

[Mr. Truelove]

Originally Posted by couplewanting50

Speaking of not understanding logic, that made absolutely no sense at all.

My head hurts. head bang

[WesternSwing]

Wow, few subjects invoke the emotional responses like the subject of male bisexuality. I can't believe it actually. There is such a division in the two camps, with very little gray area where people say "it's not for me, but if it works for them". And like in the vanilla world where the media immediately takes swinging to pedophilia and beastialty, so does swingers about male/male contact. Wow, I thought we were the "enlightened ones".

Surrender

Mr. WS

[Amanda69]

I have no issues with male/male or female/female contact within or out of the lifestyle. I do however have issues when someone makes a statement like

Wow, I thought we were the "enlightened ones".

Just because we swing doesn't mean we accept every form of sexual contact or sexual fetish...I am pretty open minded but even I have limits. For example I don't do gang bangs, I don't swallow, I don't like having a man cum on my face etc... That doesn't make me close minded it just means I have an opinion. Open minded does not mean we have to accept everything.

As part of that open mindedness I also accept that there are things that I don't have any issue with, like male/male contact and yet another person sees male/male contact as "gross". That person doesn't deserve any more critcism for his opinion than I do for me.

Just my two cents worth..... Surrender

[Chicup]

Originally Posted by WesternSwing

Wow, few subjects invoke the emotional responses like the subject of male bisexuality. I can't believe it actually. There is such a division in the two camps, with very little gray area where people say "it's not for me, but if it works for them". And like in the vanilla world where the media immediately takes swinging to pedophilia and beastialty, so does swingers about male/male contact. Wow, I thought we were the "enlightened ones".

Surrender

Mr. WS

If you can't beat them, attack their character, excellent! Perhaps you should work on running for office. This has nothing to do with being 'enlightened' or even the presses reaction to swinging. It has nothing to do with morals or phobias, bigotry, or any other hotbutton words.

Being a swinger doesn't mean I am now able to see two men having sex and think 'oh thats hot'. I still think its odd and gross as I don't have any of the biological urges for it. This isn't a judgement of their activity, I accept that they have the urges that make them want to have MM sex and my feelings shouldn't stop them in any way. This is what is called 'tolerance' I tolerate an activity that does nothing for me but seems to work for someone else. Tolerance doesn't mean you have to LIKE said activity.

[WesternSwing]

Okay, "the enlightened ones" was said tongue-in-cheek, hence the quotation marks. I probably should have put a smiley after it to clarify that.

Originally Posted by Chicup

If you can't beat them, attack their character, excellent! Perhaps you should work on running for office.

Isn't that what you just did with this statement, attack my character? I never attacked anyone's character with my post. Again, the "enlightened ones" was a poke at ourselves!!!

I don't see where I attacked your character. I never said, "Chicup, you are a morally desitute, biggoted man and everyone who thinks like you is the same." I made an accurate observation that this disucussion went from being, in a nutshell: Do you think watching two guys is hot and how many men are bi or bi-curious?

to

"male bisexuality is akin to beastiality" or "it has as much appeal to me as beatiality" which I likened to the general public's view of swinging in general - that swinging is the gateway to beastiality and pedophelia. The former could be left out completely and the latter could have been shortened to "it has no appeal to me" rather then dragging it down into the gutter. It would have been enough to say "no, it's not for me", but it went way, way further.

Mr. WS

[Chicup]

Originally Posted by WesternSwing

Okay, "the enlightened ones" was said tongue-in-cheek, hence the quotation marks. I probably should have put a smiley after it to clarify that.
Isn't that what you just did with this statement, attack my character? I never attacked anyone's character with my post. Again, the "enlightened ones" was a poke at ourselves!!!

I don't see where I attacked your character. I never said, "Chicup, you are a morally desitute, biggoted man and everyone who thinks like you is the same." I made an accurate observation that this disucussion went from being, in a nutshell: Do you think watching two guys is hot and how many men are bi or bi-curious?

to

"male bisexuality is akin to beastiality" or "it has as much appeal to me as beatiality" which I likened to the general public's view of swinging in general - that swinging is the gateway to beastiality and pedophelia. The former could be left out completely and the latter could have been shortened to "it has no appeal to me" rather then dragging it down into the gutter. It would have been enough to say "no, it's not for me", but it went way, way further.

Mr. WS

I missed the tounge in cheek nature of 'englightened', its a flaw of written communication that such distinctions can not be made.

Now the REASON for the beastiality comparison is to understand how someone could lose 'respect' for someone based on their sexual behavior. My wife is VERY turned off by MM activity. I can't think of anything thats more of a turn off for her. Me saying 'its not my thing' would do nothing to show how this is a fair reaction. By showing how to me and my wife MM activty is about as appealing as beastiality, something which most (but not all if you recall a post a while back) of us find gross you could understand our reaction to it if it became an issue in our relationship.

Now this is a comparison that really offends homosexuals and bi males, but mostly because they are transfering their own revultion with beastiality and their feelings twords it to my revultion at the thought of a homosexual act. Their intolerance of beastiality is transfered to my stance on homosexuality which isn't correct. We all know bi males in the lifestyle are very defensive, understandably, but my viewpoint on the subject is not unique and is why most swing clubs do not condone/allow MM activity in public areas.

[RDfnd]

It seems to me that a number of the responses in this thread are unreasonably extreme. One has to wonder the true conscious or sub-conscious motivations for these posts. Tolerance for others and other ways of thinking is certainly something that those of us that participate in swinging should appreciate.

[Dooode]

Originally Posted by RDfnd

It seems to me that a number of the responses in this thread are unreasonably extreme. One has to wonder the true conscious or sub-conscious motivations for these posts. Tolerance for others and other ways of thinking is certainly something that those of us that participate in swinging should appreciate.

I give. Surrender

I have always understood the desirability factor with many heteros (and some bis actually) to same-sex activity. There is no question of that. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck yesterday. I've gotten the same reaction from homosexuals pertaining to sex with the opposite sex (go talk to a lesbian about sex with a man and you'll see what I mean).

At the same time, I found the comparison to beastiality to be of an order of magnitude that is grossly unfair. It's like a non-smoker saying that smokers are comparable to druggies smoking crack cocaine. Or a vegetarian telling a meat-eater that he's a cannibal. It's like !!!!

On the subject of beastiality being "harmless" or "morally ok", I think that's also off-kilter. I put down my German Sheppard of 16 1/2 years just a few months ago .. and although I have enjoyed the cuddle sessions with her on occasion, I KNOW that not only would I have hurt her by having sex with her, I have no doubt that I would've killed her.

I like to think that I care more for my animals than that.

Anyway. That's the last of my input on this subject.