Bisexuality, evolution, and social conditioning

[puneswings 15]

At what point in our evolution did we begin to differentiate between the genders? At what point did humankind say 'I am a man/woman and can therefore only only be happy with a woman/man'? Will there ever reach a stage where humankind will have evolved to such a level that they shall know no difference between the genders when it comes to using the human body (one's own, and others') for pure physical pleasure?

 

I wonder if this differentiation that we make between the sexes are a result of social conditioning. What is it that makes a man or woman say 'never' when presented with an option to explore pleasure with another man? And, what is different about those men and women who say 'ok', or 'maybe' and are open to trying it out?

 

I have always considered bisexuality as the most beautiful form of sexuality. The liberating feeling of knowing that you are not limited in your choice of potential partners, the sheer thrill of being able to participate in a sexual act with any of the participants (and not to mention, double the rejections ), its simply exhilarating.

Universal Receiver, Universal Giver

 

I see the beauty of bisexuality not merely at the physical level; it is even more so at the mental and emotional level. To be able to admire a fellow human being belonging to the same gender as you and enjoy it is, I believe, a sign of an evolved personality; one who's inner eye has opened and can see true beauty in all humans without the limitations of social conditioning.

Universal Lover

 

Finally I see the social beauty of bisexuality: How can there ever be true equality until that day comes when a man can feel free to bring out the woman in him without worry, and woman can be man without fearing the wounded masculine ego?

When you are Kali; Shaker of the Worlds

I will be your Shiva; Humble Recepient

When I am Shiva; Dancing Tandav

Be my Parvati; become my Dance

 

Peace.

Mohan

 

PS: Both me and Asha are bi.

[warkman 31]

Bisexuality has always seemed to me (based not on any science mind you-just the musings in my own head) to make the most sense as a norm for human sexuality even though I don't consider myself to be. I'm not sure to what extent our socialization impacts on whether we feel (or allow ourselves to feel) physical attraction for someone of the same sex as well as the opposite. I wonder how the majority of people would describe their sexual preference, if the prevailing social norms encouraged bisexuality among both sexes. There sure seems to be a large increase in female bisexuality (or maybe due to more women coming out of the closet) now that there is more popular acceptance of it. I have to think that the fact that it is "more permissable" allows for more women to go there. I wonder if the same would be true for men.

[good times 990]

At what point in our evolution did we begin to differentiate between the genders?

 

I can only guess but I would say it was about the time we grasped the obvious, looked at the male and females respective equipment and then noticed it was pleasurable to insert one into the other.

 

At what point did humankind say 'I am a man/woman and can therefore only be happy with a woman/man'?

 

Probably shortly after their first orgasm.

 

Will there ever reach a stage where humankind will have evolved to such a level that they shall know no difference between the genders when it comes to using the human body (one's own, and others') for pure physical pleasure?

 

I seriously doubt it.

 

From your post it is apparent that, to you, if we all were bi it would be the ideall world, but keep in mind you are in the minority. Most of us prefer that our sexual pleasure involve the opposite sex. I know that for myself I don't have any sexual attraction to people of my same sex and don't understand those that do. This doesn't mean I have anything against someone who is bi, as in most things in life I am pretty indifferent about what others do as long as it doesn't negatively impact me. So while I understand the wish of the bi and gay community for everyone to be like them I think it would be pretty naive to think it will ever happen as they are pretty severely outnumbered.

 

This actually made me think about something that always crosses my mind when listening to the gay and lesbian community expounding on the virtues of their lifestyle. If everyone evolved to become homosexual, how long would it take for the human race to become extinct?

[PAcouple2004 15]

To be honest, I have no problem with Bi or gay men. None except one thing. The thing that bothers me the most is how gay men act. The whole 9 yards of the stupid lisp, the flailing of hands bothers me.The over feminism which tends to be an act I feel more than anything else.(no offense intended)

 

If a man could be BI or even fully gay and not act like that, then really I don't think you would see a huge gap in the acceptance of bi men to bi women.

 

Very few women that are gay or even bi act like a man.

[menher1559 17]

I would certainly have to agree with PA couple on this one. My wife and I have both had bisexual experiences and for the most part found them to be very enjoyable. However, FEM guys and BUTCH ladies really are a turn off for us. We both believe that women should be women and men be men. And regardless of whether or not we have sex with our same gender doesn't change the fact of gender identification. (I think I said that right). Anyway. to keep from getting to carried away, keeping in perspective regarding sex is what we are looking for when we meet bi guys, ladies or bi couples. There are men and there are women. And we all have sex with each other. It doesn't change the dynamic of gender identity.

[BradAndJanet 69]

PAcouple2004 said:

To be honest, I have no problem with Bi or gay men. None except one thing. The thing that bothers me the most is how gay men act. The whole 9 yards of the stupid lisp, the flailing of hands bothers me.The over feminism which tends to be an act I feel more than anything else.(no offense intended)

 

If a man could be BI or even fully gay and not act like that, then really I don't think you would see a huge gap in thE acceptance of bi men to bi women.

Very few women that are gay or even bi act like a man.

What you have to think about is that the feminine gay man is the one you notice more. There are plenty of gay men out there who don't act that way and whom you would never know were gay unless they told you.

 

You know, there are a lot of straight personality types I don't like either, so I avoid those people, but I don't lump all straight people together and think they're all like that. I try to treat everyone as an individual and make my decision to associate with them based on how they treat me and others.

[warkman 31]

BradAndJanet said:

What you have to think about is that the feminine gay man is the one you notice more. There are plenty of gay men out there who don't act that way and whom you would never know were gay unless they told you.

 

You know, there are a lot of straight personality types I don't like either, so I avoid those people, but I don't lump all straight people together and think they're all like that. I try to treat everyone as an individual and make my decision to associate with them based on how they treat me and others.

 

Amen to that. Being in the music biz we have lots of gay and lesbian associates - all of whom are different. As you say, many meet the stereotypes, and many don't. There are some we really like and others we don't like.

[warkman 31]

This actually made me think about something that always crosses my mind when listening to the gay and lesbian community expounding on the virtues of their lifestyle. If everyone evolved to become homosexual, how long would it take for the human race to become extinct?

 

I heard a teaser for (I think) a PBS radio or TV show dealing with a few scientist's beliefs that the xx xy chromosome difference in humans may go the way of the dinosaur- the implication being that men would disappear and that women will become able to reproduce without them. Don't know if that would happen without sexual contact. Now wouldn't that be a shame!

[imsnowman 32]

To be honest, I have no problem with Bi or gay men. None except one thing. The thing that bothers me the most is how gay men act. The whole 9 yards of the stupid lisp, the flailing of hands bothers me.The over feminism which tends to be an act I feel more than anything else.(no offense intended)

 

If a man could be BI or even fully gay and not act like that, then really I don't think you would see a huge gap in th acceptace of bi men to bi women.

Very few wome that are gay or even bi act like a man.

 

Couple of questions

1. You state that the feminism is an act. How is that you know it's an act?

2. You state that very few wome(n) that are gay or even bi act like a man. Do you mean that very few of the gay or bi women that YOU KNOW act like a man?

 

I've met plenty of butch gay females. Maybe you just don't get out into the gay/lesbian community enough.

[misterbates 3]

PAcouple2004 said:

If a man could be BI or even fully gay and not act like that, then really I don't think you would see a huge gap in the acceptance of bi men to bi women.

 

Very few women that are gay or even bi act like a man.

 

Huh?? you must not know many lesbians....or you watch too much tv....most of the gay women i know are VERY butch..flannel shirts,chain wallets,the whole nine yards...the truth is not far from the stereotype...lol!!....

 

I also know many gay men that you would never know were gay....and some that shoot sparks out their ass when they walk.....

 

Most Bi men and women do not fit the stereotype because they are BI not Gay...

[PAcouple2004 15]

Ok guys it was only my opinion,

I said I think it tends to be an act, I don't know for sure, and I know LOTS of lesbians that are very feminine (both of them) and very few butch ones.

 

As for that matter I know lots of gay men that don't act like flamers that think that it is totally unacceptable for the gay man to act that way.

 

[imsnowman 32]

To be honest, I have no problem with Bi or gay men. None except one thing. The thing that bothers me the most is how gay men act.

 

Most people here understand that we're all discussing opinions. However, when you make the statement "how gay men act." you're putting your opinion out as a fact because you are covering an entire group ("gay men") of people.

[Hellboy 15]

Like any other group, there by choice or biology, the ranks are filled with a vast spectrum of people. Personally, I do not enjoy being around people who let their sexual persuasion completely define them, which to me at least, encompasses many "flamboyant" gay men and "butch" gay women.

 

The best way I can think to describe it is Gay man vs. Man who is gay...

 

I don't get it, I cannot get inside the head of a man who has to act out his sexuality, make it their identity. Its not about sex, its lifestyle and I think its an act for the most part. And a part of a system of cliques and peer groups many of us have played roles in at various times. Jocks, nerds, rednecks, stoners, etc. I think its in large part the same type of behavior.

 

Back to the original topic : What ever floats your boat. I personally have no attraction to men, but that doesn't make me any less of a free person sexually or otherwise.

 

BTW: I have not gone away, but I am super busy now and the whole swinging experiment is on hold....damn, our sexlife period is shoved into little stolen moments when the stars, babysitters, time off from work, are all in proper alignment. I snuck off from work this morning for a quickie with the wife. I'll still log 70+ hours of work though....blech....

[JustAskJulie 2,588]

It really only takes a look back through the history of the world to see that this separation is through social conditioning. Look back at ancient Rome and other civilizations and we see bisexuality (especially among men) as a much more common thing.

 

People today are making a huge deal about the movie Alexander coming out and how dare Oliver Stone put in a scene with Alexander kissing another man. He was bisexual, as were most men in that day, it was not a big deal. He had male and female lovers. The fact that we feel the need to make a big deal out of it, is the sad thing.

[Hellboy 15]

I read some Plato back in college and was a little shocked by his description of a meeting of all male scholars being peppered with a "who's screwing who" gossip. For those that believe, there is referance to it in the Bible and while all else can be argued on semantics, homosexuality is forbidden....of course so is eating bacon, meaning Denny's will burn right along with the local swing club on Judgement day.

 

I guess I am fortunate that I do not have the attraction and therfore have to consider the issue with my ingrained morality. The bottom line for me is that I do not care to infringe on the rights of consenting adults to do as they wish in private or in public displays consistant with accepted norms for hetero people. And I don't care to participate.

[puneswings 15]

...the rights of consenting adults to do as they wish in private or in public displays consistant with accepted norms for hetero people

 

Surely you mean "accepted norms for society at large" or similar, and are not suggested that publicly acceptable norms should/would be established by the hetero folks?

[Hellboy 15]

Norms established by society as a whole, not just "normal folks" What is normal anyhow? It should be no more acceptable for a gay couple to have sex at a bus stop in mid afternoon than for a hetero couple and vise versa. There must be, however, and over riding urge to put on display lifestyles outside conventional definitions because we see it all the time, often under the guise of expression and pride. There is nothing wrong with pride in a chosen lifestyle, but it is cheapened by those who would pander to the stereotypes.

 

This coincides with a discussion I had with a friend on another message board. Does a person want to be known as a gay man, or a man who is gay? It seems like a matter of minor semantics, but its at the heart of the discussion.

[imsnowman 32]

Norms established by society as a whole, not just "normal folks" What is normal anyhow? It should be no more acceptable for a gay couple to have sex at a bus stop in mid afternoon than for a hetero couple and vise versa. There must be, however, and over riding urge to put on display lifestyles outside conventional definitions because we see it all the time, often under the guise of expression and pride. There is nothing wrong with pride in a chosen lifestyle, but it is cheapened by those who would pander to the stereotypes.

 

This coincides with a discussion I had with a friend on another message board. Does a person want to be known as a gay man, or a man who is gay? It seems like a matter of minor semantics, but its at the heart of the discussion.

 

Why do you derisively say, "under the guise of expression and pride"? Is this expression any different that the folks around here who've never set foot in a barn but walk around in their fancy cowboy clothes. Or rabid football fans wearing their favorite teams uniforms? Are they, to use your loaded term, pandering to a stereotype or are they enjoying themselves?

 

Basically, you seem to just not like gay men who are feminine and you're trying to cover-up that prejudice with a lot of high talk. Interesting that your examples all seem to be about gay/bi men and not lesbian/bi butch women.

[OpenVA 15]

I see the beauty of bisexuality not merely at the physical level; it is even more so at the mental and emotional level. To be able to admire a fellow human being belonging to the same gender as you and enjoy it is, I believe, a sign of an evolved personality; one who's inner eye has opened and can see true beauty in all humans without the limitations of social conditioning.

Universal Lover

 

Finally I see the social beauty of bisexuality: How can there ever be true equality until that day comes when a man can feel free to bring out the woman in him without worry, and woman can be man without fearing the wounded masculine ego?

 

These 2 paragraphs in particular strike a cord with me. In my younger days I experimented with bisexuality. How ever I found that I enjoyed women much more then men. Men no longer have a sexual charge for me unless engaged in the sex act with a women, but it is the act it self that the charge is centered on. At the same time I can admire and enjoy observing the male form (this is not some hidden refrence to a mans package ).

 

I also agree with the statment about equality. But I think that it goes deeper then that. For true equality to be a reality the double standards need to be removed as well. There can not be one set of standards for men in a chosen field or profession and a seperate one for women. The playing field needs to be level. The requirements the same for all. The physical requirements for a particular field of endevour do not change just because the gender of the aspirents is diffrent. A realistic evaluation of what the minium requirements for a particular endevour are needs to be made and those are the standards that all should be held to.

 

Unfortunetly this is easier said then done as ego tends to get in the way.

[OpenVA 15]

This coincides with a discussion I had with a friend on another message board. Does a person want to be known as a gay man, or a man who is gay? It seems like a matter of minor semantics, but its at the heart of the discussion.

 

I have found that this differs with the individual. I have had many homosexual friends that acknowledged a diffrence between the two and just as many who swear there is no diffrence. From some of our discussions, those that acknowledged a diffrence seemed to refer to the more effemanit (pretty sure I spelled that wrong) as gay men and the more masculine as those who were men that were gay.

[EternallySingle 32]

Basically, we are taught what is considered normal sexual behavior. I believe that you are attracted to who you are attracted to, but you act on that attraction based on what you were taught is right or acceptable. That is why it is more acceptable for a woman to be bisexual and a man to be gay than it is for a man to be bisexual or a woman gay. For men its always all or nothing, but women are supposed to be flexible.

[DBL D 120]

I never say that someone should be flexible in the sex area. I just ask that they be open minded. I try to take folks as they are.

 

Who was it who said if you always give a man enough rope, then he can hang himself.

 

That is what makes a real connection between partners special. When both of you end up truly loving what you both like to do. facelick

 

Male D

[Hellboy 15]

As hard as you were fishing for something to attack on, I'm surprised it took you so long. You don't need me or anyone else to validate your lifestyle, but when you seek to open a discussion on a topic and then turn on a comment you don't like with vitriol, I have to wonder what you were expecting. If you want total acceptance of your lifestyle, then you have to accept points of view that are different from your own. Your position seems to me to be people should be free to express themselves and act, think and feel how they wish, yet you attack my comment because they don't agree with your point of view...

 

HYPOCRISY!

 

I just don't think its right and proper for people, be they gay, straight, or whatever, to parade down the street naked and call it "expression" There has to be a line of what sexual behavior is A.) fit for public forum and B.) fit for behind closed doors. Even in privacy, there are some things that cannot be accepted by this society (ie, sex with children or sex with a German Sheppard) Is there something biological that causes a gay man to be more effeminate? To quote a great American, "I don't know" So there is to the outside observer, no way tell who is driven that way by their internal chemestry and who is acting baecasue they have assumed an identity.....But who gives a damn?!?!? Indecent exposure is indecent exposure and the standards should be universal.

[TNT 1,155]

Hellboy said:

Indecent exposure is indecent exposure and the standards should be universal.

 

Huh? Nothing is universal...especially indecent exposure. You are obviously applying Judeo-Christian morals which are not universal. In some cultures nudity is common and accepted. But in Islam the glimpse of an ankle is frowned upon.

 

Should you have to conform to their morals? They hold them to be universal.

 

JustAskJulie said:

It really only takes a look back through the history of the world to see that this separation is through social conditioning. Look back at ancient Rome and other civilizations and we see bisexuality (especially among men) as a much more common thing.

 

People today are making a huge deal about the movie Alexander coming out and how dare Oliver Stone put in a scene with Alexander kissing another man. He was bisexual, as were most men in that day, it was not a big deal. He had male and female lovers. The fact that we feel the need to make a big deal out of it, is the sad thing.

 

We agree.

 

TNT

[EternallySingle 32]

Sexual morality is about what the leaders of the society believe are needed to keep the society strong. For that reason, those of us brought up under the laws of morality started by Judism believe certain things are wrong and certain things are right. In other cultures, there is nothing wrong with having sex with 13 or 14 year olds, because they are TAUGHT different things about sex, love, religion, morality, and responsibility. Just 100 years ago it was not uncommon for a 20 year old man to have a 13 or 14 year old wife, or for her to have a child at 14 or 15. Then again, she knew she was now going to be a mother, was prepared for those responsibilities, and more or less grew to be a content mother and grandmother. When it became more important to have more education to get by in the world, it became more important for children to stay in school longer. How was this enforced? By making it more difficult for young children to be married off, then by making it illegal to have sex with anyone under a certain age.

 

In short, nothing is universal, especially morality. It all depends on what you are TAUGHT is needed for the society to be strong. Why not beastiality? In a real sense, its to keep people from turning to animals instead of humans for companionship. Again, it will keep the race going by making sure men and women make the effort to do the deed with each other instead of taking the short cut of finding a suitable animal and training it. And again, there are probably examples that are easy to find in ancient history. It may even be where the legends of centaurs, the sphynx, mermaids, and other half human creatures come from...what happens when humans mate outside their own.

 

If you take the emotion out of discussions of morality, its easy to see what its really about: The perceptions of a few on what it takes for the many to survive, and those few having the power to convince others to do as they say. The question is...

 

Do you want to be considered "normal" by the heads of our society or risk censure for doing what they say is wrong? For things that without a doubt cause pain, injury, suffering, hardship, or death to others, morality is not necessary. For the rest of human behavior, morality is the only thing that separates one group from another.

[warkman 31]

Do you want to be considered "normal" by the heads of our society or risk censure for doing what they say is wrong? For things that without a doubt cause pain, injury, suffering, hardship, or death to others, morality is not necessary. For the rest of human behavior, morality is the only thing that separates one group from another.

 

I'm not sure what you're saying here ES. I don't quite understand the second sentence. I guess it could beg the question, "What is morality?" but to my mind's eye causing pain, injury, suffering, hardship, or death to others is exactly where my kind of morality comes into play. That's wrong- or at least in a non self defense capacity. Of course opinions will vary as to what's acceptable or not. Or are you saying that many people use morality to justify hurtful actions? By the way, I really enjoy your posts.

[imsnowman 32]

Sexual morality is about what the leaders of the society believe are needed to keep the society strong.

SNIP

 

If you take the emotion out of discussions of morality, its easy to see what its really about: The perceptions of a few on what it takes for the many to survive, and those few having the power to convince others to do as they say.

 

Another reason may be to keep the society not necessarily strong but under the control of the few.

[DBL D 120]

You know what? I really don't care if "society" condones what I do or not.

 

You have just live your life. Why shouldn't you do it doing something you enjoy doing? (Of course, this takes into consideration that it doesn't hurt someone else in a terribly physical way as in causing pain or death.)

 

Doesn't make sense to me otherwise.

 

Male D

[EternallySingle 32]

I'm not sure what you're saying here ES. I don't quite understand the second sentence. I guess it could beg the question, "What is morality?" but to my mind's eye causing pain, injury, suffering, hardship, or death to others is exactly where my kind of morality comes into play. That's wrong- or at least in a non self defense capacity. Of course opinions will vary as to what's acceptable or not. Or are you saying that many people use morality to justify hurtful actions? By the way, I really enjoy your posts.

 

What I was trying to say is that when you do something that will hurt someone in a visible, concrete way like causing bodily harm or causing them to lose something of physical value, there is no gray area as to whether its right or wrong. The same goes if you do something you know will cause someone emotional anguish because you broke a clearly defined written or verbal contract (such as marriage vows or financial agreement). When it comes to whether one person approves of a behavior or idea and another disapproves of that behavior or idea, or an action that is beneficial to a person in one instance but detrimental in another (like becoming pregnant before marriage), or an action where there is no possibility of anyone being affected except the person involved(masturbation, taking mind altering substances in the confines of your home and not leaving until you become sober again, then you are talking about morality, not what is right or wrong.

 

I did my dimensions of human behavior term paper on technology and its affects on local morality. Interesting research. Did you know it was considered bad form for an older woman to marry a younger man in feudal European society because it almost always meant that the man would outlive his wife and marry again, allowing the children of his new wife (if he remarried) to inherit a portion of his estate? Did you also know that it was bad form for a widow who inherited an estate to remarry because it would keep another woman's children from potentially inheriting an estate? What did someone say about the real reason for morality laws?

[Vespertine 31]

A little off topic, but interesting....

 

 

WHO IS BISEXUAL?*

 

As you can see, there is no simple definition of bisexuality, and bisexual people are a very diverse group. There are several theories about different models of bisexual behavior. J. R. Little identifies at least 13 types of bisexuality, as defined by sexual desires and experiences. They are:

 

Alternating bisexuals:

may have a relationship with a man, and then after that relationship ends, may choose a female partner for a subsequent relationship, and many go back to a male partner next.

Circumstantial bisexuals:

primarily heterosexual, but will choose same sex partners only in situations where they have no access to other-sex partners, such as when in jail, in the military, or in a gender-segregated school.

Concurrent relationship bisexuals:

have primary relationship with one gender only but have other casual or secondary relationships with people of another gender at the same time.

Conditional bisexuals:

either straight or gay/lesbian, but will switch to a relationship with another gender for financial or career gain or for a specific purpose, such as young straight males who become gay prostitutes or lesbians who get married to men in order to gain acceptance from family members or to have children.

Emotional bisexuals:

have intimate emotional relationships with both men and women, but only have sexual relationships with one gender.

Integrated bisexuals:

have more than one primary relationship at the same time, one with a man and one with a woman.

Exploratory bisexuals:

either straight or gay/lesbian, but have sex with another gender just to satisfy curiosity or "see what it's like."

Hedonistic bisexuals:

primarily straight or gay/lesbian but will sometimes have sex with another gender primarily for fun or purely sexual satisfaction.

Recreational bisexuals:

primarily heterosexual but engage in gay or lesbian sex only when under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

Isolated bisexuals:

100% straight or gay/lesbian now but has had at one or more sexual experience with another gender in the past.

Latent bisexuals:

completely straight or gay lesbian in behavior but have strong desire for sex with another gender, but have never acted on it.

Motivational bisexuals:

straight women who have sex with other women only because a male partner insists on it to titillate him.

Transitional bisexuals:

temporarily identify as bisexual while in the process of moving from being straight to being gay or lesbian, or going from being gay or lesbian to being heterosexual.

 

Many of these people might not call themselves bisexual, but because they are attracted to and have relationships with both men and women, they are in fact bisexual.

 

Now let's toss in a brief summary on Kinsey

 

Dr. Alfred Kinsey created a scale, graduated between heterosexuality and homosexuality, to rate individuals on actual experiences and psychological reactions. The ratings are as follows**:

 

0 - Entirely heterosexual.

1 - Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual.

2 - Predominantly heterosexual, but with a distinct homosexual history.

3 - Equally heterosexual and homosexual.

4 - Predominantly homosexual, but with a distinct heterosexual history.

5 - Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual.

6 - Entirely homosexual.

 

Clearly anything above 0 and less than 6 can be defined as bisexual. Although many people will say "I am Kinsey (whatever)," it should be noted that subsequent researchers such as Klein have found it more useful to rate people on a variety of levels, such as "Past History," "Present History," "Present Feelings," and "Future Inclinations". Nevertheless the Kinsey scale remains a useful tool for discussion of sexuality precisely because it is so simple.

 

Wow. Talk about labels.

 

No more Bi Vs. Bi-curious. There are subcategories for bi's now.

 

Which one are you?

 

I'm a Hedonistic Bisexual, Kinsey 2. I like the sound of that. So much better than bi-curious.

 

Bisexual.org

[davesgirl2305 15]

Wait a minute why all the grief? Doesn't it really come down to you and yourself to deal with. If you like who and what you are who cares? Right? I dont need anyone to tell me I think sex with a girl is fun. I think you get to totally different feelings from both sexes why not experience it.

There are no "do overs" in life. Why have regrets?

[Vespertine 31]

There are no "do overs" in life. Why have regrets?

This is one of the best quotes I have ever read.

 

So true....so true.

[confunktion 19]

Excellent research, Vespertine. I have been a Kinsey scale advocate, but I didn't know about that info from Little. Knowledge is power, you know? Based on that, you are like She-Ra.

 

Mr. Funk

Ignorance Is Not One Of My Favorite Things