Galarza
Dec 29, 2006, 9:18 PM
Dear Readers:
Just wanted to share the following with you.
What most of us call “sexual” orientation is really romantic orientation. This means that a heteroromantic male (straight in the romantic sense) can be biSEXual (bi in the purely sexual sense). Three tiers of orientation exist.
1) Sexual Tastes: Which sex or sexes you're SEXually attracted to
2) Romantic Orientation: Which sex or sexes you're ROMANTICALLY attracted to
3) Platonic Preference: Which sex or sexes you're PLATONICALLY drawn to
Most heteroromantic men are drawn to homoplatonic bonds with other males (e.g., “male bonding”). It is homophobia (fear of homosexuality) that keeps their innate biSEXuality from being expressed here. Still, about 70% of the population is heteroromantic, biSEXual, and homoplatonic. In this sense, bisexuality simply means SEXUAL attraction and/or activities with members of both sexes. (I’m using the term both because 95% of people are anatomically male or female and not transgendered.)
Bisexuality can be practiced by heteroromantic people (straight in the romantic sense). Because men tend to divorce sex from romance, they are more likely to have sex in and out of a heteroromantic context—if they get over their homophobia. Because females tend to require romance for sex (and because most people are heteroromantic), most heteroromantic women will remain heteroSEXual, as well. Thus, female bisexuality is about 1/3 as common as male bisexuality. It is only our society that hides this fact because it is obsessed with female bisexuality. Female bisexuality, after all, is a fantasy of straight men and doesn’t disrupt the heterosexual status quo. This is because female bisexuality is seen as “women just fooling around.” It is male bisexuality that is the real threat, which is why it must be pushed under the rug. But looking at human history, one sees that male bisexuality is more common than female bisexuality. Our society is the anomaly in the history of human civilizations.
Homophobia keeps male bisexuality hidden—and the fact that in our society, romance is the only context for legitimate sex. Even homoplatonic love makes gay sex no-no. People learn the straight/gay binary at an early age, which leaves little room for a bi identity. Teenagehood is the time when the straight/gay divide is enforced the most brutally. Teens, the so-called rebels of society, are told that they only have a 3% chance of ending up gay—and even less of a chance of ending up bi. Print, radio, TV, parents, peers, teachers, and religion pressure teens and young adults into choosing the default identity (and behavior) of straight. The latest manifestation of this indoctrination is teens saying, “That is so gay”—referring to everything they see as bad (e.g., a boring movie). This shows that straight identity, behavior, and even feelings are constructed, enforced, and chosen (consciously and unconsciously) and malleable to peer pressure and to social upbringing—just like everything else. It is the unconsciousness of this socialization process (although much of it is conscious, too) that makes people say that they didn't choose their orientation.
When men reach adulthood, they find that most women refuse to date openly bi men. This forces heteroromantic men (and biromantic men) to hide their bisexuality (e.g., the downlow phenomenon). Articles then “prove” that male bisexuality is a “myth.” Seldom do articles look at the social context that drives male bisexuality underground. Even less mentioned is the total lack of bi community—no bi cafes, no bi workout clubs, no bi sports teams, no bi music, no bi cable networks, no bi fraternities and sororities, etc. In the United States, a country of 280 million people, there isn’t a single bi bar—not even in Boston, the “bi capital” of America. Worse, nobody notices. As the saying goes, bisexuality is everywhere, yet invisible as air.
Heteroromantic people, however, have a biSEXual potential, which means that bisexuality can happen with opposite-sex romantic partners and with same-sex friends (homosocial bonds). It is the one-man/one woman paradigm (e.g., monogamy) that keeps people from openly admitting their bisexuality. Men, in particular, feel that if they enjoy gay sex, they must be turning “gay.” But one can be straight in the romantic sense and bi in the purely sexual sense. If we teased apart sexual tastes from romantic orientation from platonic preference (instead of lumping the three together as “sexual” orientation), then “sexual” politics would be romantic politics in the future. In such a world, there would be heteroromantic/biSEXual people, homoromantic/biSEXual people, homoromantic/homosexual people, biromantic/bisexual people, etc. For more info, go to www.threecirclegraph.com. I also have an article at http://www.cleansheets.com/coverstories/galarza_01.04.06.shtml
Thanks for reading!
Tony out!
Just wanted to share the following with you.
What most of us call “sexual” orientation is really romantic orientation. This means that a heteroromantic male (straight in the romantic sense) can be biSEXual (bi in the purely sexual sense). Three tiers of orientation exist.
1) Sexual Tastes: Which sex or sexes you're SEXually attracted to
2) Romantic Orientation: Which sex or sexes you're ROMANTICALLY attracted to
3) Platonic Preference: Which sex or sexes you're PLATONICALLY drawn to
Most heteroromantic men are drawn to homoplatonic bonds with other males (e.g., “male bonding”). It is homophobia (fear of homosexuality) that keeps their innate biSEXuality from being expressed here. Still, about 70% of the population is heteroromantic, biSEXual, and homoplatonic. In this sense, bisexuality simply means SEXUAL attraction and/or activities with members of both sexes. (I’m using the term both because 95% of people are anatomically male or female and not transgendered.)
Bisexuality can be practiced by heteroromantic people (straight in the romantic sense). Because men tend to divorce sex from romance, they are more likely to have sex in and out of a heteroromantic context—if they get over their homophobia. Because females tend to require romance for sex (and because most people are heteroromantic), most heteroromantic women will remain heteroSEXual, as well. Thus, female bisexuality is about 1/3 as common as male bisexuality. It is only our society that hides this fact because it is obsessed with female bisexuality. Female bisexuality, after all, is a fantasy of straight men and doesn’t disrupt the heterosexual status quo. This is because female bisexuality is seen as “women just fooling around.” It is male bisexuality that is the real threat, which is why it must be pushed under the rug. But looking at human history, one sees that male bisexuality is more common than female bisexuality. Our society is the anomaly in the history of human civilizations.
Homophobia keeps male bisexuality hidden—and the fact that in our society, romance is the only context for legitimate sex. Even homoplatonic love makes gay sex no-no. People learn the straight/gay binary at an early age, which leaves little room for a bi identity. Teenagehood is the time when the straight/gay divide is enforced the most brutally. Teens, the so-called rebels of society, are told that they only have a 3% chance of ending up gay—and even less of a chance of ending up bi. Print, radio, TV, parents, peers, teachers, and religion pressure teens and young adults into choosing the default identity (and behavior) of straight. The latest manifestation of this indoctrination is teens saying, “That is so gay”—referring to everything they see as bad (e.g., a boring movie). This shows that straight identity, behavior, and even feelings are constructed, enforced, and chosen (consciously and unconsciously) and malleable to peer pressure and to social upbringing—just like everything else. It is the unconsciousness of this socialization process (although much of it is conscious, too) that makes people say that they didn't choose their orientation.
When men reach adulthood, they find that most women refuse to date openly bi men. This forces heteroromantic men (and biromantic men) to hide their bisexuality (e.g., the downlow phenomenon). Articles then “prove” that male bisexuality is a “myth.” Seldom do articles look at the social context that drives male bisexuality underground. Even less mentioned is the total lack of bi community—no bi cafes, no bi workout clubs, no bi sports teams, no bi music, no bi cable networks, no bi fraternities and sororities, etc. In the United States, a country of 280 million people, there isn’t a single bi bar—not even in Boston, the “bi capital” of America. Worse, nobody notices. As the saying goes, bisexuality is everywhere, yet invisible as air.
Heteroromantic people, however, have a biSEXual potential, which means that bisexuality can happen with opposite-sex romantic partners and with same-sex friends (homosocial bonds). It is the one-man/one woman paradigm (e.g., monogamy) that keeps people from openly admitting their bisexuality. Men, in particular, feel that if they enjoy gay sex, they must be turning “gay.” But one can be straight in the romantic sense and bi in the purely sexual sense. If we teased apart sexual tastes from romantic orientation from platonic preference (instead of lumping the three together as “sexual” orientation), then “sexual” politics would be romantic politics in the future. In such a world, there would be heteroromantic/biSEXual people, homoromantic/biSEXual people, homoromantic/homosexual people, biromantic/bisexual people, etc. For more info, go to www.threecirclegraph.com. I also have an article at http://www.cleansheets.com/coverstories/galarza_01.04.06.shtml
Thanks for reading!
Tony out!