POLL: Are you "LGBTQ" or Straight?

[Magus]

Just for demographic purposes. It's anonymous poll. No fear, no shame, you're not a freak if you find something attractive in your own gender, it just is what it is.

Also, there can be a fine line between bisexual and questioning but that's for you to decide. Labels are just labels.

[SmallFarm]

I clicked male bisexual. I don't like labels that say I am this or that I prefer the term same-sex attraction because it's something I have not something I am.

[Magus]

I agree with you, SmallFarm - our society puts way too much emphasis on a persons's attractions as being the end-all-be-all of their identity, when it isn't. Of course, saying that is super politically incorrect.

[Fiannan]

If people want to take a test on sexual orientation here is one designed by researcher Dr. Robert Epstein:

http://mysexualorientation.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Totally safe for work.

[Rose Garden]

Some people can't tell?

[Fiannan]

Some people can't tell?

I was talking with a young woman recently who said her best friend was trying women out. She said her friend is from a liberal household and feels it would hinder her exploration of who she is if she did not at least try to be bi. She said her friend is "having fun dating women" but is unsure whether she will eventually be in a long-term relationship with a woman or a man.


The trendy nature of this has been around since the mid-1990s but it appears to be skyrocketing now with the 18-25 female population. So no, many people are not sure yet.

[Elizabeth]

Who was it who coined the word "straight" ? Normal would be more appropriate, troubled for those being tempted by Lucifer and perverted for those following Lucifer. Rainbow and gay are once beautiful words stolen by the perverts.

[AI2.0]

Some people can't tell?

I was talking with a young woman recently who said her best friend was trying women out. She said her friend is from a liberal household and feels it would hinder her exploration of who she is if she did not at least try to be bi. She said her friend is "having fun dating women" but is unsure whether she will eventually be in a long-term relationship with a woman or a man.


The trendy nature of this has been around since the mid-1990s but it appears to be skyrocketing now with the 18-25 female population. So no, many people are not sure yet.

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

[skmo]

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

He's not mistaken in his analysis, though. Considerably far more females are becoming bi-curious than males. Males are much more statistically likely to be in the gay or straight category, and while the largest majority of women still identify as heterosexual, bisexual is the next largest group, and it's a much higher percentage than either homosexual or bisexual males. It's been a while since I read much on it, but I remember that the percentage of bi-curious females was larger than gay or bi males combined.

Another thing which I DID expect to find, females who had been in a traditional relationship then broke up and went into a same-sex relationship were more likely to change back into a straight relationship. I expected this to be the case because often women either get hurt or want more emotional intimacy than they get with a man, but they find another woman only provides part of what they're missing and they end up back in a male-female relationship. Men who've been in the closet and then come out, leaving the relationship are much more likely to remain that way.

[Elizabeth]

Perhaps it is the media attention making it seem that way. Personally I am glad to say my only exposure to homosexuality is on the internet. No one of my acquaintance, or anyone I know of, or come in contact with, are homosexual.

[Magus]

Some people can't tell?

I was talking with a young woman recently who said her best friend was trying women out. She said her friend is from a liberal household and feels it would hinder her exploration of who she is if she did not at least try to be bi. She said her friend is "having fun dating women" but is unsure whether she will eventually be in a long-term relationship with a woman or a man.


The trendy nature of this has been around since the mid-1990s but it appears to be skyrocketing now with the 18-25 female population. So no, many people are not sure yet.

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

I ain't gonna lie - most men, if not all men, love the idea of girl on girl. Whether they admit it or not. Deep down, it's there. Just saying. Don't judge!

That being said, I understand this young lady's perspective, but it's wrong to think that you have to try to be bisexual in order to properly explore yourself. Anyone can be bisexual if they wanna be and they try hard enough, in my opinion. Psychology and physiological response to stimuli are malleable things.

[Elizabeth]

Yes Magnus in such a circumstance we can judge. One may perphaps expect this in the world, but not of LDS men who hold the Priesthood of God and who know they are judged on thoughts as well actions and that thoughts preceed actions.

I ain't gonna lie - most men, if not all men, love the idea of girl on girl. Whether they admit it or not. Deep down, it's there. Just saying. Don't judge!

[Magus]

Also, what are your thoughts on this?

The Church's position is that same sex attraction is not a sin, only acting on it is.

I used to think that just the attraction itself was a sin until I came across the Church's distinction.

So that got me thinking.

Hate is a sin. Evil thoughts about other people, that's a sin. Dwelling on lustful thoughts of someone you're not married to, that's a sin.

But same-sex attraction is not? Just the act?

This leads me to wonder if there is a place somewhere in the eternities for same-sex attraction to be expressed in some form. Not in a "marriage" or any sense of the traditional family, but something else. Sex for sex's sake is one thing, but it seems to me that the big reason why homosexuality is a sin is because we're in a mortal world and 1.) male and female must learn to be united and bring out the best in each other, 2.) the differences in male and female make that hard enough and having gay relationships would just get in the way, 3.) gays relationships can't produce biological children, and 4.) gay relationships would interfere with the concept of family over-all (like having "gay marriage"). And the family is what eternity is based on. So the reason it's sinful seems, to me, to not be really the sexual gratification aspect as just the interference with objectives aspect.

Because outside of those things, yeah, who would care? And why?

But if those objectives are achieved? Mortal tests passed? "Same sex attraction not a sin, only acting on it" says the Church. So what does that mean for eternity? We know that in the Bible, people had multiple spouses and multiple concubines. Is there same-sex concubinage in the eternal worlds?

Just a thought. Don't call me a perv for being open-minded. And I'm straight, btw.

[Magus]

Yes Magnus in such a circumstance we can judge. One may perphaps expect this in the world, but not of LDS men who hold the Priesthood of God and who know they are judged on thoughts as well actions and that thoughts preceed actions.

I ain't gonna lie - most men, if not all men, love the idea of girl on girl. Whether they admit it or not. Deep down, it's there. Just saying. Don't judge!

Men are men, Elizabeth. And women are women. I don' judge any guy who would think girl on girl is exciting. Most would find porn exciting too - doesn't mean they watch it. I'm just calling out a fact about peoples' inherent sexual natures.

[Magus]

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

He's not mistaken in his analysis, though. Considerably far more females are becoming bi-curious than males. Males are much more statistically likely to be in the gay or straight category, and while the largest majority of women still identify as heterosexual, bisexual is the next largest group, and it's a much higher percentage than either homosexual or bisexual males. It's been a while since I read much on it, but I remember that the percentage of bi-curious females was larger than gay or bi males combined.

Another thing which I DID expect to find, females who had been in a traditional relationship then broke up and went into a same-sex relationship were more likely to change back into a straight relationship. I expected this to be the case because often women either get hurt or want more emotional intimacy than they get with a man, but they find another woman only provides part of what they're missing and they end up back in a male-female relationship. Men who've been in the closet and then come out, leaving the relationship are much more likely to remain that way.

I think this has something to do with the natures of men and women, or the "energy" (as I call it) behind their masculinity and femininity.

Masculine energy, as a principle or philosophy, is in fact Mars. It's the conqueror, the invader, and it can be territorial. In esotericism, it's associated with the sun, with fire. It's force and logic.

Feminine energy is receptive. It's Venus. It's the moon. It's the ocean and its tides. It's feeling and intuitive. It's logic from a different perspective, I guess you could maybe say. Adam's view in the garden was reflective of his masculine nature, while Eve's considering of the fruit was reflective of her feminine nature.

Considering these things - I think it'd be easier for two women to, as energy, be together than two men, as energy, be together. Feminine energy is just more of a receptive thing, even to other feminine energy, even if the preference is masculine energy.

[Fiannan]

Some people can't tell?

I was talking with a young woman recently who said her best friend was trying women out. She said her friend is from a liberal household and feels it would hinder her exploration of who she is if she did not at least try to be bi. She said her friend is "having fun dating women" but is unsure whether she will eventually be in a long-term relationship with a woman or a man.


The trendy nature of this has been around since the mid-1990s but it appears to be skyrocketing now with the 18-25 female population. So no, many people are not sure yet.

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

What, I've tapped into the collective unconsciousness of Aliester Crowley and Helena Blavatsky? Yeah, someone mentioned that at our annual meeting at Bohemia Grove last July.

PS, if you think the powers-that-be are not using the research of Skinner and Freud to their advantage (check up on Bertram Russel in regards to this) to redirect the libidinal energies of young people today, primarily women as they are the ones able to reproduce, so they can destroy the birthrates of the west, and it will later be used on the rest of the world, you need to do your research. For starters look up some of the resent commentaries by Paul Joseph Watson on the subject - he seems to have done his homework.

[Fiannan]

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

He's not mistaken in his analysis, though. Considerably far more females are becoming bi-curious than males. Males are much more statistically likely to be in the gay or straight category, and while the largest majority of women still identify as heterosexual, bisexual is the next largest group, and it's a much higher percentage than either homosexual or bisexual males. It's been a while since I read much on it, but I remember that the percentage of bi-curious females was larger than gay or bi males combined.

Another thing which I DID expect to find, females who had been in a traditional relationship then broke up and went into a same-sex relationship were more likely to change back into a straight relationship. I expected this to be the case because often women either get hurt or want more emotional intimacy than they get with a man, but they find another woman only provides part of what they're missing and they end up back in a male-female relationship. Men who've been in the closet and then come out, leaving the relationship are much more likely to remain that way.

I think this has something to do with the natures of men and women, or the "energy" (as I call it) behind their masculinity and femininity.

Masculine energy, as a principle or philosophy, is in fact Mars. It's the conqueror, the invader, and it can be territorial. In esotericism, it's associated with the sun, with fire. It's force and logic.

Feminine energy is receptive. It's Venus. It's the moon. It's the ocean and its tides. It's feeling and intuitive. It's logic from a different perspective, I guess you could maybe say. Adam's view in the garden was reflective of his masculine nature, while Eve's considering of the fruit was reflective of her feminine nature.

Considering these things - I think it'd be easier for two women to, as energy, be together than two men, as energy, be together. Feminine energy is just more of a receptive thing, even to other feminine energy, even if the preference is masculine energy.

You appear to have done your research on the esoteric natures of archetypes. I would be interested in your views of the influence of Minerva, Inanna and Ishtar (pretty much the same deity) on the foundations of the USA. Most people have no idea how deep the occult role was on the founding of the nation.

[Magus]

I'm sorry Fiannan, but there is just something super creepy about your posts whenever you turn the conversation to sexual matters (which is a lot) and you seem to have a predeliction for steering conversations to lesbianism.

You seem to attempt to post as if you are just 'reporting' the information, but I think I'm picking up vibes that there's more to it than a purely clinical interest.

He's not mistaken in his analysis, though. Considerably far more females are becoming bi-curious than males. Males are much more statistically likely to be in the gay or straight category, and while the largest majority of women still identify as heterosexual, bisexual is the next largest group, and it's a much higher percentage than either homosexual or bisexual males. It's been a while since I read much on it, but I remember that the percentage of bi-curious females was larger than gay or bi males combined.

Another thing which I DID expect to find, females who had been in a traditional relationship then broke up and went into a same-sex relationship were more likely to change back into a straight relationship. I expected this to be the case because often women either get hurt or want more emotional intimacy than they get with a man, but they find another woman only provides part of what they're missing and they end up back in a male-female relationship. Men who've been in the closet and then come out, leaving the relationship are much more likely to remain that way.

I think this has something to do with the natures of men and women, or the "energy" (as I call it) behind their masculinity and femininity.

Masculine energy, as a principle or philosophy, is in fact Mars. It's the conqueror, the invader, and it can be territorial. In esotericism, it's associated with the sun, with fire. It's force and logic.

Feminine energy is receptive. It's Venus. It's the moon. It's the ocean and its tides. It's feeling and intuitive. It's logic from a different perspective, I guess you could maybe say. Adam's view in the garden was reflective of his masculine nature, while Eve's considering of the fruit was reflective of her feminine nature.

Considering these things - I think it'd be easier for two women to, as energy, be together than two men, as energy, be together. Feminine energy is just more of a receptive thing, even to other feminine energy, even if the preference is masculine energy.

You appear to have done your research on the esoteric natures of archetypes. I would be interested in your views of the influence of Minerva, Inanna and Ishtar (pretty much the same deity) on the foundations of the USA. Most people have no idea how deep the occult role was on the founding of the nation.

I realize there is a Masonic connection in the founding of our country and that Washington is pretty much laid out according to Masonic design, with a lot of symbolism involving pentacles, etc. I think I heard there being some Ishtar or Venus symbolism as well, something to do with the rising of empires or something.

I know there's a lot of conspiracy theories about Freemasonry, but frankly, I've never bought them or been convinced it's an evil organization. Just a very misunderstood one. My grandfather, great grandfather, and other ancestors were Freemasons, some of them rather influential in their times....I recently came across an old, authentic version of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, and have been reading it...there's nothing but profound insight and wisdom in that book dripping from every page...

Oh yeah, I know that the Vatican is set up with some fertility symbolism too, in its architecture....it's just how things are.