Spoon

[And we'll just put a happy little bush over here.]

i wonder how living in a postcolonial context has to do with such a position? or, perhaps, it is just the problematic legacy of descartes and a western dichotomy? it could also be both, of course.

I'm just going to swallow my pride and admit I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean Descartes' Cartesian mind/body dualism? It's been a long time since philosophy class!

basically that one is either this or they are that. one is either straight or they gay. they cannot be bi. one cannot reside in the gray area. we all must fit nicely in on category.

[Trathena]

Well, being Mormon doesn't stop him being gay, and he claims to be a member of a "tolerant" section within the church. He's very outspoken about gay rights. I think he's married, so he probably doesn't identify as gay, but "Andy, You're a Star" is autobiographical. Here's more information:

The gigs in a drag club, the lyrics to "Andy, You're a Star" (about a crush on a male High School athlete) as well as the androgyny of "Somebody Told Me," Brandon Flowers' apparent metrosexuality, and the band's considerable gay following have all led to speculation and rumors that Brandon Flowers is either gay or bisexual. Brandon Flowers claims that "Andy You're a Star" is "free for people to interpret as their own," in a Genre 2005 interview. However in an earlier QLas Vegas interview during 2004 he said it was about his crush on a male athlete in high school. Brandon Flowers has stated that some confusion over his sexuality is "not a bad thing." He was also seen holding hands with a male outside of an early gig in Las Vegas. Brandon Flowers has also said "I'm not gay", but has not yet responded to whether he is bisexual or not. The band is also known for boylove (suggestive homoerotic play between male bandmembers) onstage, something on par with the yaoi and slash fiction cultures.

I think that having a "crush" on someone of the same sex makes you Bi. You might be only a 1, but you're Bi on the Kinsey scale.

Added after 14 minutes:

basically that one is either this or they are that. one is either straight or they gay. they cannot be bi. one cannot reside in the gray area. we all must fit nicely in on category.

Got it.  Yeah, that's what many think. Heck, it's in politics too! You can't be a liberal and be against affirmative action. You can't be conservative and be pro-choice. I think that people are uncomfortable with situations that don't categorize into black or white.

A gay activist in my area, who'd been married before he came out, told me that the only good thing about his first marriage was the sex. But he doesn't identify as bisexual. He says he's gay.

It just seems to me that if a person can have a good sex life with people of both sexes then he/she is in that "gray area" you mention. And that's what's frustrating to me sometimes. People don't distinguish themselves from their relationships. I'm in a "heterosexual" relationship, but I'm still a bisexual woman.

Back to your question: do you also think it might be our Christian Good vs. Evil teachings too? That something is either good or bad, never both or neither? I mean, we read about God doing so many horrible things in the Bible, but so often Christians use tortured logic to justify it instead of thinking that the God they worship just might have a dark side too.

Perhaps that's why Eastern religions don't seem to have this problem of evil as much? Because of the concept/philosophy of the Tao?

[TheRuleofThree]

Hmm.  Interesting stuff Trathena.  Thanks for sharing that.  While a lot of it is certainly hear-say I can see the pattern and the reasoning behind it.  But I just think that speculating on the sexuality of someone who is married is sort of a waste of time generally.  I feel like if I were married (I basically am) and people continued to ask me if I was bisexual I'd stop answering eventually too.

I also think that trying to reason through the straight/gay/bi argument by boxing in any human behavior at all may be a waste of time, particularly if we focus so much on definitions.  What can we say constitutes "sexuality" that can define a person as any particular type?  It seems we're referring to the actual act of intercourse, which may or may not necessarily be a part of someone's sexual preferences.  Would it be possible that a person perform a "sex act" with someone without it being an expression of their "sexuality," or does there sexuality have to be by definition a product of their sexual acts?  In the scenario you describe, a gay male who had great sex with his former wife but says he was always gay, what part of this man's psyche makes him describe himself as "gay" and why does it clearly differ from the actual SEX that he was having?  Similarly, where do we draw the line between attraction and recognition of beauty?  The age-old argument of whether a guy can acknowledge that another guy is attractive without it meaning that he wants to make out with him sort of fits in here, I imagine.  

I guess my point of view on this is that the overwhelming majority of people define themselves in particular ways based on what society expects.  The average person shapes their gender performance around the sexual acts that they perform with others, which may or may not be expressions of their true sexual intent or preference.  But when you get into that intent and preference, you're getting into an area that no one can really explain or understand clearly, let alone explain to someone else.  Freud calls it the Unconscious, Lacan calls it "das ding" but both agree that it is ALWAYS driving us and is ALWAYS unreachable.  "Gray area" doesn't begin to cover it.

[Trathena]

I don't know, Brock, it all seems so logical and uncomplicated to me.

I don't think that speculating on the sexuality of anyone is a waste of time. As you know, it's only recently that being gay wasn't universally condemned, so anytime someone famous or talented says he or she is gay it's extremely important. Brandon Flowers admitted in an interview that he crushed on a guy in high school. At one time, it was obviously so important to him that he wrote and published a song about it. He's married now and wants a little privacy, and that's fine. But he's also a member of a church that condemns homosexuality. So you can bet that him saying gay positive things is very important to gay people.

Trent Reznor once expressed curiosity (even desire) about having sex with men. Kurt Cobain said he'd have explored his "gay side" if he'd not fallen in love with Courtney. Michael Stipe is Bi. Pete Wentz came out as Bi recently. This is all very important, no matter that all of these guys date or are married to women.

I once read an article where a girl talked about "situational orientation." She said she refused to "label" herself: if she was attracted to a girl, she went out with that girl. If she was attracted to a guy, she hooked up with him.  Now, I think God's been very, very good to that girl! The sky's the limit.

A person's sexual orientation is different from his/her sexuality, isn't it? I don't think that we need the act of intercourse to define a person's sexual orientation. I knew I was attracted to women and men before I'd ever had sex with either gender. I think that's the same for everyone.

In the scenario you describe, a gay male who had great sex with his former wife but says he was always gay, what part of this man's psyche makes him describe himself as "gay" and why does it clearly differ from the actual SEX that he was having?

I don't want to speak for him, but I think he'd say that it's all of who he is. That's vague, I know, but I do remember that when I "discovered" what bisexuality was, it not only explained my feelings about women, but also explained a lot about my basic personality, the friendships I form, the way I dress.  A lot.

Re: attraction and recognition of beauty. One is aesthetic and one is attraction. For me, before I knew I was having real, significant crushes, I thought of it as "hero worship." It wasn't just the beauty of the girl (or guy). I know the difference. I can think someone is good-looking without being attracted to the person (can't men too?).

I don't think I'm quite sure what you mean by "gender performance." But I think that I may be guilty of trying to "compartmentalize" people too. But I don't really know how else to do it. It's all so fluid, bisexuality is. We have a lot more numbers on the scale! :-)

I've always considered myself a 3 (convenient, I know). I enjoy sex with women as much as I do with men. But I've never fallen with love with a woman. One woman made me feel like a 5. And my husband has made me feel like 0.5. :-) For all intents and purposes, I have a "straight" relationship, so I understand my friend identifying as gay. I understand why bisexual people--once they commit to another person--decide to identify with whatever type of relationship they're in.

My argument is that if everyone who is bisexual would identify as such, the "gay" demographic would have exploded long ago and we'd have had complete and full civil rights by now.

[kata rokkar]

Re: Spoon

Can anyone here maybe share or recommend an album? I'm really enjoying them.

Kill The Moonlight is by far the starter album for Spoon. But the new one is awesome as well ('Don't You Eva' is such a catchy song). But start with Kill The Moonlight.

soooo, who's bi?

[Trathena]

Ah! Back on topic! Thank you, Kata!