Het's, gays, and lesbians, how would you feel if your partner suddenly said he/she were bi?

Her to me: "I have to tell you something. I'm bi. Is that ok?"

Me: "Of course it is. But uh... I'm straight. Is that ok?"

Her: "Of course! People have to be what they have to be."

And that was that.

Years ago I was with a guy who was bi. I knew it from the get-go, by intuition, and a few things he did or said, but he had the hardest time even telling me. So late one evening it's time to tell me, and he blurts out his deep secret taht he's also been with men. Mainly men in fact. I say "I knew that! Shoot I thought you had something heavy to tell me man." He was terribly suprised.

Not all people react like I do, I hear. But it honestly never bothered me one iota.

There's still quite a bit of hostlity in many lesbian communities towards bisexual women. So, bi vs. lesbian vs. straight is still relevant for some groups (and not just the red-blooded right-wingers where you might expect it!)

The question doesn't really make sense to me. How do I manifest my orientation? The same way you manifest yours. If I like someone and I think they might be receptive, I may flirt, ask them out, throw them up against the wall, or totally clam up, depending on the person or the circumstances. I don't go around wearing triangle pins, I generally keep mum about anything about my personal life at work, but with friends and lovers (heh, not like there are any) I refer to it as if it is the most normal thing in the world. But then again, this is Seattle, which is a pretty "post-gay" city. If I lived in a city that was more "non-gay" or "old-skool-stridently-political-gay", things would probably be different - well, actually, I would probably move to Seattle or Portland or SF.

I'm pansexual. I like people for who they are, not their gender.

That said, I don't have a romantic life because no one ever sees me the same way. I'm everyone's "sister" and no one's lover. :P

In a "post-gay" age of pan-, poly-, and ambisexuality

ROFLSAURUS!!!! i can't WAIT for the post-pretentious era, which hopefully shall arrive when the current crop of post-modern post-rock-listening post-gay pre-adolescents get some neo-perspective.

I am more than willing to become horizontally acquainted with any bi or gay chick. And have.

I've been in love exactly once, and married for almost 21 years to that person. I realize that we may both harbor some fantasies that, in the context of a faithful, traditional marriage, will never be realized. I don't really want to rock the boat, and I don't think she does either. We have something pretty good, and neither one of us (I hope!) wants that to change.

Given that, if my wife were to come out and say she was unambiguously bi, I would ask her to *not* act on some of her urges, but if she felt she really had to, I would want to know about it.

i can't WAIT for the post-pretentious era
I yearn for the post-toastie era.

Just as long as it's after the man-always-rings-twice era.

I'm bisexual (although that term isn't exactly correct - I'm attracted to a person, not what is or isn't dangling between his/her legs) and married to a man. My husband knew I was bi before he met me.

It wouldn't bother me (how could it?) if he told me if he were bi and/or had been with other men.

In any case, my desires for women aren't acted upon (except through reading). Neither my husband or I are looking to add a third person (of either sex) into our relationship.

i can't WAIT for the post-pretentious era

Or the post-prefix era

If someone suddenly told me that, and we were in a committed relationship, i'd be furious, hurt, and feel betrayed i think. They would have been hiding it from me, violating trust. Everyone wants to feel like, and know that, they're the most important person to the other person in the relationship--hiding stuff like that would go against that, entirely.

We're not really in any kind of "post-" anything, i don't think.

Think about what happens when married men and women come out. Coming out as bi would probably have the same effects, esp. if the person coming out was doing so for a reason, which would be very likely (they met someone else, or they wanted to). And look at what happens when someone cheats--the thought that someone had acted on it would immediately become part of the conversation, no?

If I'm starting to go out with someone, they usually know already, so there's no "coming out" involved. The kind of coming out amberglow is describing seems to have more to do with it having been a secret on the part of the bi person that they weren't comfortable with revealing before, like maybe they weren't even out to themselves. That hasn't been an issue with me or with the bi people I've been with.

Breakdown of the people I've dated: Women: 100% bi, 0% lesbian. Long-term men: 66% bi, 33% straight. Short-term men: mostly straight. The bi men were usually more fun than the straight ones.

Being bisexual doesn't equate to being polyamorous, and so a partner in an exclusive relationship ought not automatically be threatened by the other's revealed bisexuality. On the other hand, for a lot of bisexuals, polyamorism is intrinsic to their identity.

All the women I've been in serious relationships with in my adult life have been the type to freely and casually tell me that they've had sex with another woman, if they had. And most had. None thought of themselves as bisexual.

And the previous paragraph is exactly true about me, as well. (Except change all the sexes.)

Both those things being the case, then I guess I'm in no position to reply to your question. On the other hand, a large number of people foolishly equate "ever having sex with same/different" (as the case may be) to somehow define bisexuality. In that case, I guess I could answer the question.

Relative to the first thing I wrote, it's not clear to me that it's required in some sense of a true bisexual to integrate their bisexuality into their exclusive sexual relationship with their partner. It seems to me that true bisexuality could take at least a couple of distinct forms...

...One would be a generalized indifference to the sex of potential partners in the same sense as, say, most (or at least many) people are indifferent to hair color. In that case, it's not clear to me that living a heterosexual or homosexual lifestyle would be either problematic or even inauthentic.

But a different form would, for lack of a better way of putting it, fetishize the bisexuality. In other words, the practical, demonstrated activity of bisexuality is of primary sexual importance. In that case, things would be very different. Integration of some form would be essential or the relationship will fail.

It's often the case that someone who is a closeted gay will initially claim bisexuality as a first step of coming out. (And there well may be a number of people who are straight but for one reason or another have always adopted a gay lifestyle who might equivalently come out of the closet by first claiming bisexuality.) In either case, there is reason for the partner to be worried.

Anyway, the distinction I make about two different kinds of bisexuality is an important one, I think. Amberglow's condemnation of dishonesty would apply in the second case...but not in the first, I don't think.

And, again, given that a lot of people (wrongly) define bisexuality as ever having had sex with both sexes, does the "bisexual" person have a responsibility to come out? How should the partner react? Well, again, in my case both with myself and my partners, it's been the case that we've been very up-front with each other while, at the same, it really isn't that important.

If you're upfront about it, it's another story, of course. But then there'd be no "suddenly says", so it wouldn't be a surprise, or an issue.

It seems pretty clear to me that amberglow's point is telling.. that when your partner suddenly informs you of a change or expansion in their sexual orientation, they're also telling you they met someone. *sigh* Been there, etc.

Worse, though, is when they announce a sudden change in religion. That, too, can mean they met someone, but it can be much much worse for your relationship.

I said "bi and/or having sex with men" believing, as kmellis does, that having sex with one's own sex is not necessarily indicative of bisexuality (is that convuluted enough, or what?).

I would prefer my partner tell me up front that he had had sex with men, but I think I could get over it. What's in the past is in the past as long as he's free of sexually transmitted diseases, of course. And if he suddenly decided he was bi - I could get over that as well. Sometimes people just don't know until later in life.

Truthfully, though, my husband is one of those men that is pretty much 100% straight. He's so straight that he doesn't even fantasize about two women having sex together. Weirdo.

Me and most of my bi friends aren't the "don't see the gender" type. When we like a boy, we like the boy things about him, and when we like a girl, we like the girl things about her. Nothing's stopping us from liking both. Sometimes a person like that can be more in "boy mode" or "girl mode" but that doesn't mean that a few months or years down the line we might be swinging the other way. I guess in that situation choosing to identify as bi is more about the potential.

Well, if there are people that are the first type of bi that I described, and I'm sure there are, I don't think it's that they don't see the gender or that they don't enjoy the girl things of girls and the boy things of boys, but, rather, that the second part of what you wrote isn't true: that they have changing needs for one sex or the other for its own sake.

I have one female body type that I'm very sexually strongly attracted to. But I could probably come up with another that I also strongly attracted to (relative to all others). Would my desire alternate? Would my desire alternate in terms of need? Indeed, do I have a need for sex with either body type for its own sake? If I spent my life in an exclusive relationship with one body type and not the other, would I feel stifled, unfulfilled, frustrated, whatever?

In my case, I think all the answers would be "no". But I think that in the case of some other men (and women) some, most, or all of their answers could be "yes". Particularly, many men feel they need a diversity in sexual partners for the sake of diversity in order to have a fulfilling sex life. It's interesting to me that most people in our culture...

...would consider that an indulgance, not a legitimate need. I suspect that most people in our culture would also consider the kind of bisexual lifestyle you describe as an indulgance...but nevertheless, that there's something more "valid" about your claim.

So, again, I don't know how the proportions actually break down, and I don't know that that's the point, anyway. I think that it's important to consider that there can be very distinctly different reasons why different people might have a variety of sexual partners. He or she may need the variety itself. Or the variety might be only be incidental.

And the real bottom line here is that I suspect that most everyone has some particular, relatively distinct sexual requirement for their lives, without which they are deeply unhappy. It is best for everyone if they identify what that is, and they are upfront with their partners about what that is. And they should probably never let any partner who does not satisfy that essential sexual need believe that they will be happy in that relationship.

In the context of this question, I think if your lover tells you that he/she is bisexual it would be of primary importance to discover what that means to them, in the sense of the previous paragraph.

The initial question was so vague and open-ended that this discussion could go anywhere. There are tons of books and websites that the initial questioner could read if they want to find what people have written on this topic.

And the real bottom line here is that I suspect that most everyone has some particular, relatively distinct sexual requirement for their lives, without which they are deeply unhappy. It is best for everyone if they identify what that is, and they are upfront with their partners about what that is. And they should probably never let any partner who does not satisfy that essential sexual need believe that they will be happy in that relationship.

I think so too.

Ditto. I learned that the difficult way.

"I suspect that most everyone has some particular, relatively distinct sexual requirement for their lives, without which they are deeply unhappy."

Really? That's fucked-up.

"post-gay" city

"non-gay" city

"old-skool-stridently-political-gay"

I am not familiar with these distinctions (Even non-gay - I do not want to stereotype about different areas of the country. Is it true that most cities with a population of 250,000 or more probably have an active gay community?).

What are some examples of the "old-skool" gay cities - Is NY one?

Could anyone suggest any resources?

What are some examples of the "old-skool" gay cities - Is NY one?

In the sense that the majority of the populace shrugs its houlderness at gayness, yeah.

i wish i had a houlderness...i would shrug it as hard as i could.

"*Waits for straight male chorus of "Honey, this is the best Christmas ever!"*"

OK.

HONEY, THIS IS THE BEST CHRISTMAS EVER!

That's not a chorus, crash. That's a solo.

All together now, 1..2..3..

HONEY, THIS IS THE BEST CHRISTMAS EVER!!

What are some examples of the "old-skool" gay cities - Is NY one?

Montreal? Amsterdam? Albuquerque, NM?

Becomes po-mo sexual and wonders why is not getting laid...

Oh, longbaugh, give me some Judith Butler, a little Donna Haraway, perhaps, and you'll have a night you'll never forget, you hot pomosexual.

I'd say NY, SF, Amsterdam, Paris, London, etc, are old-school, and places like Montreal, Rio, Barcelona, etc are more new-school, and generally more open cities where people don't have to fight all the battles that those of us in the old-school cities did. They're kinda second-generation, where it didn't take a Stonewall or long years of oppression and fighting and gains and losses to be able to live in relative peace and harmony.

I try not to identify myself by whom I fuck. It's not a constructive way for me to look at my life.

It's also not a constructive way for you to look at my life.

"I suspect that most everyone has some particular, relatively distinct sexual requirement for their lives, without which they are deeply unhappy."

Really? That's fucked-up.
posted by mr_crash_davis 19 June | 21:24

I feel a little dense asking this question, but, crash, are you being serious or sarcastic?

While reading this thread, I found myself wondering if the Freepers ever had this sort of discussion and if they did, what it was like. But I haven't finished my first cup of tea and I'm still not coherent.