Why Are So Many Girls Lesbian or Bisexual?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
there is a bloke at the cricket club, and he was with a smoking hot girl, but they broke up and she has been with a woman for some time now.

not sure if it was a George/Susan type thing, but yeah
 
These are the kinds of topics FYM needs more of. As always, I'll leave this to our resident anthropologists. Just wanted to say:

A young woman told me how her boyfriend several years ago suggested that she shave her pubic hair, so that she might more closely resemble the porn stars who were this young man's most consistent source of sexual arousal.

This guy is a fucking idiot, even if his vocabulary was as great as is suggested by this paraphrasing.
 
I'm not sure that I'd identify as bi, I think I probably am straight in any meaningful sense, but going to same-sex schools with a lack of females around messes you up, at least in my experience it did, in the sense that it still holds me back with women.


what do you think about when you think about doing "it"?

there's your answer.



We can't rule out environmental factors entirely.

<>


it's true. clearly, my parents raised me much differently than they did my straight siblings. my father was weak and passive, and my mother was needy and overbearing, right up until 1981 when my brother was born, and then they suddenly stopped being that way.
 
I agree wit Yolland (I usually do as she says it so so much better then I can) I think teenage girls especially are all about rebelling and basically a short skirt low cut top don't cut it naymore due to the fact that this has now become normal clothing. So how else to say 'i'm sexy, free thinking and bad ass' to attract attention from men, how about giving into te notion of two girls and getting it on with one in a bar or with your best friend etc. I think this could attribute to a lot of the whole "bisexual" movement rather then an actual bisexual tendancies (such as actors who kiss other men or women in movies but are acting rather than being bisexual themselves)
this is completely in contrast to men who would never think about making out with another guy friend to atrract girls (even though im sure quite a few would enjoy it!) it just doesn't work both ways.

On a bisexual note, an ex boyfriend of mine is bisexual he was with a guy before me, then me, then another girl then a guy for a bit and now is married and has two children wit his wife. She knows all about it and one of his ex boyfs came to the wedding. ITs all about commitment not 'afraid to be totally gay' bullshit.

oh i just thought, maybe its also because its less intrusive when girls are intimate compared to guys such as with two girls you're doing the same thing as you would with a guy but with two guys its totally different for the most part? does that make sense? haha
 
On a bisexual note, an ex boyfriend of mine is bisexual he was with a guy before me, then me, then another girl then a guy for a bit and now is married and has two children wit his wife. She knows all about it and one of his ex boyfs came to the wedding. ITs all about commitment not 'afraid to be totally gay' bullshit.

On another bisexual note, I remember an Oprah show where happily married (to women) men also enjoyed sex with men on the side - the problem being that most of the wives didn't know about it. So it seemed that there are those in the spectrum that are sexually attracted to both but romantically attracted to one. And maybe that works the other way around for women who experiment on the basis that men have let them down.
 
Oh, chicks. Night and day.


i think it's quite common to get little crushes on the same gender when you're a "tween" or a teenager. in my experience, the litmus test is what visual material you supply yourself with (mentally, not porn) when you imagine "it."
 
On another bisexual note, I remember an Oprah show where happily married (to women) men also enjoyed sex with men on the side - the problem being that most of the wives didn't know about it. So it seemed that there are those in the spectrum that are sexually attracted to both but romantically attracted to one. And maybe that works the other way around for women who experiment on the basis that men have let them down.


and this is where the gay guys get a little bit peeved -- first, we were all "bisexual" once, before we assumed the responsibility for actually being gay; and, second, these men seem to want to have it always and in all ways, you know?

it's hard to come out, and for many gay guys, it seems like these men are trying to get their kicks but bear none of the social burden. when you're gay, you meet a lot of these men, and it gets tiresome.

and, yes, a part of me realizes that it's all different strokes for different folks, but there's also a part of me that's like, "come the fuck on."
 
and this is where the gay guys get a little bit peeved -- first, we were all "bisexual" once, before we assumed the responsibility for actually being gay; and, second, these men seem to want to have it always and in all ways, you know?

it's hard to come out, and for many gay guys, it seems like these men are trying to get their kicks but bear none of the social burden. when you're gay, you meet a lot of these men, and it gets tiresome.

and, yes, a part of me realizes that it's all different strokes for different folks, but there's also a part of me that's like, "come the fuck on."

Understandable that it would be frustrating except that you'd be in the best position to know that everyone comes to terms with it in their own way and some of those men are likely not being honest with themselves.

My point was more that what turns some people on sexually versus romantically or in the context of an intimate relationship might be very different and potentially satisfied separately. Adds to the complexity of what the spectrum of bisexuality means.
 
Here is another curve ball to throw in, though I would think some aspects of this stage of development of sexual politics are rather specific to the UK:



The change in our culture was all too apparent when I talked to Alevel students at a sixth-form college in London — a dozen teenage girls, a mixture of black and white, middle class and working class, British by birth and immigrants. We discussed their ideals for their sexual lives.

I do not want to exaggerate the changes in our society. Just as in Jane Austen’s time there were women who had sex before marriage and lovers after marriage, so there are women now who hold themselves in readiness for their one true love and seek to remain eternally faithful to him.

But whereas in Austen’s time the promiscuous woman was presented in the dominant culture as marginal and to be condemned, now a girl who has decided to delay sexual activity until she finds a true emotional commitment can be pushed to the margins and silenced.

One of the sixth-form girls told me she felt there was too much pressure to have sex and another chimed in: “Yeah, there is pressure — if you’re a virgin and you’re at a party and the college stud muffin is interested, then there’s pressure to just do it, just do it.”

But they were silenced by the laughter of three slender, well dressed, beautiful white girls whose voices were louder than the others. “Mean girls”, I scribbled in my notebook. Not that they were actually mean, but like the mean girls in the film of the same name they were so confident that the others in the group seemed subdued beside them.

Their sense of certainty clearly arose partly from their sexual self-confidence. When I talked to them afterwards in a cafe, they were easy about telling a stranger how uninhibited they were in their happily promiscuous sex lives. Bella, who had had 22 sexual partners — 13 men and nine women — started telling me how she sometimes has to prove to men that she really is not looking for love and romance.

She told me a male friend had come to see her the previous night and got drunk with her: “Somehow we got on to how much sex I had. He was trying to convince me I had had a traumatic childhood and that was why I had so much sex. I had to keep saying no, I actually am happy. I like having this much sex. I love it.”

Her friend Ruby agreed: “I don’t have boyfriends. I have sex with men, but I wouldn’t call them boyfriends.” Is that just how things are now or is that how she wants to run her life? Ruby looked at me scornfully. “It’s how I want to run my life, basically,” she said, taking another sip of her frappuccino.

Would they ever think of glamour modelling, pornography or lap dancing if they needed the money? Ruby stepped in again: “Yes, I would. I wouldn’t do it for the money. I don’t need an excuse. I would do it for enjoyment. I’d enjoy it.”

The only impediment in their desire to “run” their sex lives was the unfortunate fact that many of the men they met wanted something more. “Men always go soppy on me,” Ruby said.

Bella agreed: “I met this guy in a pub the other night. We had sex once and ... it’s pathetic. We’re lying there ... and he says, ‘Are you going to sleep with other people?’ I thought: who are you; why are you asking me this? Obviously I’m having sex with other people. He decided he loved me; he was texting me and phoning me for days. After having sex once! What’s that about?”

Feminism seen as promiscuity? - Times Online
 
From the same article:

“But it’s everywhere. I mean, if you put on the television, every other music video has half-naked women dancing around. It’s just like you don’t have any choice — you feel that as you grow up you have to start dressing that way, acting that way — that there is no other way to behave.”



She is angry that she is growing up in this milieu. “It’s all casual sex now; nobody talks about love,” she said. “I wish I could have a real connection with a man. But there’s no courtship any more. That’s all dead. It’s just immediate. There’s no getting to know someone; you’re expected just to look someone up and down and make the decision just like that: are you going to have sex or not?



“There’s no time to build up a connection. The idea is that you have sex first, but how are you meant to create the kind of excitement, the emotional connection, after that? I want to have an emotional connection with a man. I want it to be there with the feeling that I am equal to him. I do think I’m as good as a man. But I don’t want just this no-strings sex stuff.”

This is what I want - a relationship. Call me a prude, a freak or whatever, but I don't believe in one-night stands with a stranger. I could never bring myself to that. I want to be loved and respected by a man. If that is old-fashioned, then so be it.
 
This is what I want - a relationship. Call me a prude, a freak or whatever, but I don't believe in one-night stands with a stranger. I could never bring myself to that. I want to be loved and respected by a man. If that is old-fashioned, then so be it.

It's probably not as old-fashioned as you think. There are plenty of guys who want that too. I find most of what's in the media and what's in that passage grossly exaggerrated. Do your friends act like that? Feel that level of pressure to indulge in casual sex? I would find that surprising.
 
From the same article:

This is what I want - a relationship. Call me a prude, a freak or whatever, but I don't believe in one-night stands with a stranger. I could never bring myself to that. I want to be loved and respected by a man. If that is old-fashioned, then so be it.

You're not a prude or a freak but you probably had a bit of bad luck in relationships and might be a bit old-fashioned by modern mores and standards. Doesn't mean they're right by any means. I think you're right and modern standards are wrong but I am really not the best person to be advising on this kind of stuff!
 
You're the only one who can decide what's "right." My definition of personal "right" is whatever I'm comfortable with.
 



i think these girls make for great copy, but to think they are the rule rather than the exception is probably not accurate, no matter the culture (UK or US).

i think girls today are more liberated from traditional virgin/whore roles when it comes to sex, and i have to think that's a good thing. and i also have to think that ultimately it is a good thing that a girl has permission to be a player.

now, we can have a discussion about whether or not it's good to be a player, but the fact that it has become untethered to gender has to be seen as something of a good thing, imho.
 
i think girls today are more liberated from traditional virgin/whore roles when it comes to sex, and i have to think that's a good thing. and i also have to think that ultimately it is a good thing that a girl has permission to be a player.

now, we can have a discussion about whether or not it's good to be a player, but the fact that it has become untethered to gender has to be seen as something of a good thing, imho.

Of course, since men have traditionally been the ones to play, the question is whether feminism has merely become "let's do things the way men do."

Which, in the case of sex with anonymous strangers, feels like a race to the bottom.
 
Why does homosexuality have to be about sex with anonymous strangers all of a sudden? That's not what's "liberating" about it. The liberation is in the form of not being shamed about relationships, not about sex with random people.
 
Despite the choice of that attention-getting quote for a headline, reading the article all the way through gives the impression that this "promiscuity" has in fact come about as a reaction against the perceived uptightness of feminists concerning sexuality.
Of course, since men have traditionally been the ones to play, the question is whether feminism has merely become "let's do things the way men do."
Not really; the question is whether women are disproportionately stigmatized and/or scrutinized for behavior which in reality both sexes have always engaged in. The distinction matters a good deal when you're the one on the receiving end of that greater stigma or scrutiny.
 
the question is whether women are disproportionately stigmatized and/or scrutinized for behavior which in reality both sexes have always engaged in.

Of course, but when you're someone who has a problem with promiscuity in general, regardless of which sex engages in it, you're going to have a different perspective.
 
reading the article all the way through gives the impression that this "promiscuity" has in fact come about as a reaction against the perceived uptightness of feminists concerning sexuality.

Or just a gross misinterpretation of sexual empowerment.

the ideal of liberated sex in the 1960s was about really loving and valuing your body and being proud of it. (my edit - not selling it to the highest bidder) Now there is a toxic mix, for young girls, of feeling they have to be sexually active but also feeling very critical of their bodies. So they will have lots of sex, but without pleasure or pride.”

“Feminism is now seen as sexual promiscuity, which is such a narrow view of empowerment. Liberation isn’t just about promiscuity. For some women, liberation may be about having a new sexual partner every week, but for a lot of women it will be about finding someone to be with for your whole life, growing together over the years, and you never hear about that any more.

“What liberation means to me is that in any sexual relationship you are cherished and you cherish.”

Hedonism isn't empowering and it isn't sexy. Female chauvinist pigs are still chauvinist pigs. Careless disregard/disrespect for oneself and others is nasty no matter which gender displays it.
 
Of course, since men have traditionally been the ones to play, the question is whether feminism has merely become "let's do things the way men do."

Which, in the case of sex with anonymous strangers, feels like a race to the bottom.



linking anonymous sex to the liberation from traditional gender roles is rather faulty, so all you're doing here is continuing the patriarchal virgin/whore good-girls-say-no paradigm that destroys the self-esteem of so many young women and perpetuates precisely the double-standards that feminism sought to eradicate.

i understand that women making their own decisions about sex -- and not necessarily following whatever rules their fathers may have laid out for them -- is unsettling, but that's probably why most men don't know what it feels like for a girl.
 
linking anonymous sex to the liberation from traditional gender roles is rather faulty, so all you're doing here is continuing the patriarchal virgin/whore good-girls-say-no paradigm that destroys the self-esteem of so many young women and perpetuates precisely the double-standards that feminism sought to eradicate.

i understand that women making their own decisions about sex -- and not necessarily following whatever rules their fathers may have laid out for them -- is unsettling, but that's probably why most men don't know what it feels like for a girl.
Do you consider self-contol, no matter what gender or orientation, to be a virtue?
 
Do you consider self-contol, no matter what gender or orientation, to be a virtue?



i consider it to be a sign of maturity -- the ability to delay gratification might be the surest way to be successful in life.

however, as Yolland calmly pointed out, we have traditionally asked our girls to exhibit a self-control that we would never have asked our boys, and we enforce this among our girls by designating them as either proverbial "virgins" or "whores."

i think we'd like to believe that women only sleep around because they've been misled by the media and Madonna, or that they have daddy issues, but the reality might be that lots of women really just like to fuck. :shrug:

is that so bad? i know lots of men who just like to fuck. why should girls be any different? did we tell ourselves that there were differences so that men could continue to control their god-given property?
 
Back
Top Bottom