The Klein Sexual Orientation Grid--the Upgraded Kinsey Scale

submitted by PeakingPeachEater from (self.Bisexuals)

{{Thumbnail picture}}

The Kinsey Scale was developed by Dr. Alfred Kinsey while he was researching human sexuality. This chart had a rating of how "heterosexual" or "homosexual" you are, and if you're in the middle, it would say you're "equally homosexual and heterosexual" instead of using the term bisexual. For more information on the Kinsey Scale, please read here: Kinsey Institute

If you're interested in taking the Kinsey Scale test, here are a few a found:

Note: None of those tests are official, there was never an official Kinsey Scale test created. I found a decent one YEARS ago --- it was more neutral with the language, these other ones are...worded a bit differently.

Fritz Klein later expands on the Kinsey Scale and came up with the Klein Sexual Orientation Grid{KSOG}. He even wrote a book about bisexuality called The Bisexual Options. I have not read it yet, so I wouldn't know if it's good or not. Some woke people consider it "queer" and other woke people are mad that it talks about "two genders" and not "ALL genders"---saying the book is "too outdated". So I don't know.

Questions

  1. Do you think the Kinsey Scale is useful, detrimental, or so you feel indifferent?

  2. What are your thoughts on the phrase "sexuality is fluid" along with terms such as "homo flexible" and "hetero flexible"?

  3. What are your thoughts on the KSOG?

Bonus

  • Any additional thoughts you'd like to share?
all 1 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]MarkJefferson 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The last few times I did the Kinsey scale tests, I ended up as a 3. Very near the center. But I'm not sure whether my BIas has caused me to subconsciously answer questions in a certain way to either push the number higher or lower than it should be in order to keep it in the middle.

1..

I don't think it's especially useful. The reason why is that I think a person's attraction to any one sex naturally goes up and down over time. For Bisexuals, I think it is basically a separate attraction towards men or women that changes("bi-cycles"). Monosexuals(L,G,S) don't notice this happening as much and so may liken it to a plain increased/reduced sex drive. But Bisexuals, who have a second attraction to compare it to, may not see it as plain sex drive change but may liken it to their fundamental sexual orientation changing.

So a Bi's position on the Kinsey scale wholly depends on where they currently are in the Bi-cycle when they take the tests. For that reason I think the insightfulness of the scale is limited. It's function is no better than a "snapshot" of moment in a Bisexuals life. The most useful thing it can do is perhaps reveal whether someone is Bisexual or not based on these snapshots. Dual scales that show attraction levels to both sexes would be more useful for Bisexuals.

2..

I think the concept of "fluidity" as it exists now is just a predictable by-product of the bi-cycles I described above. Sexual Orientation doesn't change. People just go through natural movements of attraction. Because of dual attraction, Bisexuals are prone to see their Sexual Orientation as fluid. Fluidity is a concept that can become harmful to the acceptance of same-sex attraction if the basis for it is not understood. And only Bisexuals experience what is known as Fluidity.

For this reason, I think Bi Erasure is the "Final Boss" for Bisexuals. It is crucial that our sexual orientation is understood as real(binary) and permanent, by Heterosexuals, Homosexuals, and well... Bisexuals. Whatever our outwardly behavior may indicate. If it is not, Bi Fluidity will always be used as a vehicle to attack the validity of same-sex attraction and homosexuality.

Being "homo flexible" and "hetero flexible" means you are Bisexual. A Bisexual whose attraction to one sex is currently fairly dominant over the other.

3..

The KSOG has much the same problem as the Kinsey scale, in that it only uses a Heterosexual to Homosexual continuum. It applies this scale to so many different dimensions including time, but the fundamental problem of the singular scale not being well suited to represent the very real phenomenon of Bisexual cycles is still there.

One of my biggest beefs with the Kinsey or Kinsey-esque scales is the zero-sum nature of it. Attraction to either males or females is implied to be lost, or given up, when the other attraction is gained. Like sand moving in an hourglass. But I don't think that's how real attraction works. I think attractions have relative movement, but the levels could really be anywhere and don't compete which one another.