Bisexuals and AGP/AAP Pseudobisexuality

submitted by usehername from self.Bisexuals

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

In my goal of facilitating I would like to provide some orientation data for various phenomena.

Furries: 84% non-heterosexual identity:

"Of the male furries in our sample, 143 (42.8%) identified themselves as bisexual, 106 (31.7%) as homosexual/gay, 53 (15.9%) as heterosexual/straight, and 9 (2.7%) as asexual. The remaining 23 (6.9%) participants chose the response “other,” and the most common explanation was that they identified as pansexual."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-018-1303-7

BDSM: 46.4% non-heterosexual identity:

"Of the 268 participants who responded to an open-ended prompt assessing sexual orientation, the majority identi- fied as heterosexual (53.6%) or primarily heterosexual with some qualification provided (14.6%), such as ‘straightish’, ‘mostly straight’ and ‘straight with a little flexibility’. Approximately one-quarter of the respondents indicated a sexual minority orientation (21.1% bisexual, 2.6% gay, 1.8% lesbian and 2.6% queer), and 3.6% of respondents used a BDSM role as their sexual orientation (e.g. ‘top’ or ‘slave’).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19419899.2012.700028

Trans: Overall 82% non-heterosexual identity.

Trans women: 6% asexual, 20% bisexual, 27% gay/lesbian, 16% pansexual, 6% queer, 19% heterosexual, 6% other. Trans men: 7% asexual, 12% bisexual, 12% gay/lesbian, 15% pansexual, 24% queer, 23% heterosexual, 5% other.

https://transequality.org/sites/default/files/docs/usts/USTS-Full-Report-Dec17.pdf

EDIT:

United States general population: Non-heterosexual identity: 3%.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhis/sexual_orientation/ASI_2018_STWebsite_Tables-508.pdf

[–]usehername[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Those are some really great stats. I think it's clear that a lot of these hard-core fetishists are more interested in the fetish than in other people, to the point of being able to engage with members of a sex they aren't attracted to, as long as their fetish is involved. I think these people are skewing the stats that show that bisexuals tend to have more fetishes and STDs.

[–]PeakingPeachEater 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing these stats, I will have to look further into them later when I am off work Gatito!

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

what's up do you think with the over-representation of homosexuals in those stats (well the furry ones anyway)? you're taking two rare-ish phenomena, the overlap should be statistically low.

Bisexuals I can understand because they would get into it regardless of the sex of the person should the paraphilia be present.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Since the thread seems to have run its course:

you're taking two rare-ish phenomena, the overlap should be statistically low

Precisely. So the question is: is there a "thing" that inclines people to homosexuality and bisexuality that also inclines them to paraphilia? (I could write an essay on this statement. I know the legacy, the politics, etc.) Do paraphiles demonstrate significant big five trait openness, and this is what causes their same-sex experimentation and thus identity? Or, my preferred hypothesis: it is the paraphilia they're after, and the model of het/homo/bi does not adequately accommodate that?

Dendrophilia is a sexual interest in trees. Classify that as het/homo/bi? You can't.

Bisexuals I can understand because they would get into it regardless of the sex of the person should the paraphilia be present.

While I presently maintain that a person can be classically bi/het/homo and also have a paraphilia, I do believe that people with significant paraphilic interest--things other than sex and sexed bodies--this often leads them to a bisexual identity, since they're doing the paraphilia with both sexes. Sex isn't as relevant to them. It's the paraphilia they're after; sex matters not.

what's up do you think with the over-representation of homosexuals in those stats (well the furry ones anyway)?

I don't know. I need to go suss that one out in person. Could be strictly paraphilic (wouldn't that be something?), could be both euphilic and paraphilic. My gaydar is dialed in, I can discern classic sexual orientation often by just looking at a still of a person's face. (Which shouldn't come as a surprise. Orientation isn't magic; there's lots of biomarkers.) This virus just has to let up, and they have to find a venue to host them. Godspeed, furries.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I personally wonder if there are sexes or sexualities that are more likely to go develop particular paraphilias. I know there is an under-representation of women in the fury community, but on the flip side there is an A/B/O community on tumblr that is full of (heterosexual) women. It would be possible to argue that they are expressing the same paraphilia differently, but to me these two fetishes (on the surface) look very different.

So maybe there is something about being a gay man that inclines the person towards being a fury cf. other paraphilias?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I personally wonder if there are sexes or sexualities that are more likely to go develop particular paraphilias.

It's parroted that men posses most paraphilias, but there's no scientific evidence to support this. It's all anecdotal. My anecdotes conflict with the popular opinion, primarily masochism (pain, power, humiliation) in women. A sprinkling of sadism as well. (Think BDSM.)

I think this sentiment is in large part due to the psychiatric and psychological professions having dealt with primarily men as their patients, usually in a criminal context. It may be that men and women are inclined to develop different sorts of paraphilias, different thematic clusters.

However, it could follow that what makes people gay, lesbian, or bi could also incline them towards paraphila, among a great deal of other psychological traits. It's entirely possible, and there's some evidence to suggest it, but that's generally not a politically correct thing to say.

As far as gay and furry goes, I was reading a journal article about a community of zoophiles. Not furries, people who like real animals. (Totally normal hobby, I assure you--reading this sort of stuff.) Among them, there were a cohort (there were several) of men who exclusively desired male animals, and they labeled themselves homosexual. Point being, are these gay furries homosexual in the classic sense and just happen to also be furries? Where is their sense of "male" being derived from in terms of their attractions--male humans, or male anthropomorphic animals? What about a female human in a male-presenting fursuit? Outstanding question.

[–]usehername[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

what's up do you think with the over-representation of homosexuals in those stats

Probably they're such fetishists that they require the feeling of disgust to get off, which could be induced by engaging in the same sex as a heterosexual.