Kinsey Scale and Other Types of Measures: Pros and Cons

submitted by BiHorror from self.LGBDropTheT

As the Title states: Majority of us probably believe the Kinsey Scale is the most "accurate" tool when it comes to measuring sexuality but does anyone feel there's any pros and cons to it (If there's others who feel other sexuality measure tools that are more better than Kinsey Scale along with its pros and cons, please share!) and why? I feel that while the Kinsey Scale is great, the cons (from my view) are:

  • It doesn't take in account of asexuality (which I do believe is real, alongside the spectrum of types of As, especially romantic related)
  • The way it measures bisexuality is kinda off

I feel like there should be a newer tool that involves sexual attraction, romantic, asexuality, etc. BUT obviously does not involve "gender identity" and other "sexualities" (I know there's the Erotic Response and Orientation Scale by Michael Storms but also read that the cons for it was due to not taking in account of hetero/bi/homo-romantic asexuals, libido scale, and "NB" people according to *one AVEN website).

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]VioletRemiCat, homosexual one 19 insightful - 1 fun19 insightful - 0 fun20 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Technically, it only measures sexuality of bisexual people. And even in doing that it goes poorly. It is much easier and more clear to everyone to just say "bisexual leaning to women (or to men)" and that is it. While heterosexuality and homosexuality is, well, fixed.

[–]BiHorror[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Very true! Considering (from what I seen and the protrayals of the scale) 2-4 are still considered "hetero" or "homo" instead of bi leaning and only those of 3 would be considered (equally) bisexual. 1-5 would be considered hetero/homoflexible.

[–]TalerTest 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I dislike any type of sexuality scale or measure of sexuality because people always twist it into the 'sexuality is fluid' thing. I like undiluted, uncomplicated sexual orientations. Heterosexual, Bisexual, Homosexual and Asexual.

[–]MarkJeffersonTight defenses and we draw the line 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm assuming that's because it's just a scale- with no official standardized way of determining an individual's place on the scale, so people just end up taking multiple "tests" with wildly different results and erroneously concluding their sexuality is fluid because "It moved from 0 to 1! uwu"(this is compounded by the fact that Kinsey himself believed it was fluid). I think the scale is really only good for finding sexuality averages; The larger the sample size the better.

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

But that's precisely it--sexuality is fluid for some people, not everyone and certainly not most people.

[–]TalerTest 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

some people

Only bisexuals, which is why I don't understand Heterosexuals and Homosexuals being included in the scale. It causes confusion

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think that homosexual/heterosexual really aren't included, per se; they're just on the scale as boundary-markers. To represent where it begins/ends, and the distance between the middle point (Kinsey 3, aka 50/50) in either direction.

As many have observed, the "monosexualities" don't need such measurement themselves; they're just what the various gradations of bisexuality are being measured against.

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

How many labels do straight people have? Is there a special word for women who like men? Is there a special word for men who like women? Is there a scale of straightness that describes anything whatsoever? is straightness on a spectrum? It is not.

Probably close to 97% of the world is straight and they manage to just relax with one label for both sexes. Why is it that so many of the remaining 3% of us have all collectively lost our fucking minds when it comes to the labeling business? (You and everyone on this sub is exempted of course, I'm mainly ranting about Tumblr.)

Here's what's works for me. I ask people out, they say yes or no. People ask me out, I say yes or no. Putting out that I'm bisexual lets men and women know a) I'm available and b) I'm a B not an L or an S, so if you don't like that, keep it moving.

No one needs to know where on the bi spectrum I reside. There is no need to complicate things. And even if there was a machine (like those temperature reading guns) that someone could point at my forehead to determine, "ah... Coordinates 22.58 by 81.26 on the bisexuality scale..." that information is virtually useless. Look at the /r/febfem community, they were barely active. They're here now, and I see only 25 members and zero posts. We can't form a community based on our specific little micro-labels. There literally aren't enough of us out there for that. The gay guys could do it to a certain extent because they go outside and interact with each other in real life. I don't know what that scene is like anymore, and I really don't believe there are gay guys out there going "I'm a bear and you're a bear, let's be friends!" What I'm trying to say is you can't even use these micro-labels to make friends, really. It's all a waste of time.

Maybe micro-labels would be useful for statistical research, but first we need to get back to a version of reality where we can trust researchers to be capable of being politically unbiased, biologically factual, and use our information for good, not evil.

Okay, this rant is going all over the place so I'll stop now.

[–]oofreesouloo⚡super lesbian⚡ 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I definitely agree with you for the most part. The only thing is that as a lesbian, I appreciate the visibility of febfems. For lesbians, more often than not, it's important to know "where" in the bi spectrum a woman relies. With that being said, in no way are you obligated or entitled to justify or "clarify" your attractions to anyone if you don't want to. I'm just saying that this is something important to know for many lesbians. So in short, I definitely agree with you that these micro labels are total bs and totally unnecessary. On the other hand, I see no harm if bi people want to make their "preferences" known, for example "bi with a preference for women/men". Just don't create a new sexual orientation for that lol OR say you're gay/straight when you're not.

[–]8bitgay 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Just don't create a new sexual orientation for that lol

Right? You can convey preferences which all exist within a sexuality. Some gay men only like twinks, some only like bears, some like both, some like neither. Gay men are able to say they're only into twinks without turning it into a new label for a new sexuality.

I find it so weird when people say that they're pansexual, or when they come up with a new word for a masculine gender, or a new word for a sexuality that is into masculine people... Just say that you're bisexual with a preference for masculine people, for example.

[–]haveanicedaytoo💗💜💙 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh definitely! I'm actually really disappointed that the febfem community didn't get a chance to flourish. (I was hoping it would eventually cannibalize the "bi lesbians". Hopefully it still can.)

[–]Some-unoriginal-guy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I know this might sound crazy but sometimes I think that if people weren't trying to categorize everything we wouldn't have this problem

[–]Ladis_Wascheharuum 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a tool that's suitable for some purposes. A hammer is a useful tool but you shouldn't use it to put in screws.

If you need a more in-depth assessment, you'd need separate scales for:
Sexual attraction target
Sexual attraction magnitude
Romantic attraction target
Romantic attraction magnitude

I don't think it's a good idea to want to know these numbers about someone before dating them. That should be a very individual thing. Certainly it's a bad idea to pre-judge people based on such scales.

It may be a useful thing to know about yourself, but not necessarily. I can see it helping someone become more grounded and comfortable with themselves, but also limiting their growth or becoming tribal or obsessed.

The one place I can see such assessments being useful is in mental health statistics. For better or worse, sexuality and romance affect us hugely, sometimes in very bad ways. Mental health treatment could probably be better implemented if we understood more of how they work.

[–]reluctant_commenter 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Most researchers who study sexuality do not actually use the Kinsey Scale anymore because it can be rather misleading. Some just straight-up ask people categories (gay/lesbian/bisexual/straight, for example) instead. Others ask for a combination of behaviors and categories.

There have been a few papers starting to pop up about nonbinary bullshit such as "genderqueer", unfortunately (still don't know what that means lol, not planning to waste the 2 seconds of my life it takes to google it). But, very little research uses just the Kinsey scale anymore-- partly because, as others have said, scores 2-5 are just bisexuals.

edit: Lol, screw the "romantic orientation" scale. We've been over that in a couple other threads already, though.

[–]PriestTheyCalledHimBisexual 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Kinsey studies and some versions of the scale do take asexuality into account the X was used as asexual, or basically the person had no sexual attraction to anyone.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale

Also if anyone else here ever read the actual studies they never said 'most people are bisexual' or 'people cannot be heterosexual/homosexual'. The scale does describe different types of bisexuality from 1-5.

[–]OPPRESSED_REPTILIANIntersex male | GNC | Don't call me "a gay", "twink" or "queen" 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think it's accurate but I also strongly disagree with people here whining that it "only measures bisexuality!" I for one believe that "homo/heteroflexibility" and rare exceptions are a thing. And if you say that claiming so is "literally erasing muh identity," get off the internet because clearly you have a lot of privilege to get upset over something that doesn't affect you.