RantSo a friend came out as bi, I guess? (Bi people help)

submitted by oofreesouloo⚡super lesbian⚡ from self.LGBDropTheT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Yes, please! That'll be great. Thanks.

[–]reluctant_commenter 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Sure!

Here's a link to a summary of the article, in case you wanted to google it yourself. It's called "Who are gynandromorphophilic men? Characterizing men with sexual interest in transgender women" (Hsu et al., 2016) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26498424/

I downloaded it for free by just googling the title and clicking on this link (but if you don't trust an internet rando, feel free to just google the title :) ) https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://d-miller.github.io/assets/HsuEtAl2015.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwji_czx76XtAhV2FzQIHQTCAs8QFjABegQIDhAB&usg=AOvVaw1fUSThsBUg9uVwf8rUAuuB

Now-- note that this study only involved male participants, so it only provides evidence for the "fetish -> bisexual identification" pattern in men. They write:

Similar to past samples (e.g. Weinberg & Williams, 2010), our GAMP men were moderately likely to identify as bisexual. Their bisexual identities, however, did not correlate with their sexual arousal to male stimuli. Instead, bisexual identification was positively associated with degree of autogynephilia

The paper has some good graphs for ease of interpretation. It's pretty short, would recommend the whole thing!

Again, this type of study hasn't been done on women yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's something similar (or slightly different, with more female trans chasers identifying as "lesbian" than "bisexual"?).

edit: formatting and stuff.

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

Thanks! I'll be sure to give it a read! It's so weird how some of them could still be considered heterosexual. Especially when sexuality is always to do with sex.

Again, this type of study hasn't been done on women yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if there's something similar (or slightly different, with more female trans chasers identifying as "lesbian" than "bisexual"?).

Wouldn't be surprised. That or as "pansexual," I always noticed women (more than men) always labeled themselves as pan more but who knows.

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

Man, that was an interesting read! But the next question would then be: what are trans chasers who are "gay" be considered? If GAMPs are considered heterosexual... What would, for example, a "gay" man into the mixed characteristics be considered (not transwomen but for transmen)? A reverse GAMP? AGMP?

Edit: adding/deleting words

[–]reluctant_commenter 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

That's a good question... and to be honest, I don't have a good answer, I haven't heard of that example studied in the research literature-- a gay man who fetishizes transmen. This won't answer your question but it might be tangentially of interest to you, if you haven't seen it before; it's an interview with Ray Blanchard where he talks about autohomoeroticism in women (who want to become gay men). https://quillette.com/2019/11/06/what-is-autogynephilia-an-interview-with-dr-ray-blanchard/

Also... just in case you're interested, shortly after I shared this with you I ended up getting in a multi-day, multi-person debate over this topic (with a substantial amount of agreement between some of us at the end!). If you're really curious, this is where it started, and it ended up going a LONG ways in several directions: https://saidit.net/s/LGBDropTheT/comments/6w7h/yes_even_buck_angel/q9cq

Feel free to decide for yourself, of course, but here's MY take:

  • A paraphilia is a consistent pattern of sexual arousal about an "atypical interest" i.e. anything that is not human sex (male/female, human genitals, etc.). Source: DSM-5 definition discussed here http://jaapl.org/content/42/2/191

  • Sexual orientation is a consistent pattern of sexual arousal related to human sex (male/female)

One of the people I was talking to, strictly, apparently does not define GAMP the way that I do, and the way that is cited in that study, so I was not persuaded by many of their comments. However, they (and GatitoMalo) made the important point that regardless of whether or not someone is actually attracted to the same sex-- if that person has relationships with people of their own sex, it doesn't matter to homophobes if it's because of a paraphilia and not homosexuality/bisexuality. So in some contexts, e.g. when working towards eliminating discrimination towards LGB couples, it might actually just make sense to refer to someone with a paraphilia as "bisexual" even though they really are not.

edit: formatting

[–]BiHorror 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Yeah, tbh, before I read into it, I thought GAMPs was referring to the gay men attracted to transwomen (especially if you're into a homophobic society that does the whole "transition = x" then they would be still be considered "straight" socially). Or men attracted to transmen where they have some weird "homo"eroticism but wouldn't be gay due to still having sex and being attracted to a female. But, now I'm curious about that... when it comes to (actual) straight/gay/bi women and men into trans men, then vice versa with transwomen. More studies should not opened about this but of course... They'll get shut down quickly.

I've started reading into the sub comments (got into late and I'm pretty sure the convo is done by now but I'll through it all still) but I noticed someone also used the heteroflexible term as well.

Personally, I cannot see a heterosexual man being into transwomen. Period. He would be bisexual, "homo/heteroflexible," or homosexual with a fetish.

I honestly think I'm gonna make a post to LGB and see what are the opinions of others on the sexualities of GAMPs and such.

Also, I noticed you ask about what I thought how hetero/homoflexibility was not bisexuality in another post and I did explain some of my thoughts on it but it wouldn't mind explaining it more here and why! Some of my reasons have to do with a post I made about it on here in the past.

Edit: words

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

Personally, I cannot see a heterosexual man being into transwomen. Period. He would be bisexual, "homo/heteroflexible," or homosexual with a fetish.

Here is my understanding. If a dude is into dicks, attracted to men for the sake of men-- then he must be bisexual or homosexual. But if he is not into dicks but is so aroused by an atypical interest (in the case of GAMP, gynandromorphism), and has sex with a man DESPITE being repulsed by dicks / not attracted to men-- then he is not necessarily bisexual or homosexual. He could be, of course. That is consistent with how psychologists define what a paraphilia is and our understanding of sexual orientation.

I honestly think I'm gonna make a post to LGB and see what are the opinions of others on the sexualities of GAMPs and such.

That'd be interesting!

Also, I noticed you ask about what I thought how hetero/homoflexibility was not bisexuality in another post and I did explain some of my thoughts on it but it wouldn't mind explaining it more here and why! Some of my reasons have to do with a post I made about it on here in the past.

I would be curious to hear that, but no pressure. :) edit: whoops just saw your other comment lol.

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

Here is my understanding. If a dude is into dicks, attracted to men for the sake of men-- then he must be bisexual or homosexual. But if he is not into dicks but is so aroused by an atypical interest (in the case of GAMP, gynandromorphism), and has sex with a man DESPITE being repulsed by dicks / not attracted to men-- then he is not necessarily bisexual or homosexual. He could be, of course. That is consistent with how psychologists define what a paraphilia is and our understanding of sexual orientation.

That makes sense. Especially when there are scenarios where people do have sex with the same sex (obviously not for same reasons) despite not being into it. I think I was just going more for that these men willing go out of their way to have sex with TWs which makes it weird to call them "heterosexual" but I can see your point on it. Especially in being consistent on what defines paraphilia.

I would be curious to hear that, but no pressure. :) edit: whoops just saw your other comment lol.

Yeah, alongside that post I made (plus what I recently replied with), some of my views are based on the answers I made a post about in the past regarding homo/heteroflexibility.

https://saidit.net/s/LGBDropTheT/comments/5xv6/opinions_on_heterohomoflexibility/

I just find it odd to name a group of people who would have what is basically a fleeting (sexual) "attraction" as bisexual, especially when they're the type to have no interest in persuading the opposite sex. Like, there's FEB and MEB (thd sexual attraction towards same/opposite sex remains. Its not just physical either but multiple ways). I noticed these people also call themselves such during adulthood, and while there are bisexuals who do find themselves attracted to same/opposite sex later in life but i just don't want this to make the "it's a phrase" stereotype pop up more, when it seems most of these "flexibles" seem to be more into what asexuals call "aesthetic attraction" but take that to heart that they "aren't" 100% x becuase they managed to find the same/opposite sex attractive, not sexually tho. But then but don't want to necessarily appropriate the bisexual label either. It may have to do with how some cultures see anything (speaking on the aspect of heteroflexible) between same sex as "gay." I mean, some men can't even compliment each other without being called gay and similar acts. So, it might be that too.

I mean, is there some who are bisexual but I guess lean HEAVILY (to the point where opposite/same sex attraction is super rare) on one side and be considered such? Sure. But even if that what the case, I think there should some term that separates them from other bisexuals. Like a subset that we do with GAMPs. Plus, who knows, maybe some of them are similar to "pansexuals" and these types are the ones who date transpeople while pandering to their "gender identity" if that makes sense. A "heteroflexible" (straight) man who becomes "flexible" for a "gay transman" but also wants to acknowledge he's attracted to women (this logic removing sex out of sexuality and replacing it with GI).

The top half of PenseePansy is what I feel some hetero/homoflexible may be

This is pretty much my take, with the caveat that I'd define "flexible" a tad more narrowly: as someone who's sexually-attracted to only one sex, yet can be legit OK about boinkin' the other (i.e., it's inoffensive/agreeable-- the physical sensations are reasonably-pleasant, making another person feel good is genuinely enjoyable, etc.-- despite their maleness/femaleness). They're perfectly comfortable with it, in other words. So, it seems to me, this is meaningfully-distinct from either being bi OR a monosexual who's just experimenting/traumatized/attention-seeking/strictly for-pay: the former are sexually-attracted to both sexes, the latter are-- with respect to the sex they're not oriented towards-- either indifferent or grossed-out, erotically-speaking.

Edit: words and formatting

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

That makes sense. Especially when there are scenarios where people do have sex with the same sex (obviously not for same reasons) despite not being into it. I think I was just going more for that these men willing go out of their way to have sex with TWs which makes it weird to call them "heterosexual" but I can see your point on it. Especially in being consistent on what defines paraphilia.

Glad it makes sense, and yeah it's kind of fascinating and different to look at sexual orientation with paraphilias in mind. And I think, too, there may be a distinction between someone who's learned a sort of fetish as a result of say trauma, and someone who's just been like that their whole life with no apparent instigating factor. It's a little odd that you could have someone who regularly has sex with a sex they aren't attracted to, but then, human behavior is very varied.

but i just don't want this to make the "it's a phrase" stereotype pop up more, when it seems most of these "flexibles" seem to be more into what asexuals call "aesthetic attraction" but take that to heart that they "aren't" 100% x becuase they managed to find the same/opposite sex attractive, not sexually tho. But then but don't want to necessarily appropriate the bisexual label either.

Ok that actually makes a lot of sense. Hmm. Yeah I dunno. Maybe having more discussions about "aesthetic attraction" would be helpful, honestly? Because it is so normalized for straight people to be able to compliment each other and still be assumed to be straight, esp straight women, but with gay people it's like "oh are you ACTUALLY gay?" And I bet there are many tumblr-type people who just have a sort of "aesthetic attraction" to their same sex and who jumped to apply the label "bisexual" to themselves when they are not really, they are straight; but they were told "bisexual includes EVERYONE even people who are SLIGHTLY drawn to each sex in a non-sexual way" and then people end up seeing them and being like "wtf you're not actually bisexual it's a phase..." For these people, I honestly understand the attitude of not having labels. I actually have a friend like this, and feel like I kind of get it better now.

edit: oh and also. Distinguishing between admiration and sexual attraction is not happening for many kids, I think, and it should. Many people online just jump to, "Oh you felt embarrassed/shy/delighted around this person? Maybe you're bisexual! Everyone is a little bisexual after allllllll"