The Glade 4.0

You didn't even read the "Innate Bisexuality" link about Freud, did you?

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

He didn't say you were. Just proves you don't understand the point.

There is no pure "straight" or pure "gay." Everyone is born bisexual, with a possible preference (nature) one way or the other word. You retain that bisexuality -- the potential to be attracted to someone of either sex -- throughout your life, but your natural preference (however strong), combined with your life experiences and influences (nurture) give you your perceived sexuality. You may end up only entertaining attractions of one sex (and in fact, probably do), but that potential is still there. Gay rights activists are not exactly right when they say "I was born this way," "this is how nature made me." Anybody has the potential to be attracted to either sex -- everyone is naturally bisexual. One does ultimately learn their "chosen" sexual orientation, but their natural orientation is never 100% gay or straight.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

No, it's blocked from work. What's your point?

Yes, he did.



Yes, there is.



No, they aren't.

Nor can you prove that in any way.

Wow. Wikipedia is blocked from work?

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I'm never quite sure, actually. Some things don't load, somethings give an error, some things give not found, some say blocked. It's not consistent either, the same page may be blocked and not blocked in the same day.

Maybe it's related to ads, I don't know.

Sounds like a content based filter....

Wiki's, blogs, and web forums are all blocked at my office. Fortunatly I don't spend much time there.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

How about Heteroflexible or Flamingly Heterosexual?

I've never cared for the lables for sexuality. I'm attracted to people, not parts. Besides, these studies are so subjective that they are good for showing trends rather then cause or effect. In my opinion of course.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

I like you, even if I don't like your spelling.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

What are you talking about Taly? I am with Ara and Tas on this but cut the graph down to
1) Straight
2) Bisexual
3) Gay
and maybe some other rating for people who sexualize objects.
No need for degrees of bisexuality.

_________________

What does a content based filter sound like?

_________________
I'll show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

I guess I'm too lazy to download a spellcheck app for my phone. Of course I'm usually replying while sitting in my truck trying to warm up.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Please figure out how to adapt this spellcheck app to your browser.

Please.

The entertainment you would provide us would be limitless.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I see what you're saying in the post, but I have to disagree with your definition of "bisexual." Every definition I've seen of the word indicates an active behavior, or active preference...not the "potential."

To me, it's much like calling a newly laid egg an "omelette" simply because it has the "potential" to be scrambled and cooked in a pan with ham, cheese, peppers and onions. To widen the scope of the word to include all potential for any range of behavior or attraction makes the word meaningless.

Pfft Coren =P we all know the only potential an egg has, is to become a fully fledged chicken =P

I think there's a disagreement on the definition of "bisexual". I need to find this article I read and it was a while ago, but basically all humans are either completely hetero, completely homo, or degrees of "bisexual". However the % of complete hetero or complete homo was only something like 5% of the entire population.

This leads sometimes to things we dub bromance, or female 'exploration'. Even with those who define themselves as bisexual, there is usually a degree of preference for one sex or the other and is rarely 50/50.

So the potential that Talya's talking about is those who define themselves hetero, but is actually classified bisexual with majority preference for the opposite sex. There is a potential to discover that they are bisexual, but just havent yet and may never discover if not under the right circumstances.

Exactly, Lydiaa, except I doubt those 5% extremes exist (and so did Freud and all psychology derived from his work.)

On a related note, were I single, and somewhere the other side of the world from where I am now, I'd be all over you.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

I'm just saying that her definition of bisexual is not the same one I and everyone I know use hehe...I'd call her term "potentially bisexual", which is about as meaningful as referring to all eggs as "potential chickens" or "potential omelettes."

If Joe has absolutely zero attraction to guys (and is therefore 100% straight using real terms that mean anything), but could potentially in the future after 20 years in prison be desparate enough to take anything he could get...its silly to use that minute possibility to call him bisexual now, and to do so makes the term meaningless.

Weak attempt to score rhetorical points



That's nice. Do you think your opinions are immune from cricticism?



Not goign to happen.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

No, they won't, because that would be sexual harassment, just like it's sexual harassment for a straight NCO or officer to do it to a female solider. Such conduct is not acceptable, and is dealt with vigorously, so much so that the excessive zeal in daling with it is a frequent complaint of troops at all levels.

Based on exactly what experience are you making claims about how things really work in the day-to-day military? I'm guessing none, since only civilians refer to NCOs as "non-comms".

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Hence the word "abuse" of authority, or did you overlook that in your zeal to jump on me? Are you claiming there will never be anyone who will abuse their authority? No man has ever abused his authority in the military concerning sexual favors from women under his command? What damn planet do you live on? It is not Earth.

All I am saying is that, just like some catholic priests abused their authority, and some men have abused their authority over women in the workplace, some gay men in the military in positions of authority will abuse that authority. Note the word "some" before you go jumping on me again. It'd be incredibly naive to think that it won't ever happen, so don't waste your time trying to tell me it won't.

So it won't happen, Diamondeye?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/ ... 2713.shtml

Throw your line of bull at someone stupid enough to buy it.

Whatcha trying to link to Willis?

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

It's a news story about sexual assault in the military. So it does happen, and only a fool would argue that gays will not do it, also.

For young people considering joining the military, it's one more checkmark in the negative column, and there are enough of them already.

Though I'm not Willis

The article is interesting, but I'm not sure I really see what your point is vis-a-vis DADT. Are you saying that repealing it is going to increase incidents of sexual harassment?

I don't think it would, to any significant extent. Gay people were already in the military prior to this. If a gay officer doesn't care about violating military policy regarding sexual harassment, I can't imagine they would be overly concerned about violating DADT, either. At least breaking DADT isn't criminal.

Edit:

To clarify, if I understand your concerns correctly, they hinge on there being some theoretical gay officer who would be sexually harassing his/her subordinates if only it weren't for DADT (and those meddling kids). I don't doubt that sexual harassment occurs in the military, but that particular scenario seems a little far-fetched to me.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.