Do you have to have sex first before you can claim to be X?

Their chosen sexual orientation is the only trait we can know. This sexual orientation in actual reality you speak of can't be objectively identified.

 

nope. the difference is who we're attracted to.

 

procreation has no relevance.

 

You keep on fooling yourself.

 

Amen!! And most 'troubled' heterosexuals cannot STAND that.

 

Did you REALLY read/study this somewhere... or are you making it up as you go?

 

Not everyone is bisexual; you know that, right?!

 

Indeed.

 

He won't buy the TRUTH... but it is definitely entertaining to see people bat-down his claims so readily.

 

Great point; well made.

 

You made that up; it is obvious. Even so... please attempt to prove what you just claimed.

You are really trying to mold reality into your nonsense.

In reality, a proper psychological exam(s)... sexual-orientation can be determined in most anyone.

 

He knows that; but I understand you sharing reality for others. It is refreshing.

 

Do you actually believe that "many people" means "everyone"? Or do you just have a need to respond. and as usual, you have nothing to respond with.

 

It's a fact. Science doesn't have the ability to determine if an individual prefers the same sex or the opposite, any more than they can determine if a person prefers chocolate over vanilla

 

It's a fact. Your inability as a gay man to accept that fact changes nothing

 

Certainly irrelevant to a gay man. No amount of the boning of your butt would ever produce a child.

 

It could determine both of those things actually by measuring brain waves and blood flow to the genital area (in the case of sexuality). A plethysmograph is designed for just that purpose, and the usual method is eye tracker technology + pornography + blood flow and heartrate. It's quite accurate for determining what stimulus turns people on.

Yes the only practical method for measuring sexuality among a population is by asking people, but a scientific study using those methods usually reveals more latent homosexual attraction among self-identified "heterosexuals" as it does heterosexual attraction among self-identified "homosexuals". And once again, the reasons for that should be obvious. It's socially encouraged to engage in heterosexual conduct, yet homosexual contact is viewed with shame and disgust by large sections of society - hence why most gay people who have experimented would be "more secure" in their sexuality than the self-identified heterosexuals who are too afraid to act on their latent feelings. Don't knock before you try as they say

 

In all seriousness, I am curious at to why you think natural procreation has anything at all to do with a topic about what constitutes sexual orientation/identity...

 

dixon, can you please show me where you found evidence in the link I provided that it somehow backed up your claim?

http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx

 

And when the tests determine that a subject is attracted to both sexes, they have no way to determine which of the two the individual prefers.

 

"most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation".

Most is not all. NOW why dont you copy and paste what you believe suports your assertion.

 

The topic is the question asked

You can just proclaim it to be irrelevant, and move along like everyone else.

 

it's irrelevant to the topic

 

The topic is homosexual "relationships" not individuals. And at most ONE of the individuals in a homosexual relationship, AND a 3rd party of the opposite sex can procreate. The other homosexual in the relationship has no role in the procreation. So no, homosexual relationships dont lead to procreation.

 

Of course people choose to identify as 'homosexual', 'heterosexual', or 'bisexual'. Duh! Brilliant command of the obvious. They don't do so arbitrarily, though. Many, (perhaps even most) base that choice of identifier on their experience with feelings of attraction <- something they don't choose. Some may base that choice of identifier on another - their choice of a partner. It would not be surprising if the latter group tended more toward bisexuality in their experiences of attraction. Some may base their choice of an identifier as an accommodation to social pressure; identifying as 'straight' despite experiencing primarily same-sex or bisexual attraction; or identifying as 'bisexual' despite experiencing primarily same-sex attraction.

Notice the absence of people who identify as 'bisexual' or 'homosexual' despite experiencing primarily opposite-sex attraction. There's a reason for that: There is no benefit to identifying as 'homosexual' or 'bisexual'. Whatever benefit one might imagine (emphasis on imagine) is certainly outweighed by the negatives of living in an anti-bi/anti-gay society. If there are any heterosexually attracted people identifying as 'gay' or 'bi', they're an exceptional rarity.

Bottom line: Sexuality and the identifiers people us in association with it do not fit nicely into the little boxes that black & white thinkers would like to cage them in.