Is sexuality more complicated these days than it needs to be?

[zbi73]

Controversial question. Is sexuality more complicated these days than it needs to be? Do we have too many sexualities, not enough or is it just about right? Not talking about romantic attraction here. They're two separate things in my opinion.

For me, the answer is yes. For me, you're either exclusively attracted to the opposite sex, same sex, or both. Yes, people will identify as neither male nor female but for most, they were born as one of those two and for a small few, born as both. Some say gender doesn't matter, it's the person, that's fine, but it does mean you're able to be attracted to both. I'm most definitely over simplifying it for sure but I feel the current plethora of sexualities is over complicating it.

For example I could be ambisexual, pansexual, homoflexible, heteroflexible, queer, macho, versatile, supersexual, flexamorous but I prefer the much more simple, Bisexual. I'm sexually attracted to both men and women.

Discuss! Please don't flame or disrespect anyone who comments on this post, it's not about right or wrong, it's just how you see it and who knows, you may be able to help change someone's mind.

[sysper]

a good question. i think its important we understand ourselves as much as we can so its good we have such specific words. but for everyday life it's probably best to keep things simple.

[Long Duck Dong]

yeah it is more complicated there is over 50 sexualities now....

but honestly I do not care, each to their own, why should they have to conform to what others want, it just starts constant and ongoing fighting... god knows this site has seen enough fighting over who is using the right labels and what labels are allowed.......and how people that do not use the label * bisexual * they have internalized biphobia etc... and I am not suggesting that its your intention......

I quess in a way I am saying it because I am content with my intersex partner and our two female lovers... so what is happening in society, is something i am just ignoring for the most part...... and being in NZ in the south island, I watched the fight for same sex marriage succeed, anti discrimination, equal rights and it did not bring peace, it was on to the next fight and the next fight ........yeah I am tired, I no longer care.....

[dan.woodlawn]

As someone who in the LAST 5 years, figured out "bi" was a thing, and I am an old dude...I lived my life straight (plus). I think calling things names, gets more complicated, but we have a million names for things. We dont call every flower, ..."flower"...we call them iris, lillies, dandy lions...a million names to describe each thing.
humans each have their own name and occassionally we find multiple "Dick Johnsons" (dont we all want to find one?)...
So for me, removing the ambiguity by placing names is fine...even if I cant keep up with the urban sprall of sexualities. I dont care if there are lumberjack-bi-bottom-yaddas....At least I know your thing.
p.s....I call my wife bi, while she identifies as hetro flexible. neither of us is right yet.

[foundpuppy]

In the US it is too complicated. In Europe it seems that all sexes are tolerated better than here. If tolerated we would not need labels/movements such as lgbtq. We wouldn’t need them.

[BiViking]

I don’t think it’s actually sexuality that is complicated per say, I think that a certain sect of the population wants and feels they need to be “special” and recognized for that so it’s an identity issue and not a “sexuality” issue. They may say it’s about sexuality but I think it’s how they’re identifying themselves. Shit I could be wrong but it’s an interesting discussion.

[KDaddy23]

We here in the US have always been funny about sex and sexuality. I grew up in the era where life in the 1950s was considered to be the ideal template and the Moral Majority ruled the roost... until the sexual revolution came along in the 1960s and upset the apple cart. The more demonstrative people were getting about having sex - any kind of sex - the more griping and bitching was taking place. Women were being slut-shamed like never before and, of course, those horrible homosexuals were just so rude to be flaunting their sexuality in everyone's face - and, all the while, bisexuals were hiding in the cut and getting their freak on. Because of the huge departure from what was being considered as normal and healthy sex, being able to have sex became more complication; women's lib came around right on the heels of the sexual revolution, the ruckus over homosexuality was literally getting dangerous and just when things were kinda settling down about people have a lot of sex, HIV/AIDS appeared on the radar and gave the weakening Moral Majority some ammunition to keep their childish attitudes about sex alive.

It hasn't stopped anyone from having sex but it also hasn't stopped what's left of the Moral Majority from doing everything they can to stop people from having sex and in any way they want to... and the one effect it has had is that sex and sexuality has become a lot more complicated than at any other time I can remember in both what sex - and sexuality - is and is supposed to be to being able to get with a guy, have sex, and without anything else being of issue other than two guys wanting and needing to get off with each other. It has shown how insanely childish and ignorant we are about sexuality and more so when compared with other countries - like most of Europe. I had a UK friend tell me that, "You Yanks need to grow the fuck up about it..."

And he was right. And we still haven't.

[BiViking]

We here in the US have always been funny about sex and sexuality. I grew up in the era where life in the 1950s was considered to be the ideal template and the Moral Majority ruled the roost... until the sexual revolution came along in the 1960s and upset the apple cart. The more demonstrative people were getting about having sex - any kind of sex - the more griping and bitching was taking place. Women were being slut-shamed like never before and, of course, those horrible homosexuals were just so rude to be flaunting their sexuality in everyone's face - and, all the while, bisexuals were hiding in the cut and getting their freak on. Because of the huge departure from what was being considered as normal and healthy sex, being able to have sex became more complication; women's lib came around right on the heels of the sexual revolution, the ruckus over homosexuality was literally getting dangerous and just when things were kinda settling down about people have a lot of sex, HIV/AIDS appeared on the radar and gave the weakening Moral Majority some ammunition to keep their childish attitudes about sex alive.

It hasn't stopped anyone from having sex but it also hasn't stopped what's left of the Moral Majority from doing everything they can to stop people from having sex and in any way they want to... and the one effect it has had is that sex and sexuality has become a lot more complicated than at any other time I can remember in both what sex - and sexuality - is and is supposed to be to being able to get with a guy, have sex, and without anything else being of issue other than two guys wanting and needing to get off with each other. It has shown how insanely childish and ignorant we are about sexuality and more so when compared with other countries - like most of Europe. I had a UK friend tell me that, "You Yanks need to grow the fuck up about it..."

And he was right. And we still haven't.

Your Brit friend is spot on and I loved your view based on your life experiences. I grew up in a fundamentalist baptist home with a father who graduated from seminary so I felt that Moral Majority for most of my early developmental life and it had an obvious effect on me and how I thought and felt about my sexuality.

[zbi73]

In Europe it seems that all sexes are tolerated better than here.

Having been to the Netherlands, it opened my eyes to what "liberial" means sex wise. They had sex museums that had both straight and homosexual exhibits. I looked at both. They seemed to embrace all thing sex wise. Like most places, I guess they have groups over there who think homosexual activity is wrong but the majority don't seem to care or put on a very good poker face. I'd like to think if I grew up there things would be different.

[Jazminedress]

it simple, I have sex...............done

[playful808]

I do know some guys who find simple, direct, straight-forward ways to express their healthy sexuality.

And I know many more guys who make sex exceptionally complicated for no good reason.

[Neonaught]

Labels are for soup cans not people. Be with who you wish to be with and be happy!

[KDaddy23]

I was in the UK for a work-related conference with my team members there and for the week I was there, I got laid six times... and four times with guys. I found their openness and lack of drama so refreshing - and that's when the one guy said what he said about us needing to grow up about it. To them, it's just sex (and as it should be) but we're such children about having sex so we're incapable of looking at it so simply. He had also said, "You know you guys are the laughing stock of the sexual world, don't you?" and again, he was right... and he's still right. It was... embarrassing to hear what he had to say about the US re sex and sexuality.

[Annika L]

I think many of the variants you describe fall into the camps of:
(1) bargaining terms
(2) cute puns, and
(3) attempts at inclusion and/or political correctness.

...and that most add nothing meaningful to a discussion of sexuality.

I find terms like heteroflexible, flexamorous, and ambisexual to be a kind of blend between cute and bargaining. They are ways of saying “bisexual” (or pansexual, or polyamorous, depending) without being willing to own those terms...which is fine...identify however you like, or don’t, but unless you can define precisely how your word differs in meaning from the existing words (well beyond “I feel this word fits me better”), don’t ask everyone else to track a bunch of new terminology.

Versatile is (1) without (2).

Macho isn’t sexuality at all...it’s just a style.
Queer is an umbrella term that covers any identity outside of “straight”...I know many object to the word itself, because of its history, but this is the current usage within the LGBT+ community.

Now pansexual I’m less settled on, but I put it in the category of (3), in the most positive sense. I identify as bisexual...because that’s what I grew up hearing and understanding. But there is nothing about me and my taste that restricts me to attraction only to gender extremes. I’m sure I could love and thereafter find myself sexually attracted to various kinds of space aliens that don’t even have male and female sexes or genders. So technically, I suspect that makes me pansexual. I feel that what pansexual brings to the table is the notion that there are more than two sexes/genders, and the term suggests that those too are worthy of attraction and love, and I think that’s wonderful...I do not remotely object to people using the term. But I think that, like myself, a lot of bisexuals are really in this camp as well...or would find themselves to be if exposed to the right situation. I find it difficult to believe (and this is a personal issue...the way my brain works) that humans would have evolved a group that is open-minded enough to accept attraction to two well-defined sexes, but not to the “murky in between” or anything outside of that. So to me at least “bisexual” and “pansexual” refer to the same thing...it’s just that pansexual is more specifically inclusive/politically correct.

Anyway, in a nutshell, I think society has added too many meaningless terms to the conversation, and that sexuality itself remains failrly straightfoward.