Dazed
@_Dazed
6 Years10,000+ Posts
Comments: 9549 · Posts: 12626 · Topics: 250
Monogamy and attraction/emotion...
You are on page out of 2 | Reverse Order
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Attraction and emotions don't play that much of a part. Monogamy is about commitment.
Sexual orientation is not a factor...
Anyone can 'cheat'.
Ime/observation primarily hetero/cis couples because gay/bi couples tend to have more open relationships. And what I mean by hetero/cis couples... I mean men.
Men are taught that sexual conquest is directly tied to their masculinity/how manly they are.
Women are taught that sex diminishes your worth as a sexual commodity.
You'll notice that primarily patriarchy societies have polygamy with men having multiple wives... not the other way around.
Sexual orientation is not a factor...
Anyone can 'cheat'.
Ime/observation primarily hetero/cis couples because gay/bi couples tend to have more open relationships. And what I mean by hetero/cis couples... I mean men.
Men are taught that sexual conquest is directly tied to their masculinity/how manly they are.
Women are taught that sex diminishes your worth as a sexual commodity.
You'll notice that primarily patriarchy societies have polygamy with men having multiple wives... not the other way around.
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMOclick to expand
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Posted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.click to expand
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
Posted by LadyNeptune
Attraction and emotions don't play that much of a part. Monogamy is about commitment.
Sexual orientation is not a factor...
Anyone can 'cheat'.
Ime/observation primarily hetero/cis couples because gay/bi couples tend to have more open relationships. And what I mean by hetero/cis couples... I mean men.
Men are taught that sexual conquest is directly tied to their masculinity/how manly they are.
Women are taught that sex diminishes your worth as a sexual commodity.
You'll notice that primarily patriarchy societies have polygamy with men having multiple wives... not the other way around.
although to be fair women are more detailed oriented so maybe they just aren't getting caught as much
also since typically the majority of the household duties, child rearing, elderly care falls on women's shoulders... on top of many holding down jobs... where is the energy or time to cheat.
its like murderesses. they tend to be way less prominent then murderers. however maybe that's just cause they aren't caught as much...
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
The rule for successful relationships is how you choose to treat each other aka actions, not emotional connection.click to expand
I fail to see the difference here, do actions not result in emotions?
are actions independent of emotions?
what do you even define as emotions?
Posted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Arinoaqua
Men are more opportunistic. If presented with the opportunity to cheat on their spouse I think a large majority would.
I highly disagree
That’s fine lol.
Most of the studies I’ve seen don’t have a huge disparity between men and women and it’s maybe 1/3 at the most that it trends around for cheating of those two genders.
Statistics might show men and women cheat at the same rate but consider that a woman probably didn’t have to try at all and a man had less opportunity. Men always have less dating/sexual prospects than women.click to expand
I agree with this
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?click to expand
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
Posted by dOpehEadPosted by _Dazed
1. What roll do you believe attraction and emotions play in one's ability to be monogamous?
2. Which of the following do you believe is less likely to be monogamous based on your answer to #1?
a. Straight woman
b. Straight man
c. Bisexual woman
d. Bisexual man
e. All of the above have the same potential for monogamy
2. They're listed in order from most potential for monogamy to least.click to expand
Can you offer a reason or opinion as to why?
Posted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Arinoaqua
Men are more opportunistic. If presented with the opportunity to cheat on their spouse I think a large majority would.
I highly disagree
That’s fine lol.
Most of the studies I’ve seen don’t have a huge disparity between men and women and it’s maybe 1/3 at the most that it trends around for cheating of those two genders.
Statistics might show men and women cheat at the same rate but consider that a woman probably didn’t have to try at all and a man had less opportunity. Men always have less dating/sexual prospects than women.
Some men are homebodies and are always home even when it’s not a pandemic and never go anywhere since they tinker around at home all day. So nahhhh
#notallmen
I’m staying with equal
Another guy looked me up on Facebook after he fixed my cell phone.click to expand
Was he a Scorpio?
Posted by dOpehEad
Straight women are like % 50 monogamous
Straight men are like 2% monogamous
And then bisexuals I'd place at don't go in with high expectations
Do you have any studies to back up this claim, or is it strictly a subjective opinion?
Posted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by ArinoaquaPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Arinoaqua
Men are more opportunistic. If presented with the opportunity to cheat on their spouse I think a large majority would.
I highly disagree
That’s fine lol.
Most of the studies I’ve seen don’t have a huge disparity between men and women and it’s maybe 1/3 at the most that it trends around for cheating of those two genders.
Statistics might show men and women cheat at the same rate but consider that a woman probably didn’t have to try at all and a man had less opportunity. Men always have less dating/sexual prospects than women.
Some men are homebodies and are always home even when it’s not a pandemic and never go anywhere since they tinker around at home all day. So nahhhh
#notallmen
I’m staying with equal
But doesn’t that further prove my point? Lol. Women will get approached at the grocery store. I’ve had the most weird encounters with men.
Some guy wrote his number in my pizza box at a takeout restaurant. Another guy looked me up on Facebook after he fixed my cell phone.
Women have opportunity around every corner that men do not have. We just have to exist in a public space. Men don’t get that kind of attention.click to expand
I was propositioned for a 3some standing in line at the grocery store. She was hawt he gave me major creep vibes.
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
The rule for successful relationships is how you choose to treat each other aka actions, not emotional connection.
I fail to see the difference here, do actions not result in emotions?
are actions independent of emotions?
what do you even define as emotions?
People fall in and out of love and infatuation is temporary. If you want a long time commitment to one person there is something outside those emotions that holds it together is my point.
If every relationship was based on emotion alone not much monogamy would be happening.click to expand
well I personally see infatuation as a byproduct of attraction
"Actions create or influence emotions. Emotions don’t create the rest"
I still fail to get your point of view, if one's angry there's more chance of a negative action, and that would create more negative emotions.
and even if people decide to not engage in some negative interaction they can hold negative emotions that leads to resentment, another emotion.
heck I'd use Gottman as an example, they can predict divorce by the amount of dissatisfaction couples feel in their relationship, you just call then interactions and separate them from all form of emotional bonding? that's new for me.
but I think, afaik, there's not much monogamy going on anyway.
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.click to expand
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Posted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.click to expand
Your explanation relies on statistical chance of encounters and evolutionary reasons for sex..
I see no mention of emotional attachment you mentioned in your original comment.
Do you agree that there is a difference between an individual that is bisexual and one that is bi-romantic?
Posted by champrangerv2Posted by Endless
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
But there's nothing to say this relationship is linear....that if a straight man is interested in 20% of a sample population, therefore, a bisexual man must be interested in 40% of the same sample.click to expand
I didn't say it was linear, but even 5% would mean one is more than the other, if you take a sample big enough the difference would be noticeable.
Posted by Arinoaqua
I read a study once that said men with big balls are more likely to cheat. If their balls are smacking my clit during doggy...we breaking up
no old saggy ball sack for you
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.click to expand
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
Posted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'click to expand
More likely to cheat*
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
Your explanation relies on statistical chance of encounters and evolutionary reasons for sex..
I see no mention of emotional attachment you mentioned in your original comment.
Do you agree that there is a difference between an individual that is bisexual and one that is bi-romantic?click to expand
should I assume that a person being bi-romantic is not interested in having sexual encounters with the person they form attachment to?
the reason why I mentioned emotional attachment is because, the way I see it, one would try to keep a relationship were there's a strong attachment, so I see it mechanically, if there's less attachment, then the person would be more likely to 'cheating' lets say, and then it depends on you chances of cheating lets be fair there, not everyone in a "stable" relationship is really committed, they just haven't found someone to cheat with, cuz they are loathsome pieces of shit and nobody likes them.
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
More likely to cheat*click to expand
well, isn't that to be non-monogamous?
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.click to expand
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.
Posted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
Your explanation relies on statistical chance of encounters and evolutionary reasons for sex..
I see no mention of emotional attachment you mentioned in your original comment.
Do you agree that there is a difference between an individual that is bisexual and one that is bi-romantic?
should I assume that a person being bi-romantic is not interested in having sexual encounters with the person they form attachment to?
the reason why I mentioned emotional attachment is because, the way I see it, one would try to keep a relationship were there's a strong attachment, so I see it mechanically, if there's less attachment, then the person would be more likely to 'cheating' lets say, and then it depends on you chances of cheating lets be fair there, not everyone in a "stable" relationship is really committed, they just haven't found someone to cheat with, cuz they are loathsome pieces of shit and nobody likes them.click to expand
Bisexual = physically/sexually attracted to men and women
Bi-romantic = emotionally attracted to men and women
I am bisexual, not bi-romantic. I am physically/sexually attracted to men and women, but I only develop strong emotional bonds with women. I do not date men because I know there will never be a relationship between us.
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by champrangerv2Posted by Endless
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
But there's nothing to say this relationship is linear....that if a straight man is interested in 20% of a sample population, therefore, a bisexual man must be interested in 40% of the same sample.
I didn't say it was linear, but even 5% would mean one is more than the other, if you take a sample big enough the difference would be noticeable.
class="bqfade">click to expand
she basically says her experience overrides all stats, that's funny.
anyway she also says that men usually report cheating even while "loving" their wives, while women had zone out from the relationship, that can be discussed, does it mean a happy women would not cheat? that men are more likely to cheat even in a happy marriage?
but if we can go to stats....
Posted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
More likely to cheat*
well, isn't that to be non-monogamous?click to expand
There is a difference between cheating and ethical non-monogamy. I should have been more clear as to what I meant in the OP.
Posted by LadyNeptunePosted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.click to expand
It's a bit different than physical attributes you're attracted to.
The origins of the bisexual man being unfaithful stems from the fear that gay men are the sole spreaders of aids. You should know this.
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
Your explanation relies on statistical chance of encounters and evolutionary reasons for sex..
I see no mention of emotional attachment you mentioned in your original comment.
Do you agree that there is a difference between an individual that is bisexual and one that is bi-romantic?
should I assume that a person being bi-romantic is not interested in having sexual encounters with the person they form attachment to?
the reason why I mentioned emotional attachment is because, the way I see it, one would try to keep a relationship were there's a strong attachment, so I see it mechanically, if there's less attachment, then the person would be more likely to 'cheating' lets say, and then it depends on you chances of cheating lets be fair there, not everyone in a "stable" relationship is really committed, they just haven't found someone to cheat with, cuz they are loathsome pieces of shit and nobody likes them.
Bisexual = physically/sexually attracted to men and women
Bi-romantic = emotionally attracted to men and women
I am bisexual, not bi-romantic. I am physically/sexually attracted to men and women, but I only develop strong emotional bonds with women. I do not date men because I know there will never be a relationship between us.click to expand
well right now is freaking difficult to measure attraction alone, if there's no sexual activity I don't see how that would even be part of a discussion.
also is complicated to gauge what is a bisexual person if there's nothing to 'measure', how many people would be considered bisexual if we could measure just physical attraction, how can we be sure most people aren't bisexual in some form or another 🤔
most people are difficult to categorize.
Posted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
Your explanation relies on statistical chance of encounters and evolutionary reasons for sex..
I see no mention of emotional attachment you mentioned in your original comment.
Do you agree that there is a difference between an individual that is bisexual and one that is bi-romantic?
should I assume that a person being bi-romantic is not interested in having sexual encounters with the person they form attachment to?
the reason why I mentioned emotional attachment is because, the way I see it, one would try to keep a relationship were there's a strong attachment, so I see it mechanically, if there's less attachment, then the person would be more likely to 'cheating' lets say, and then it depends on you chances of cheating lets be fair there, not everyone in a "stable" relationship is really committed, they just haven't found someone to cheat with, cuz they are loathsome pieces of shit and nobody likes them.
Bisexual = physically/sexually attracted to men and women
Bi-romantic = emotionally attracted to men and women
I am bisexual, not bi-romantic. I am physically/sexually attracted to men and women, but I only develop strong emotional bonds with women. I do not date men because I know there will never be a relationship between us.
well right now is freaking difficult to measure attraction alone, if there's no sexual activity I don't see how that would even be part of a discussion.
also is complicated to gauge what is a bisexual person if there's nothing to 'measure', how many people would be considered bisexual if we could measure just physical attraction, how can we be sure most people aren't bisexual in some form or another 🤔
most people are difficult to categorize.click to expand
fwiw.. I'm border lined asexual.
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
More likely to cheat*click to expand
ahhhh, so it comes from that other thread.
well, the logic for not liking bisexual men is rather dull, many women would avoid them thinking one would be prone to cheating, that part is flawed, but there are reason why the idea came to be, firstly the amount of gay men that described themselves as "bisexual" created quite the stigma, a sad result of fear of coming out.
secondly, women want security in relationships, I think there was a thread here were many said they wouldn't date a man that was too good looking cuz he 'could' cheat, so although fallacious, if we were to define a bisexual man as someone that could choose to have sex with a man or a woman, is fair to assume he could get more opportunities if he were to looks for them (which statistically would be the case) and men are more likely to cheat given the opportunity.
now our problem would be in defining a bisexual man, and considering there's bickering about that even in the LGBT community, I don't see it happening LMAO.
Posted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
More likely to cheat*
ahhhh, so it comes from that other thread.
well, the logic for not liking bisexual men is rather dull, many women would avoid them thinking one would be prone to cheating, that part is flawed, but there are reason why the idea came to be, firstly the amount of gay men that described themselves as "bisexual" created quite the stigma, a sad result of fear of coming out.
secondly, women want security in relationships, I think there was a thread here were many said they wouldn't date a man that was too good looking cuz he 'could' cheat, so although fallacious, if we were to define a bisexual man as someone that could choose to have sex with a man or a woman, is fair to assume he could get more opportunities if he were to looks for them (which statistically would be the case) and men are more likely to cheat given the opportunity.
now our problem would be in defining a bisexual man, and considering there's bickering about that even in the LGBT community, I don't see it happening LMAO.click to expand
Who has more opportunities to cheat?
A 10/10 beautiful straight man?
A 3/10 poor bisexual man?
Posted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by EndlessPosted by _DazedPosted by EndlessPosted by Moon_RiverPosted by Endless
if you define attachment as an emotion then that one is fundamental.
and for 2 is: d. Bisexual man
Emotion has little to do with commitment. IMO
well is your opinion, but attachment theory between adults is a subject with a considerable literature, all human bonding is being researched in a variety of ways.
the amount of relationships that describe "dissatisfaction" as a reason for breaking up is too much to ignore.
Can you expand on why bisexual men are less likely to be monogamous compared to straight men?
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
All studies have shown them to be very close in percentages so I disagree.
very close is not the same, and you got to add the differences between men with different sexual preferences.
gay men are notorious for open relationships, they alone tilt all scales on men side.
lesbian are not as likely to engage in non-monogamous relationships, so there's the gender difference.
Open relationships are completely acceptable alternatives to monogamous ones, but we are talking cheating here not living your own truth.
well, Idk if there's some motive behind this post, but the OP didn't point anything beyond monogamous and I don't consider open relationships monogamous in any shape or form, I don't consider anyone getting hurt and I'm fine with people choosing it, but I don't bundle them under the term 'monogamous'
More likely to cheat*
ahhhh, so it comes from that other thread.
well, the logic for not liking bisexual men is rather dull, many women would avoid them thinking one would be prone to cheating, that part is flawed, but there are reason why the idea came to be, firstly the amount of gay men that described themselves as "bisexual" created quite the stigma, a sad result of fear of coming out.
secondly, women want security in relationships, I think there was a thread here were many said they wouldn't date a man that was too good looking cuz he 'could' cheat, so although fallacious, if we were to define a bisexual man as someone that could choose to have sex with a man or a woman, is fair to assume he could get more opportunities if he were to looks for them (which statistically would be the case) and men are more likely to cheat given the opportunity.
now our problem would be in defining a bisexual man, and considering there's bickering about that even in the LGBT community, I don't see it happening LMAO.
Who has more opportunities to cheat?
A 10/10 beautiful straight man?
A 3/10 poor bisexual man?click to expand
A 10/10 beautiful straight man
there's a reason they say that you can use stats to say whatever you want, but you be changing the sample.
most men aren't 10/10 or 3/10 LMAO
Posted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.
Is fine to not want to date a bisexual but you should be able to admit it’s a bias and not make excuses for it.click to expand
Literally all dating preferences are biased. This is not breaking news.
Posted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.
It's a bit different than physical attributes you're attracted to.
The origins of the bisexual man being unfaithful stems from the fear that gay men are the sole spreaders of aids. You should know this.click to expand
You can’t possibly assert that every woman who doesn’t want to date bisexual men do so because they fear aids. Now THAT is silly.
Physical attributes huh.
It’s no different that your preference in wanting to fuck men but not consider them as romantic prospects.
I don’t see anyone making threads about your supposed motivations...
Again, don’t take everything so personally.
Posted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.
It's a bit different than physical attributes you're attracted to.
The origins of the bisexual man being unfaithful stems from the fear that gay men are the sole spreaders of aids. You should know this.
You can’t possibly assert that every woman who doesn’t want to date bisexual men do so because they fear aids. Now THAT is silly.
Physical attributes huh.
It’s no different that your preference in wanting to fuck men but not consider them as romantic prospects.
I don’t see anyone making threads about your supposed motivations...
Again, don’t take everything so personally.click to expand
You're stoned af aren't you?
Posted by champrangerv2Posted by EndlessPosted by champrangerv2Posted by Endless
men are less likely to be monogamous, period, so then you just add the possibilities of being non monogamous, obviously, bisexual men have more possibilities as they might encounter men they fancy, and men are more likely to engage in sex than women, that part makes sense from a evolutionary perspective.
simple put a random man is more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random woman, a random bisexual man would be more likely to cheat or be non-monogamous than a random straight man, you would find committed monogamous straight and bisexual men but is we are talking about statistic they are a couple that point that men are "the problem" as some would say.
But there's nothing to say this relationship is linear....that if a straight man is interested in 20% of a sample population, therefore, a bisexual man must be interested in 40% of the same sample.
I didn't say it was linear, but even 5% would mean one is more than the other, if you take a sample big enough the difference would be noticeable.
Yes but there's no direct correlation between variability and overall percentage when it comes to human attraction because "quality" isn't something you can hold constant in your probability calculation.click to expand
that's why we shouldn't take factors we can be certain about, the question only had 4 factors, I didn't take attraction as a factor, so if, AFAIK all surveys and the like say men cheat more on average, we assume both straight and bisexual men are more likely to cheat, now we take those 2, if bisexual men can cheat with other men, the odds should be higher in comparison as if only women where taken as it is for straight men, it would be so cuz bisexuals men can cheat with women equally as would a straight man, but can also cheat with men if they choose to.
please tell me if there something about that, you see implausible.
Posted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by Moon_RiverPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
The whole point of the silly women that say they a bisexual man would cheat more is because there is more “competition” or because they’ve enjoyed sex with two types of people and she can only be one type then he’ll need to get other needs met.
But realistically you have the same scenario with straight men all the time so being bi has nothing to do with it. It’s just cultural stigma.
It’s a fallacy.
At the same time sexual preference/dating preference is specific to that individual. So trying to shame someone for deciding not to romantically engage with someone based on them being bi is actually silly.
Its like judging someone for only being attracted to big booty or dark hair dark eyes or < insert whatevs>
Dazed identifies as bisexual but not bi-romantic
Is that also silly? Men are good enough to fuck but not good enough to date?
Its a personal preference... no need to take it personally.
It's a bit different than physical attributes you're attracted to.
The origins of the bisexual man being unfaithful stems from the fear that gay men are the sole spreaders of aids. You should know this.
You can’t possibly assert that every woman who doesn’t want to date bisexual men do so because they fear aids. Now THAT is silly.
Physical attributes huh.
It’s no different that your preference in wanting to fuck men but not consider them as romantic prospects.
I don’t see anyone making threads about your supposed motivations...
Again, don’t take everything so personally.
You're stoned af aren't you?click to expand
Sober af and working
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
Posted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
When you factor in that same sex couples have more difficulty in having children (adopting/invitro etc) and therefore have less relationship specific investments holding them in that relationship... that 50% less divorce rate then hetero couples becomes even more significant.
I should add, among divorcees of same sex marriage it’s overwhelmingly women couples who divorce, not male couples.
Which supports the established statistics that women ask for divorce more so then men.
And personally the gay couples that I know (small sample size) the men are in open relationships while the women are strictly monogamous. Which harks back to this societal messaging of men being applauded and encouraged to seek sexual ‘conquest’ but women are programmed to seek stability and ‘the one’. It’s gotta play a part.
Posted by HypnotoadPosted by tiziani
f. Men with deep voices
I bring science
https://www.bigissue.com/latest/fact-fiction-are-men-with-deep-voices-more-likely-to-cheatare-men-with-deep-voices-more-likely-to-cheat/
Is that just because they get more opportunity because women go gaga for it?
Or because what makes men have deeper voices also makes them more randy?click to expand
AFAIK, deep voices are linked to higher testosterone and lower stress hormones.
is part of the science of sex appeal, but there's a funny little thing with the birth control pill, need more studies.
Posted by _Dazed
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
@LadyNeptune
Posted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
I should add, among divorcees of same sex marriage it’s overwhelmingly women couples who divorce, not male couples.
Which supports the established statistics that women ask for divorce more so then men.
And personally the gay couples that I know (small sample size) the men are in open relationships while the women are strictly monogamous. Which harks back to this societal messaging of men being applauded and encouraged to seek sexual ‘conquest’ but women are programmed to seek stability and ‘the one’. It’s gotta play a part.
how can you determine that men in open relationships and women looking for stability is societal? AFAIK Scandinavia is very progressive yet they got the same proportions.
I seen surveys where lesbian couples say they wouldn't want a open relationships plus the one that are don't describe the raise in satisfaction the gay men in open relationships do under the same circumstances, so I cannot say for sure is a societal thing.
Edit: I forgot to mention that economics difference (wage gap thing) between gay men and lesbian women should be a factor to consider.
Posted by _DazedPosted by _Dazed
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
@LadyNeptuneclick to expand
https://www.dxpnet.com/opinion/message/?id=14619297
Posted by EndlessPosted by LadyNeptune
I know this thread is about monogamy however...
Same sex couples divorce at half the rate as opposite sex couples divorcing.
I should add, among divorcees of same sex marriage it’s overwhelmingly women couples who divorce, not male couples.
Which supports the established statistics that women ask for divorce more so then men.
And personally the gay couples that I know (small sample size) the men are in open relationships while the women are strictly monogamous. Which harks back to this societal messaging of men being applauded and encouraged to seek sexual ‘conquest’ but women are programmed to seek stability and ‘the one’. It’s gotta play a part.
how can you determine that men in open relationships and women looking for stability is societal? AFAIK Scandinavia is very progressive yet they got the same proportions.
I seen surveys where lesbian couples say they wouldn't want a open relationships plus the one that are don't describe the raise in satisfaction the gay men in open relationships do under the same circumstances, so I cannot say for sure is a societal thing.
Edit: I forgot to mention that economics difference (wage gap thing) between gay men and lesbian women should be a factor to consider.click to expand
Interesting point, I didn't even think about wage.
But to answer your question... both are patriarchal societies. The usa originated from ultra conservative evangelicals (the pilgrims).
Posted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by _Dazed
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
@LadyNeptune
https://www.dxpnet.com/opinion/message/?id=14619297<div class="bqfade">click to expand
https://www.hivplusmag.com/stigma/2019/9/19/bisexual-men-arent-spreading-hiv
“I have had women suggest that because I am bisexual, I spread HIV,” says Khafre Kujichagulia Abif, a 49-year-old married bisexual man, writer, and Atlanta-based activist who is HIV-positive. (Abif is also a contributor to Plus magazine).
The theory is so pervasive that many bisexual activists can’t even recall the first time they heard it: Bisexual men are responsible for "infecting" their female partners with HIV. In essence, the theory argues, men who have sex with men and women must have a higher likelihood of contracting HIV, and because they have sex with women, they are more likely to infect heterosexual women, who would otherwise be unlikely to come into contact with the virus."
Posted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by _Dazed
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
@LadyNeptune
https://www.dxpnet.com/opinion/message/?id=14619297
https://www.hivplusmag.com/stigma/2019/9/19/bisexual-men-arent-spreading-hiv
“I have had women suggest that because I am bisexual, I spread HIV,” says Khafre Kujichagulia Abif, a 49-year-old married bisexual man, writer, and Atlanta-based activist who is HIV-positive. (Abif is also a contributor to Plus magazine).
The theory is so pervasive that many bisexual activists can’t even recall the first time they heard it: Bisexual men are responsible for "infecting" their female partners with HIV. In essence, the theory argues, men who have sex with men and women must have a higher likelihood of contracting HIV, and because they have sex with women, they are more likely to infect heterosexual women, who would otherwise be unlikely to come into contact with the virus."click to expand
#notallwomen
Assuming all women are biphobic because of a handful of encounters is silly. Stop shaming people for their sexual and dating preferences Mr. I will fuck men but not date them.
Posted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by LadyNeptunePosted by _DazedPosted by _Dazed
The stigma of bisexual men stemmed from the idea that gay men spread HIV.
Women would not date bisexual men because they were afraid that their partners would sleep with gay men and they would contract HIV unknowingly.
@LadyNeptune
https://www.dxpnet.com/opinion/message/?id=14619297
https://www.hivplusmag.com/stigma/2019/9/19/bisexual-men-arent-spreading-hiv
“I have had women suggest that because I am bisexual, I spread HIV,” says Khafre Kujichagulia Abif, a 49-year-old married bisexual man, writer, and Atlanta-based activist who is HIV-positive. (Abif is also a contributor to Plus magazine).
The theory is so pervasive that many bisexual activists can’t even recall the first time they heard it: Bisexual men are responsible for "infecting" their female partners with HIV. In essence, the theory argues, men who have sex with men and women must have a higher likelihood of contracting HIV, and because they have sex with women, they are more likely to infect heterosexual women, who would otherwise be unlikely to come into contact with the virus."
#notallwomen
Assuming all women are biphobic because of a handful of encounters is silly. Stop shaming people for their sexual and dating preferences Mr. I will fuck men but not date them.click to expand
This is a common occurrence in the LGBTQ community. I figured you'd know this given how you flaunt your gay bff on dxp all the time.
There is LITERALLY hundreds of studies and literature on the stigma of bisexual men stemming from the aids epidemic.
Join the Conversation. Explore Yourself. Connect with Others.
Discover insights, swap stories, and find people. dxpnet is where experiences turn into understanding.
Create Your Free Account →Related Topics
Why do non-binary individuals feel they have the right to withold information about their real gender when pursuing a person who clearly doesn't swing that way? What is the purpose? Do they assume their personality is so irresistable I will forget I'm not
How attracted are you to someone's natural scent? Have you noticed? I have only noticed this with maybe 3 guys I've been with where I can still smell them even tho I haven't seen them in days and have taken mult showers. Sometimes just thinking about them
What do you think?
Doesn't matter whether you are living together or have been in a relationship for say 3yrs etc if you are calling your partner more than they call you, is it Chasing?
Or is it just that you've been together a while and one of you is
For months now I’ve been talking to this guy and feel like we could be a solid couple. We share so many things in common and can laugh and joke around easily. Problem is he runs hot and cold often, just when things are so easy and we are finding more and
Background: Scorpio woman + Gemini man, dated almost 4yrs, LDR for the most part
He lives in another country and has been busy with moving to another city, new job, etc. and I have been supportive, been patient, then he became distant and cold: responds
Say a man who is constantly kissing and cuddling you, and holding you tight and doesn’t ever want to let his hands off of you, yet they aren’t usually an affectionate person. Would you say this is a sign of him falling in love?
I’ve been in situations be
about someone non stop? It is really frustrating. It is like an unspoken bond, and you cannot do anything about it. How do you distract yourself and stop thinking?
I was wondering if a leo moon and sag moon couple where one specifically has mars in sag and other in gemini are more prone to swinging and open relationships.
I know 2 different couples with all the placements listed who are in open relationships or swi
I've been having a lot of realization since may of this year some of it is good for my own development but most of it feels like someone is torturing me for a lot of reasons
1.i think i only have 1 friend left that is true to me until proven otherwise,i'
I think I’ve made a few posts talking about a certain guy I have a crush on.
It’s been going on for 3 years.
This year we have tried to stay in contact but most of the time he tends flake on me giving me lame excuses he was busy or he had forgotten (
These are the two types of individuals I find are most discussed in private concerning the dating world and have caused many lives to turn into dramatic soirees. So, let’s discuss the two in some detail and explore the mindsets.
For some reason, “growth
Hi
I just want your feedback in this situation. I love my boyfriend but lately when he gets mad he insults me. I believe we’re all human and we can say things we don’t mean out of anger. It’s ok if it happens once or twice but my SO is really offending me
Do any of you maintain any type of relationship with your partner's parents?
I stayed with my girl's parents half of the summer, before we moved in together now.
I feel very awkward around them ever since I moved out and took their daughter with me.
It
@MrsElleCappysnatch Don't lie
When is it acceptable to fart in front of someone you're dating?
Or in the dating/courtship phase..
Are you missing someone you don’t have or may never have? Is someone constantly on your mind who you can’t connect with? Then this thread is for you. Here we can send messages to those we love who don’t love us back or who we can’t be with at this time fo
what the freak is going on with my romantic life.
So i'm pretty much confused as hell.
a little overall picture: I am most certainly not someone who enjoys entering and leaving relationships rapidly, but for some reason the last few encounters with women
I first heard about it in How I Met Your Mother. Is it true, though?
2. Which of the following do you believe is less likely to be monogamous based on your answer to #1?
a. Straight woman
b. Straight man
c. Bisexual woman
d. Bisexual man
e. All of the above have the same potential for monogamy