"Science" with Raphy, Part 1

"ptak appreciates old racecars" (racecarptak) 02/07/2014 at 22:31 • Filed to: science

1

19

Heterosexuality and homosexuality might not exist.

Theory: we're all just varying degrees of bisexual. "Heterosexual" people favor people of the opposite sex 95% of the time, and "homosexual" people favor people of the same sex 95% of the time. Bisexuals (like me) favor, say, "ideally", 50% males and 50% females.

Think of it this way: a "heterosexual" guy or a girl walks down the street, and sees an attractive person of the same sex. They look at that person and 98% of their thoughts directed towards them regard them as just another person (ignoring variations in culture, jealousy, a simple neutral acknowledging that that is an attractive person, etc.). But the remaining 2% says, cue lip bite, "DAT MUTHAFUKKIN' ASS".

This is just a theory of mine, but I can't see why it couldn't be true.

Thoughts?

JayZAyEighty thinks C4+3=C7 > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:33

2

This is a scientific theory that is pretty well proven! You are almost definitely correct in your thinking (well, if you believe in that crazy science stuff and that whole thing about those facts).

Dusty Ventures > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:34

4

Sounds like a variation of the Kinsey Scale

Brian Silvestro > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:34

2

That makes some sense. I don't see why people flip out over this stuff. It shouldn't even be an issue. Let people marry who they want.

ptak appreciates old racecars > Dusty Ventures 02/07/2014 at 22:36

0

Interesting... thanks for sharing.

ptak appreciates old racecars > Brian Silvestro 02/07/2014 at 22:36

0

I wasn't addressing marriage issues (though I am all for that), it's just a simple theory of mine.

Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire > Dusty Ventures 02/07/2014 at 22:37

0

I tried to watch Kinsey , but I had to turn it off when the other scientist started talking about little boys.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:38

1

It's basically true enough. In the words of Ron White - We're all gay, it's just to what extent that defines your status as straight or gay.

Brian Silvestro > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:38

0

Oh, well your theory makes all the sense.

JustWaitingForAMate > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:43

4

I'm totally buysexual. Whenever I want sex, I have to buy it.

Tyler's SVT Focus Hates Him > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles 02/07/2014 at 22:44

1

"Nah, man, I like big hard throbbin' co-

...

I did not know that about myself!"

Velocity- Peuguette Connoisseur > Brian Silvestro 02/07/2014 at 22:48

1

Yes

Velocity- Peuguette Connoisseur > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:48

0

Yes

Jagvar > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/07/2014 at 22:56

1

We happen to live at a time in history when attaching labels to our sexualities is a big thing. But this hasn't always been the case. Not by a long shot.

Author Charles Panati writes, "The truth, no matter how hard it may be for us to grasp today, is that people in the past did not define themselves by their sexuality as we have a strong tendency to do. People didn't think of themselves in these terms before the advent of psychology and sexology in the last century. A person's beauty justified attraction to that person; the person's sex was secondary."

I keep an open mind when it comes to love and attraction, and wouldn't place myself 100% on either side.

Jagvar > Arch Duke Maxyenko, Shit Talk Extraordinaire 02/07/2014 at 23:01

1

Yeah, Kinsey conducted a lot of valuable and insightful research, but other studies of his definitely crossed lines into dark and unethical territory. It's the main reason his work remains so controversial.

Jagvar > JustWaitingForAMate 02/07/2014 at 23:03

2

I'm a trysexual. I'll try anything.

Except furries.

ptak appreciates old racecars > Jagvar 02/07/2014 at 23:59

0

Interesting. I suppose that's also why people aren't poetic anymore about their family because HA GAY BRO. You know, brothers complimenting their sisters' beauty, that 19th-century stuff.

Although if I may dispute something: you say you are open-minded on love and attraction. Do you discriminate against cousins marrying in the South, like most people? Would you support a brother marrying a brother, or a daughter a mother? (I'm neutral on this for the sake of not arguing, I just believe that in the far future incest and other taboo sexualities will evolve into okay-ness).

NeedForSwede > Jagvar 02/08/2014 at 00:13

0

Same thing, or so I've been told, with race. People really didn't think about black or white or whatever until a few centuries ago.

Jagvar > ptak appreciates old racecars 02/08/2014 at 00:15

1

That one's still a bridge too far for me. There are people whom we love as family, and people we love as lovers/partners. When you start mixing those feelings together, you really start to muddy the waters. I think when you start to blur the line between sex and family, you can potentially create a lot of tension and lose that familial connection permanently.

ptak appreciates old racecars > Jagvar 02/08/2014 at 00:25

0

Okay, and that's a respectable point of view, but you can't still think that and keep an open mind about love and attraction, right? Unless you mean there are exceptions. It's worth remembering that homosexuality is, technically, unusual as well (not unnatural, but unusual).