Apparently I'm Not The Only One Who Isn't Aging Well

[LivingnLA]

Kinsey's data is old, but who else has collected as much similar data?

 

I wasn't disparaging his data. As I said, he's historically important and foundational for our current understanding. But, we also need to be aware of the limitations of Kinsey's work and his Scale. It's important to understand the cultural context of his work and how it's limited. As you say, there's an ongoing debate about just how "fundamental" Sexual Orientation is to a person's biology, self conception, etc. As some research suggests, upwards of half of male homosexuals may actually be genetically driven while the other half may "only" have genetic predispositions that are reinforced by their life experiences.

 

For me, it all becomes "so what?" I'm more interested in how people live, identify, and change over time. I'm not overly troubled by the idea of some essential Sexual Orientation. I mean, sure, we can measure people's physiological responses to various stimuli--like Masters & Johnson--but do they really matter if a person doesn't consciously acknowledge such micro-responses? Or even actively rejects them because of some cultural beliefs and experiences?

[+ Gar1eth]

 

By the way, say what you wrote to someone who identifies as a bisexual and those are fighting words. The desire doesn't go away if it's never acted on. Being misidentified or assumed to be straight is the bane of bisexuals. It's why we feel like misfits at best in the LGBTQ world and why so many of us use the term queer instead.

 

For some. And I'll apologize to them. The problem is somewhat semantics. When you say bisexual you seem to be talking about every single experience that a person might enjoy, my idea is more of a combination of that, and as you say behavior. In my mind just because someone is able to perform the mechanical actions of sex with a same sex person-or to go at it from the 'opposite end' an ostensibly gay person has sex with the opposite gender-once or twice, and enjoy it, but never plans to repeat doesn't mean they are really bisexual.

 

While I can't ever remember getting an erection at the sight/thought of the female body (I'm not trying to be offensive here), let's suppose someone gave me a shot of Trimix to make me hard. So I'm hard, and I decide to find out what I've been missing. I find a woman who is willing. We have sex. It feels good and I enjoy it. But I have no plans to repeat. Does the fact that I enjoyed it, make me a bisexual? How would I in this case differ from a straight guy who needs Trimix to perform?

 

Gman

[LivingnLA]

@Gar1eth, I believe this discussion has become confused. I don't want to put words in @quoththeraven's mouth, so I'll just say, return to my point about the Kinsey Scale being about a subject's reported experiences and responses at a given time.

 

So, a 0 is someone who is reporting no same-sex contact nor exhibiting any same-sex response during the Kinsey interviews.

 

https://kinseyinstitute.org/research/publications/kinsey-scale.php

 

It's incorrect to assume the Kinsey Scale reveals a person's fundamental Sexual Orientation. The Scale is only a numerical representation of the subject's reported sexual history/interests/reactions/etc.

 

To use your example, a gay man who has sex with women and enjoys it isn't magically bisexual, though it's possible he is and just prefers to focus on men. All the Kinsey Scale would say about this gay man is that he is not a 6 on the Scale. He'd be a 4 or probably 5 because his reported life experiences are not exclusively homosexual.

 

Your Trimix example only reinforces my point. The Kinsey Scale doesn't care. It's a numerical representation of a person's reported sexual history/interests/etc. Now, if you want, we could pull a Masters&Johnson and hook you up to some fun devices to measure your micro physiological responses to determine if you respond at all to human females. While the probability is pretty high that your body would respond in ways that suggest biologic bisexuality, what does that matter? Shouldn't our conscious choice on how we live count for something? If you've chosen to live as a male homosexual and seem to put significant stock in that self-conception, shouldn't that be what matters?

[+ quoththeraven]

For some. And I'll apologize to them. The problem is somewhat semantics. When you say bisexual you seem to be talking about every single experience that a person might enjoy, my idea is more of a combination of that, and as you say behavior. In my mind just because someone is able to perform the mechanical actions of sex with a same sex person-or to go at it from the 'opposite end' an ostensibly gay person has sex with the opposite gender-once or twice, and enjoy it, but never plans to repeat doesn't mean they are really bisexual.

 

While I can't ever remember getting an erection at the sight/thought of the female body (I'm not trying to be offensive here), let's suppose someone gave me a shot of Trimix to make me hard. So I'm hard, and I decide to find out what I've been missing. I find a woman who is willing. We have sex. It feels good and I enjoy it. But I have no plans to repeat. Does the fact that I enjoyed it, make me a bisexual? How would I in this case differ from a straight guy who needs Trimix to perform?

 

Gman

No one here is calling you bisexual or thinks of you as one. You don't identify as one, and we respect that. So that's a straw man argument.

 

But if someone else considers themselves bisexual based on attraction, even though they've never acted on that, it's okay for you to say they're not really bisexual? I know how I and other female bisexuals I know from social media who have never engaged in sexual activity with women would respond. It would likely involve swear words.

 

Other people can't stop you from conceptualizing sexuality the way you do, but we don't all have the same take on sexuality. It's pretty important to respect other people's non-frivolous conceptualizations of what sexual orientation means and their own personal identification, even if you feel their personal ID is objectively wrong, unless you're their therapist or an extremely close friend or relative who is doing it for reasons other than simply changing how they identify.

[+ purplekow]

Yup. Anyone wanna hit that?

I always enjoy a Napoleon but I do not think I would crave Napoleon himself

[+ quoththeraven]

@Gar1eth, I believe this discussion has become confused. I don't want to put words in @quoththeraven's mouth, so I'll just say, return to my point about the Kinsey Scale being about a subject's reported experiences and responses at a given time.

 

So, a 0 is someone who is reporting no same-sex contact nor exhibiting any same-sex response during the Kinsey interviews.

 

https://kinseyinstitute.org/research/publications/kinsey-scale.php

 

It's incorrect to assume the Kinsey Scale reveals a person's fundamental Sexual Orientation. The Scale is only a numerical representation of the subject's reported sexual history/interests/reactions/etc.

 

To use your example, a gay man who has sex with women and enjoys it isn't magically bisexual, though it's possible he is and just prefers to focus on men. All the Kinsey Scale would say about this gay man is that he is not a 6 on the Scale. He'd be a 4 or probably 5 because his reported life experiences are not exclusively homosexual.

 

Your Trimix example only reinforces my point. The Kinsey Scale doesn't care. It's a numerical representation of a person's reported sexual history/interests/etc. Now, if you want, we could pull a Masters&Johnson and hook you up to some fun devices to measure your micro physiological responses to determine if you respond at all to human females. While the probability is pretty high that your body would respond in ways that suggest biologic bisexuality, what does that matter? Shouldn't our conscious choice on how we live count for something? If you've chosen to live as a male homosexual and seem to put significant stock in that self-conception, shouldn't that be what matters?

Good point; there's a scale of bisexuality (I forget whose) that factors attraction in whether there's ever been actual same-sex acts, and I use the Kinsey scale similarly, which I see is not how Kinsey used it. I've gotten off to or been aroused by porn involving cis women only, cis men only, cis men and women, a trans woman and a cis man, and a trans man and a cis man.

 

Other than the involvement of trans individuals, which hasn't been part of such studies, this appears fairly typical of American/Canadian cis women who don't ID as lesbians. Physical arousal occurs when we view sexual activity even though we may not be aware of our arousal. The exact configuration of the individuals involved doesn't matter that much. Even bonobo porn works, although not as well; video of naked individuals doing non-sexual things (a woman doing yoga, a man jogging) doesn't.

 

Too lazy to look up reports about the study but it was conducted by Canadian scientist Meredith Chivers.

[+ purplekow]

How did Tom keep looking so good? I'd love to know his secret and it better not be Scientology.

My guess, he uses a secret facial cream right from the tap.

[LivingnLA]

there's a scale of bisexuality (I forget whose)

 

I assume you're talking about the Klein Grid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein_Sexual_Orientation_Grid

 

Transsexuality introduces a whole other set of factors, but I generally agree with the thinking that it's discrete from what we're discussing. It's entirely possible to be a "Straight" male human who's gender expression is feminine and upon deeper examination reveals a "woman trapped in a man's body" who after transitioning would now be seen by much of the public as a lesbian. Though, frequently, MTF (Male to Female) trans people often remain "straight" and desire relations with "straight" males.

 

Yes, Chivers work is certainly relevant to this discussion. Here's one of her papers, with Seto & Blanchard and a fun quote from the abstract with emphasis added by me.

 

http://indiana.edu/~sexlab/files/pubs/Chivers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf

 

The genital responses of both sexes were weakest to nude exercise and strongest to intercourse. As predicted, however,

actor gender was more important for men than for women, and the level of sexual activity was more important for women than for men.

Consistent with this result, women responded genitally to bonobo copulation, whereas men did not. An

unexpected result was that homosexual women responded more to nude female targets exercising and masturbating than to nude male targets, whereas heterosexual women responded about the same to both sexes at each activity level.

 

The research into lesbianism and female sexuality isn't as robust as the work done on male sexuality. Yes, sexism and the patriarchy are alive and well. But, researchers like Chivers are working hard to change that and we're learning that lesbianism is quite different than male homosexuality biologically. It's a great time to be alive.

 

For those who are interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_arousal

[+ FreshFluff]

It seems ridiculous to me to say that someone who has had one or two gay experiences enjoyed them but never really has any interest in pursuing another one is bisexual. Yes if you consider every single permutation that might possibly occur in his/her sex life, but for all practical purposes that person is straight. But yes if you include such people then obviously there will be more bisexuals than strictly gays, straights, or asexuals

 

Gman

 

I've noticed that society applies this rule to women and the inverse of the rule to men. A woman who has a few F2F experiences was just drunk or maybe having a threesome to impress a man. But once a man have a few M2M experiences, he's assumed to be bi or even gay . If he claims he's not interested in further M2M encounters, then he's in denial.

 

Maybe there's a good biological reason for the double standard, i.e. that women's preferences are more situational than men's. But there it is.

[+ Gar1eth]

It's such a difficult subject. In one way I think we are all talking about the old calculus problem of if we stand at a doorway and start walking towards the opposite wall. If each step we take is half of the one before-technically we will never reach the wall but we will reach it for all practical purposes.

 

On one hand regarding our discussions here, there are obviously technical/scientific definitions of bisexuality. If there weren't a definition or a supposition at the very least to begin with, it could never be studied. But I am not talking about a scientific definition of bisexuality. I maintain that it's possible for a male or female-defined as straight-to get enjoyment from a same sex encounter a few times in their life without truly being a bisexual. I also maintain that the same is true for males or females who-defined as gay-could equally enjoy an experience a few times with an opposite sex partner without truly being bisexual.

 

Now if you are saying that the minutest same sex attraction for an ostensibly straight person means they are bisexual and the minutest opposite sex attraction for an ostensibly gay person means they are bisexual-well I'll agree that scientifically they are bisexual. But I'll also say for all intents and purposes in the real world, they aren't.

 

I'm reminded of a scene from the movie Scenes of the Class Struggle in Beverly Hills.

 

Robert Beltran loses a bet to Ray Sharkey and has to have sex with him. IIRC it's implied that Robert tops Ray. Afterwards someone asks Robert what it was like or whether he enjoyed it. My recollection is that Robert replies that it was ok-it was after all a hole.

 

So by Kinsey, Robert's character does fit on the scale of being bisexual. But is he really a bisexual? I don't think so.

 

Gman

[LivingnLA]

I maintain that it's possible for a male or female-defined as straight-to get enjoyment from a same sex encounter a few times in their life without truly being a bisexual. I also maintain that the same is true for males or females who-defined as gay-could equally enjoy an experience a few times with an opposite sex partner without truly being bisexual.

 

Gman, I know we've jumped all over this very complex topic, but I believe we've already discussed this particular point. Granted, we probably have decades to go before it's definitive and a Theory, but what you describe is not only possible, it appears to be completely normal for a human being who identifies as heterosexual to be able to engage in homosexual activity and enjoy it without changing their Sexual Orientation. Sexual Behavior usually aligns with Sexual Orientation, but not always and not always perfectly. Now, if that heterosexually Oriented person is also exclusively heterosexual in their Sexual Behavior as well, then they will not only be unable to perform in same-sex activity but they might be psychologically or even physiologically repulsed by it.

 

I encourage you to research Dyson & Satterly and their OBI model. It describes human sexuality as having 3 dimensions: Orientation, Behavior, and Identity. This type of thinking is where research into human sexuality is going. We're decades past the exclusionary binary of heterosexual or homosexual.

 

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/19/fluid_sexuality_partner/

https://www.glamour.com/story/sexual-orientation-sexual-behavior

https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/ypa7vk/straight-people-dont-exist-new-research-says

 

This PDF is the report for one of the biggest studies of Sexual Behavior, Sexual Attraction, and Sexual Identity in the USA done in the past couple decades. "Sexual attraction and identity correlates closely but not completely with reports of sexual behavior. Sexual behaviors, attraction, and identity vary by age, marital or cohabiting status, education, and race and Hispanic origin."

 

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf

[LivingnLA]

Here's a pretty good overview article for the OBI model by Dyson & Satterly.

 

https://queeringyourlens.wordpress.com/tag/obi-model/

[+ quoththeraven]

I assume you're talking about the Klein Grid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klein_Sexual_Orientation_Grid

 

Transsexuality introduces a whole other set of factors, but I generally agree with the thinking that it's discrete from what we're discussing. It's entirely possible to be a "Straight" male human who's gender expression is feminine and upon deeper examination reveals a "woman trapped in a man's body" who after transitioning would now be seen by much of the public as a lesbian. Though, frequently, MTF (Male to Female) trans people often remain "straight" and desire relations with "straight" males.

 

Yes, Chivers work is certainly relevant to this discussion. Here's one of her papers, with Seto & Blanchard and a fun quote from the abstract with emphasis added by me.

 

http://indiana.edu/~sexlab/files/pubs/Chivers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf

 

The genital responses of both sexes were weakest to nude exercise and strongest to intercourse. As predicted, however,

actor gender was more important for men than for women, and the level of sexual activity was more important for women than for men.

Consistent with this result, women responded genitally to bonobo copulation, whereas men did not. An

unexpected result was that homosexual women responded more to nude female targets exercising and masturbating than to nude male targets, whereas heterosexual women responded about the same to both sexes at each activity level.

 

The research into lesbianism and female sexuality isn't as robust as the work done on male sexuality. Yes, sexism and the patriarchy are alive and well. But, researchers like Chivers are working hard to change that and we're learning that lesbianism is much different than male homosexuality biologically. It's a great time to be alive.

 

For those who are interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_arousal

Yes, it is the Klein grid. And I also agree that gender identity operates independent of orientation, generally involving whomever you were already attracted to. (I use gender identity instead of trans identity because nonbinary (NB or enby) identity also exists.)

 

Thanks for the links.

[LivingnLA]

Thanks for the links.

 

You're welcome!

[+ quoththeraven]

On one hand regarding our discussions here, there are obviously technical/scientific definitions of bisexuality. If there weren't a definition or a supposition at the very least to begin with, it could never be studied. But I am not talking about a scientific definition of bisexuality. I maintain that it's possible for a male or female-defined as straight-to get enjoyment from a same sex encounter a few times in their life without truly being a bisexual. I also maintain that the same is true for males or females who-defined as gay-could equally enjoy an experience a few times with an opposite sex partner without truly being bisexual.

 

Now if you are saying that the minutest same sex attraction for an ostensibly straight person means they are bisexual and the minutest opposite sex attraction for an ostensibly gay person means they are bisexual-well I'll agree that scientifically they are bisexual. But I'll also say for all intents and purposes in the real world, they aren't.

I'd add to what @LivingnLA says that the issue is how the person IDs. I don't have a problem with someone who has had a few same-sex encounters IDing as straight, although there are times around here when it appears to be thought that enjoying same-sex encounters=gayness or at least bisexuality and someone like that who IDs as straight is in denial.

 

But if that person IDs as bisexual, even if they never again act on same-sex attraction, then in my book they're bisexual.

 

I am not meaning to use the terms as a definite scientific categorization. I don't think orientation or even preference can be reduced to scientific, replicable terms. (Only behavior, and behavior that is accurately self-reported, stands up to that test.) It's personal.

As you use the term "real" and "real world," you are actually talking about what you, @Gar1eth, consider meaningful or real. You generally shouldn't make that assumption for other people even if you disagree and even if they objectively appear to have misclassified themselves. A better example than yours would be someone who engages in frequent or regular same-sex sexual activity on the DL who IDs as straight (for purposes of sexual activity; they may only be interested in opposite-sex romantic or long-term relationships) rather than bisexual.

[+ Gar1eth]

As you use the term "real" and "real world," you are actually talking about what you, @Gar1eth, consider meaningful or real. You generally shouldn't make that assumption for other people even if you disagree and even if they objectively appear to have misclassified themselves. A better example than yours would be someone who engages in frequent or regular same-sex sexual activity on the DL who IDs as straight (for purposes of sexual activity; they may only be interested in opposite-sex romantic or long-term relationships) rather than bisexual.

 

But c'mon. Isn't this person you describe here either gay and in some form of denial or bisexual and not willing to call himself bisexual?

 

Gman

[+ quoththeraven]

But c'mon. Isn't this person you describe here either gay and in some form of denial or bisexual and not willing to call himself bisexual?

 

Gman

Which one? The better example?

 

I would agree with you, but it's not my life or my business to tell him he's wrong unless I'm his therapist or a close friend or relative.

 

Why does it matter to you anyway? People think they're ugly when they're not, that they're smarter than they really are, or that their clothing makes them look better than it actually does. Why is it vital to puncture this sort of delusion as opposed to others?

[JayCeeKy]

Not that I'm a size queen, but Napoleon would not be my first choice as an escort:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/napoleon-s-penis-size-confirmed-channel-4-documentary-calls-the-artifact-very-small-9235101.html

[+ FreshFluff]

Which one? The better example?

 

I would agree with you, but it's not my life or my business to tell him he's wrong unless I'm his therapist or a close friend or relative.

 

Why does it matter to you anyway? People think they're ugly when they're not, that they're smarter than they really are, or that their clothing makes them look better than it actually does. Why is it vital to puncture this sort of delusion as opposed to others?

 

Gman didn't say you should tell him. He implied that most people would say this guy is bi.

[+ quoththeraven]

Gman didn't say you should tell him. He implied that most people would say this guy is bi.

My point still stands. Why is judging his sexuality so important to others?

 

I would agree that he's fooling himself and that bisexual is a more accurate label, but what is this conclusion other than an intellectual exercise unless I'm going to interfere in his sex life by warning women away from him or setting him up with men? That seems pretty intrusive.

[jjkrkwood]

I think one of life's Biggest problems is that people often are concerned with other peoples business, how they identify and how they live their lives... Heads up, its really NONE of YOUR business.... If you want to volunteer to help others in need, FINE, but the only people now that should be concerned about others is the GOP, and they dont seem to give a fuck what we need, but simply want to control our lives and seemingly make it harder... My motto: if it aint happening in MY bed, I aint worried about it. Let people label themselves however they want, and fuck & suck Whomever they choose to.

[samhexum]

He's gone from a full head of hair to male pattern baldness and has wrinkle. Now I'm not saying that being bald makes everyone ugly. But it can definitely make you look older. Although if you are saying in comparison to most of the others, then I guess I could agree with that.

 

http://www.movpins.com/big/MV5BMjExMzU2NDAyOF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMTU0MDM2OQ/still-of-anthony-edwards-in-top-gun-(1986)-large-picture.jpg

 

 

 

 

"ER" star Anthony Edwards claims he was molested by Hollywood producer Gary Goddard when he was just a child.

 

The actor, 55, came forward with these allegations in an essay published Friday to Medium, in which he says he was 12 years old when he first met Goddard, who he began to look at as a father figure.

 

"He taught me about the value of acting, respect for friendship, and the importance of studying," Edwards wrote. "Pedophiles prey on the weak."

 

He says his group of friends all looked up to Goddard, and claims he wasn't the only one abused by the filmmaker.

 

"I was molested by Goddard, my best friend was raped by him — and this went on for years," Edwards wrote. "The group of us, the gang, stayed quiet."

 

"Why? One of the most tragic effects of sexual abuse in children is that the victims often feel deeply responsible — as if it is somehow their fault," he said. "With their sick form of control, abusers exploit a child's natural desire to bond."

 

Edwards even denied Goddard's alleged actions to his mother when he was 14, he said, through "tears of complete panic."

 

Edwards says he crossed paths with Goddard 22 years ago at an airport, where he confronted the producer about his abuse. Goddard told him he had gotten help and expressed his remorse, Edwards claims.

 

An attorney for Goddard, 63, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The actor's essay comes three years after Goddard, Bryan Singer and a pair of other film executives were hit by a sexual abuse lawsuit filed by Michael Egan. The suit was ultimately dropped.

 

Goddard directed the 1987 superhero movie "Masters of the Universe," which starred Dolph Lundgren as He-Man, and created the TV series "Captain Power" and "Mega Babies," in addition to producing multiple plays over the years.

 

Edwards is known for portraying Dr. Mark Greene on the medical drama "ER" and as Goose in the 1986 action movie "Top Gun." a dying American football player opposite Timothy Dalton in the Barry Gibb-produced "Hawks."

[+ Avalon]

Terence Stamp has not aged well. It "Billy Budd" he was so pretty but later I would not recognized him.

 

http://www.terencestamp.co.uk/img/db/large/terence-stamp-19.png

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BAnWriKCIAAgbnP.jpg

[caliguy]

http://www.movpins.com/big/MV5BMjExMzU2NDAyOF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMTU0MDM2OQ/still-of-anthony-edwards-in-top-gun-(1986)-large-picture.jpg

 

 

 

 

"ER" star Anthony Edwards claims he was molested by Hollywood producer Gary Goddard when he was just a child.

 

The actor, 55, came forward with these allegations in an essay published Friday to Medium, in which he says he was 12 years old when he first met Goddard, who he began to look at as a father figure.

 

"He taught me about the value of acting, respect for friendship, and the importance of studying," Edwards wrote. "Pedophiles prey on the weak."

 

He says his group of friends all looked up to Goddard, and claims he wasn't the only one abused by the filmmaker.

 

"I was molested by Goddard, my best friend was raped by him — and this went on for years," Edwards wrote. "The group of us, the gang, stayed quiet."

 

"Why? One of the most tragic effects of sexual abuse in children is that the victims often feel deeply responsible — as if it is somehow their fault," he said. "With their sick form of control, abusers exploit a child's natural desire to bond."

 

Edwards even denied Goddard's alleged actions to his mother when he was 14, he said, through "tears of complete panic."

 

Edwards says he crossed paths with Goddard 22 years ago at an airport, where he confronted the producer about his abuse. Goddard told him he had gotten help and expressed his remorse, Edwards claims.

 

An attorney for Goddard, 63, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The actor's essay comes three years after Goddard, Bryan Singer and a pair of other film executives were hit by a sexual abuse lawsuit filed by Michael Egan. The suit was ultimately dropped.

 

Goddard directed the 1987 superhero movie "Masters of the Universe," which starred Dolph Lundgren as He-Man, and created the TV series "Captain Power" and "Mega Babies," in addition to producing multiple plays over the years.

 

Edwards is known for portraying Dr. Mark Greene on the medical drama "ER" and as Goose in the 1986 action movie "Top Gun." a dying American football player opposite Timothy Dalton in the Barry Gibb-produced "Hawks."

It's funny that it's given credibility to Egan who could have used the situation for his own case against Singer. We all know Singer is just as guilty.

 

Goddard is as good as done though. There's really nothing he can say at this point.

[caliguy]

Terence Stamp has not aged well. It "Billy Budd" he was so pretty but later I would not recognized him.

 

http://www.terencestamp.co.uk/img/db/large/terence-stamp-19.png

 

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BAnWriKCIAAgbnP.jpg

I loved him in PQD.