Dark Crystal Sequel

[Tyler]

henson.com/company/20060201.html

[Thanin]

For a puppet, she used to be doable.

habidabad.com/images/queenkira.jpg

[Tyler]

Kira was one of the first women I was ever attracted to in "that way". You know, the ones that kick-start your puberty?
Now if only she were actually a woman. Now I find myself attracted to women Jim Henson has had his hand inside. How screwed up is that?

[jtmx1]

Man, that is a cool question that I don't remember ever asking anyone in the group: Who first did it for you, who was the first person that really revealed your sexual orientation to you?

[Thanin]

This is an interesting question because it suggests that there's one person, who by merely existing and being in your visual perception can define one of the most important aspects of a person. Moreover, since this outside source can be so significant, what if someone has two 'firsts'? One of the opposite sex and one of the same sex? Does any level of attraction to the same sex qualify as significant enough as a 'first'? If not, what does such an attraction mean (especially if the outside influence is really just a reflection of what’s inherent and internal)? Can sexuality be so easily and cleanly defined, or is gay and straight a false dichotomy? Is bi-sexuality the saving grey area answer 'straight' people need, or is it a cover for where our sexuality really lies?

[Jeff]

Hmm. Great questions! I don't know all the answers, but I did want to make a clarification of my original thought: I am not suggesting that a person can define your orientation. Rather, I was suggesting that I was made aware of my orientation by other people.

For me there were about three girls that did it: Patricia Allen, Juanita Bigheart, and Meggan Strahm. Movie people were always too pretty, and I've never actually been excited by them or models. I like attractive girls whom I see regularly. It is strange but in almost all cases I have to be able to see a person more than once to be attracted to them. Perhaps this means that there is an availability algorithm in my attractiveness calculation. I don't know.

I can also say that I am able to clearly and easily distinguish between the kinds of attractions I feel toward women and those I feel toward men. My heart has never been in my throat when I've spoken to a man in any sense other than one of nervousness. When I spoke with Jerry Foder, Jaegwan Kim, and Bruce Wilshire (three famous philosophers I've met), I was definitely nervous enough to make it hard for me to speak, but it wasn't because I was attracted to them in a nonprofessional sense.

With attractive women the matter is otherwise. I feel connected to the women I am really attracted to and I've found lots of reasons to believe that I do have lots in common with those of them that I've spoken to. I don't know whether that is a self-fulfilling prophecy, though I am strongly suspicious of a priori/soul-mate ideas. I have found that many of the women that I'm really attracted to are the kinds of women who might have feelings for me, too--which is very fortunate.

So...what I'm saying is that this attractiveness/orientation stuff is a feature of myself that I don't completely know, one which I am never likely to know or understand very well. I investigate it like any other strange feature of the world. Doing so, I find that my feelings are not stirred by men--in fact, I can't think of a single time that they ever have been. But I remember kissing my pillow and dreaming about true love with the 6th grade incarnations of Patricia, Juanita, and Meggan. I would count the words they said to me. I would write songs about them. Bad poetry. Etc...

I readily admit that someone might have two firsts. I would go much further and say that I might. It hasn't happened yet, but being honest with oneself means admitting that one simply doesn't know everything there is to know about oneself.

My strong suspicion is that people generally get this type of feeling from one sex and not the other. In fact, there was a scientific study released last week that said that most bisexuals are confused monosexuals of one type or another... which is sad, because it means that forever most of us prefer to miss half the fun.

Jeff

PS I’ll see if I can find that study.

[Thanin]

admin said:

I am not suggesting that a person can define your orientation. Rather, I was suggesting that I was made aware of my orientation by other people.

I know, which is why I said "especially if the outside influence is really just a reflection of what’s inherent and internal".

By the way, I think calling bi-sexuals 'confused' is insulting. I know you're just repeating what the study suggests, but these kinds of studies are fluff.

[Jeff]

Quite right, David, that was a word from the write up about the study. I wish I could find it. I am still looking.

Still looking, but this is interesting: www.sexscience.org/

I can't find the study that was done last week, but it was done to test the controversial study described here:

www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/health/05sex.html?ex=1141189200&en=f18bccadae99c34c&ei=5070

www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=29630

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/30/health/webmd/main805081_page4.shtml

Rebuttals abound, of course. Here is a site that houses some:

ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/Bailey/Bisexuality/Bisexuality-NYT%207-05-05.html

[jtmx1]

Here is the book by J. Michael Bailey, the psych professor from Northwestern whose team runs the study: fermat.nap.edu/books/0309084180/html/ The Book has a cool title, Tha Man who would be Queen, and it's third section (Women who once were Boys) is the most controversial one.

[Tyler]

Daphne from Scooby doo.
The aforementioned Kira.
The girl from that space-cartoon where everyone was dressed as birds and had a big spaceship that became a phoenix to kill stuff.
Then, later on, a cover of Heavy Metal
www.cs.virginia.edu/~dbi9m/fantasy/dreamweavers/royo/women/01/pWomen01.jpg