Bi the way...

Being a bisexual male can be an interesting experience at times, certainly there are days when I feel a lot more 'bi' than usual. Why this should be the case, I'm not sure, but nonetheless it does give me the opportunity (excuse) to blog about bisexuality and the joys it brings.

For one thing, I've often seen being Bi as a conciousness expanding experience. By that I mean it allows me to experience and understand the world in a way other people are not able. Many people have the wrong idea about sexuality - they see it as a case of black or white, gay or straight, one or the other; with each category being mutually exclusive. Bisexuality has helped me to understand that there is so much more to it than that. Sexuality to me is a broad spectrum, with 'gay' and 'straight' as end members. For comparative purposes we can make 'gay'=100 and 'straight'=0. The point I am getting at is that no individual is entirely one or the other. While I agree a lot of people are 'straight', as they would understand it, by no means does that signify them being at zero on our spectrum. Here lies the falacy with our old fashioned 'black vs white' system of classification - it just doesn't work.

I'd hazard a guess that those who call themselves 'straight' may lie anywhere between, say 0 and 5 on the scale. This would mean that they aren't absolute heterosexuals, but that this side of their sexuality is so dominant that they can happily live their entire lives without noticeing the other sides. The opposite would be true of homosexuals. Bisexuality to me, would be the area between 25 and 75, with the 'not quite homo/hetero' areas labelled bicurious.

All this is of course a personal theory of mine. In fact, it is not even a theory since there is not a scrap of evidence to back it up. I'm going on personal experience alone here; that and the experiences of close friends. If anything, this system at least allows me to work out where I lie on the system - usually around 30-40 - though in the past I've probably crossed the 50 mark back and forth a number of times.

And what use is all this? Well, it at least allows me to dismiss the most hurtful criticisms of bisexuality - the 'choice' argument. I am utterly sick of reiterating and attacking it, but it basically runs along the lines that there is no such thing as bisexuality and that those who self-define as bisexual are really just 'greedy' or 'can't make up their mind'. Firstly, sexuality is never a matter of choice - anyone who can put logic and reason before personal bigotry can see that. Secondly, why should bisexuals have to choose - ignoring part of their nature and part of who they are - just to fit within other people's narrow categories.

I don't believe that there is anything wrong with bisexuality, anymore than there is anything wrong with being fond of both tea and coffee. If anything, I personally feel that bisexuality is the future. Admittedly it wouldn't be for the people at the ends of my spectrum, but that is no big deal. For everyone else, a little bit of open mindedness and experimentation wouldn't hurt would it? It would be fair to say that it is perhaps a little progressive for me to suggest we all start 'shagging anyone' (to quote a friend), but you wouldn't rule out a perfectly good potential partner on the basis of their race or hair colour would you? Is it really any more logical to rule them out for being the 'wrong' gender?

And finally, to quote John Barrowman (as Captain Jack Harkness in Torchwood)

"You humans with your quaint little categories"

Barrowman is, of course, homosexual. But he does play a bisexual (or even pansexual) character, and has I admit been something of an influence for me.

That's all for now, but I'm likely to have more thoughts on the subject soon enough (when I have a 'bi day' as I am known to do). Incidently, the title for this post comes from the name of another blog I've recently started reading. Can't remember how I found it, but I'm fond nonetheless.

'Ciderite'

A Defeat for Religious Liberty...

.... by which I mean our collective freedom from religion, and in particular the Dark Age bigots who arrogantly believe they have a right to impose their backwards 'values' upon the rest of us.

The case I am referring to is that of Lillian Ladele, newest addition to my long list of religious gits. Ladele is a civil registrar of weddings who has refused to conduct civil partnerships between same-sex couples, because it is 'against her religion' (details can be found here).

Much has already been written of this outrage, the blogosphere being filled with almost unanimous condemnation of Ladele - and rightly so. But looking into her reasoning in full, it does set quite a worrying precedent, not least from a legal perspective. After all, what is religious belief other than a set of 'values' or ideas which the believer holds to be true regardless of any evidence or opinion to the contrary. In short it is an ideology, and one that doesn't accept dissent at that.

One can only assume that the type of 'religious liberty' Ladele was on about was one wherein everybody is allowed to hold whatever moronic beliefs they like, under the umbrella defence of "but it's my religion!" Under such circumstances one would presumably obey all the laws of the land - unless of course you didn't really fancy one or two of them, in which case try the 'against my religion line'.

Now lets say I have a fundamental and devout belief in not being detained against my will. Presumably this would grant me freedom from arrest and inprisonment. A sort of theologically mandated opt-out if you like. Don't fancy paying any taxes? Blame it on a god/gods - you're really sorry but he/she/they aren't so keen on the true faithful paying for the support of the non-faithful. They don't believe you? Make up some silly rituals and wear a daft hat - that should do it....

Obviously such a scenario is ridiculous, but no more so than the decision made by the employment tribunal which decided Ladele could opt-out of UK law and the responsibilities of her job. A central pillar of good democracy should be that everyone is equal under the rule of law - whether they like those laws or not.

In fact.... especially if they don't like those laws.

You're the one who needs counselling!

Northern Ireland assembly member Iris Robinson has just added herself to my long list of religious tossers by calling for all members of the LGBT community to seek psychiatric help. She believes that homosexuals can be 'turned around' with the help of 'a very lovely psychiatrist ' she happens to know.

Well then. I'll begin by stating the bleeding obvious. Homosexuality is NOT a psychiatric disorder. If you don't agree with that try asking the Royal College of Physicians. If anything, it is Mrs Robinson's blatant bigotry and irrational homophobic hatred that is the disease. Prejudice is the disease of the mind. In the case of Mrs Robinson (and her 'lovely' psychiatrist friend) it probably stems from christian 'principles'. Stone age desert cults are what we, as a society, could do with being cured of - not our innocent fellow humans.

As for turning homosexuals 'back' into heterosexuals, well, utter BS. Firstly, it would suggest that sexuality is a matter of choice. Anyone with half a brain cell would realise that this isn't and could never be the case. When LGBT people across the world are openly persecuted and discriminated against, can anyone really suggest that being gay is a choice anyone would make? It's also obvious that Mrs Robinson feels that being gay must mean you have something wrong with you - that Heterosexuality is 'the norm', and that anything else is somehow 'deviant'.

I mean, really? Why do we still put up with such self-righteous religious bigots like Mrs Robinson. That this woman is in regional government should be scary. The people of Northern Ireland, of all people, must be aware by now that religion and politics don't mix. Trying to 'cure' people of being gay?!? While you're at it, why not have a go at curing those people who happen to prefer tea to coffee! Lets remind those that favour dogs over cats of the error of their ways! How dare anyone have a different sexual orientation to that of Mrs Robinsonk, or to the recommendation of her favourite 'holy book'.

Before i go, i may just book an appointment with that counsellor. Not for me of course.... for Iris. Poor woman is clearly quite deranged.