Talk:Bi-curious

message: people of a single, traditional biological gender
 ->  people belonging to one gender
 
I was more specific because "belonging to a gender" is ambiguous.
Do you mean biological gender or gender identity?
Someone born with ambiguous genitalia, someone who is transgendered,
or who just does not feel like they fit in their biologically male or
female body may consider themselves to be of a non-male, non-female
third/alternative gender.
Attraction to such people is not usually considered a part of being
bi-curious, it it? I was under the impression it almost always entails
people who identify as hetero and who identify as either male or female
only, due to being biologically male or female, becoming interested in
people who identify as that same gender.
 that person's notion or their peers' notions
 -> that person or others notion
I'm pretty sure the former was grammatically correct with the possessive case, although I was unsure whether to use a singular 'notion' on both. I chose to say peers rather than others because it seems more likely that the person who is being labeled bi-curious is seen as defying the boundaries of some people's definition(s) of heterosexuality (or homosexuality) but not their own or certain other people's definition(s) of such.
I felt that just saying "others' notion(s)" would inappropriately include definitions of heterosexuality/homosexuality in which the same-gender interest is not seen as aberrant; there would be nothing to differentiate bi-curiosity in those situations. - mjb 19:59, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. People who keep editing the first half of this article keep trying to make their own definition canon, and it keeps getting worse. The list of "inaccurate usages" is idiotic and sounds like it was written by someone who desperately wants to retain their heterosexual identity while they are coming to terms with their own less-than-hetero desires. They want to stretch the definition of heterosexual to encompass everything short of actively pursuing homosexual intercourse, and they're putting arbitrary boundaries on bi-curious in the process. I'm holding off on editing it because I'd really just ditch the whole first section and put it back like I had it when I de-stubbed this article, the fruit of which is more or less preserved in the second section. I'm surprised all these anonymous contributors haven't gutted it yet. :| mjb 01:39, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Miscellaneous

message: from my point of view its completely possible that hedonists who are straight dont give a rats ass about sexual identity and gender. this article is completely vague, what about oppurtunists who are indifferent but definately find the opposite sex gets them boiling? Like a main course with a less interesting side dish. — Raddicks 07:03, 8 January 2006 MST
:People who are "straight hedonists/opportunists" but actually are romantically and/or sexually interested in people other than members of the opposite sex projecting as the opposite sex? They can call themselves what they want, I guess, but I would perhaps want to call them pansexual (not perceiving any significant difference between sexes/genders), bisexual (open/drawn to two sexes/genders; doesn't matter to what degree IMHO), or bi-curious (interested in exploring bisexual behavior while not calling themselves bisexual). The article is not going to pick a label for them for you; the point is that such labels are ultimately a matter of personal identity and often say as much about the person doing the labeling…— mjb 18:47, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  hedonism 

message: After some recent changes, the intro became a little incoherent as to whether it was discussing three or four categories (homo, hetero, bi, and asexuality).  I'm not sure asexuality is directly related to bi-curiosity, though it's certainly directly related to boundary-drawing problems relating to sexual orientation.  I tweaked the lead to reflect a more indirect relationship, and point readers to fuller coverage of such complexities. -- Beland 04:40, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asexuality 

message: Doesn't the "Q" in "LGBTQ" stand für "Queer" instead for "questioning"?
:It can be either; in fact, sometimes QQ is used to represent both. Aleta 22:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Queer or Questioning

message: I see that thanks to User:Frenchboi023, this article, after enjoying a long run of relative stability, has recently fallen victim to the relatively new fad where rulebook-throwing, Jimmy Wales-quoting editors are hell-bent on the unilateral, aggressive removal, from non-BLP articles, of uncited material that's not even controversial. Rather than expressing doubt about specific points made in the article and using the discussion page to call upon past curators to deal with attribution issues (many of which can be dealt with through more careful phrasing, if not explicit citations), they just delete and delete volumes of material, claiming "uncited" or "no original research" in their edit summaries. 
Editors like this ignore the great deal of work and reasoning that went into building up the content that was there and why certain topics were being addressed, and then fail to accept responsibility for the aftermath: vandals and frequent, poorly written attempts to expand the article to address the points of view that are no longer represented.
Massive pruning of an article without discussion and without acknowledging its history and the concerns of past editors is irresponsible and destructive. If you are going to insist that people play by the rules, fulfill your obligation as well, and use the Talk page to raise concerns and see that they're dealt with in a manner more productive than instant deletion of large portions of content. —mjb 17:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article over-pruning

message: Do we really need the South Park reference? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.57.165.224 (talk) 20:25, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably not... the article is a bit light to be getting out a "Bi-curiosity in Popular Culture" section. I've removed it... Rtucker 21:04, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  South Park? 

message: I removed this;  'It is often used by people who do not want to commit to the label of 'bisexual' because they feel it has negative connotations or they are still unsure.' 
from the start of the article, because not only is it uncited, I don't believe there is anything you could cite to back this up, it's merely an opinion on the motivation of people who choose to self-describe this way, a motivation that wouldn't be apparent or expressed by the very nature of them supposedly trying to pretend that this isn't the motivation, as though they would say 'oh yes, I say I'm bi-curious but I'm really actually bi-sexual, but I like to avoid the negative conotations of that, so I won't say I'm bi-sexual... er... except I just did. Bugger.', the second part of the sentence, ' or they are still unsure ' is redundant within the article.Number36 00:44, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest, I'm as bemused by your example as you presumably are by my edit. I'll accept that the second part is redundant but I don't think everything can be cited - I wasn't passing it off as factual information, just something to clarify/give a rounded view. But I'll accept your edit...I don't think my statement added to the article but it didn't devalue it either...I was just trying to bulk up what is a pretty lean item. Yohan euan o4 01:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed Motivation

message: The reference stated is obviously a lesbian source, but being bi-curious is not a female only thing. Could we also find a reference from a male oriented site?C. Pineda 06:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Reference

message: Below were external links. Please see ELNO. Possibly re include as inline citations?
*The N Society: “Bi-Sexuality: The Myth and the Mayhem”
*Metroactive Features | Bisexual Community: Bi & Bi - Bisexuals have found a new dating scene online. But will this newfound [sic] community lead to a political identity?
*happen, match.com's advice center: Are all straight women bi-curious?
*Laurie Essig, Salon Magazine: “Heteroflexibility”
Cptnono (talk) 11:01, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources

message: I have reverted back to the non italicised version. Applying BRD I will state my reasoning for reverting.
*Italics are only used under specific circumstances. They do not apply here.
Chaosdruid (talk) 19:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Italics 

message: I want to contest this part of the description for Bi-curious because I think it has left out another possibility
"A heterosexual or homosexual who engages in bisexual activity during a three-way/threesome/ménage-à-trois, 3-on-2, or other group sex is known as a vortex bisexual. This is a group to whom the term switch hitter may be accurately applied; other slang terms such as AC/DC, ambisexterous, versatile etc. are reserved to denote a stronger form of bisexuality.[3]"
Saying this is switch hitting makes me think they are saying the heterosexual or homosexual will do there best to be an actual bisexual as they can when in a three-way group etc in order to suit the situation.
my argument is that if a heterosexual or homosexual could be be physically stimulated by some sort of sexual machine and be turned on by the opposite sex in hetero and the same sex for homo thru just their presence but the hetero is impartial to the same sex or a homo is impartial to the opposite sex, if they replaced the machine with a member of the same sex for a hetero and if they replace the machine with a member of the opposite sex for a homo and the homo or hetero has not engaged in attempting to appear bi-sexual in anyway but just assumed their own identity that they are either homo or hetero then how are they hitting a switch.
I am a heterosexual male and don't believe that I am trying to escape any part of my sexuality but I would be very interested to here any ones interpretation or what I have posted particularly if any of it needs to be corrected.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.143.127 (talk) 20:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure where the source -- CoB, 1992 -- that is used to support that line comes from or how reliable it is, but, at this site, we generally need to use WP:Reliable sources to contest a reliably sourced line. Flyer22 (talk) 20:37, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

text: Well, as you can see, whether or not being bi-curious is the same thing as being bisexual has been debated above on this talk page. People define bisexuality differently, as is addressed in the Bisexuality article. And there are enough gay men and lesbian women out there who have stated that they had sex with a heterosexual and that the heterosexual in question most assuredly was bi-curious instead of bisexual. Some people go through a questioning phase, as made clear by the Questioning (sexuality and gender) article, which is a good candidate (the best, in my opinion) to redirect the Bi-curious article to. Many, perhaps most, gay men and lesbian women have gone through the questioning phase and a lot of them would state that, while bi-curious, they were never bisexual. Flyer22 (talk) 03:46, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Nah, because of my research on these topics, I'll just agree to disagree with you on all of that. Flyer22 (talk) 04:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The heterosexuals place in a bisexual vortex  

message: Moving content added in this dif here to talk.
As I noted in my edit note, this is WP:SYN - it weaves together primary sources to make an argument.  We don't do that in Wikipedia.  We read secondary sources that themselves synthesize the literature, and summarize that here.   Per WP:NOT, Wikipedia expresses accepted knowledge, not the synthesis of its editors.   The tone is also chatty and non-encyclopedic  and would need revising if this is something we could use. 
;Female Bi-Curiosity
This phenomenon has usually been synonymous with females experimenting with their sexuality and has been played upon in many media sources (i.e. Sex and the City, Friends), typically being directed towards the male audience.(1)	Lisa, M. "'I'm straight, but I kissed a girl': The trouble with American media representations of female-female sexuality." Feminism & Psychology 15.1) (2005): 104-110. Multiple studies have been conducted actually exploring female sexuality and their sexual fluidity, specifically their “experimental phase”, or bi-curious tendencies, essential asking the question, “why do girls who aren’t lesbians kiss girls?”(1)	Morgan, Elizabeth M., and Elisabeth Morgan Thompson. "Young women's sexual experiences within same-sex friendships: Discovering and defining bisexual and bi-curious identity." Journal of Bisexuality 6.3 (2006): 7-34.
The tendency of identifying as bi-curious was found to happen after at least one sexual encounter for the majority of women in Morgan’s and Thompson’s study. They discovered that exploration is a key factor in identifying as bi-curious, which goes hand in hand with their other study, saying that discovery is a common theme in women who have identified as bi-curious.(1)	Morgan, Elizabeth M., and Elisabeth Morgan Thompson. "Young women's sexual experiences within same-sex friendships: Discovering and defining bisexual and bi-curious identity." Journal of Bisexuality 6.3 (2006): 7-34.(1)	Thompson, Elisabeth Morgan, and Elizabeth M. Morgan. "" Mostly straight" young women: variations in sexual behavior and identity development."Developmental psychology 44.1 (2008): 15. This is logical, as once you discover you may be attracted to someone other than your identified to like, you of course want to explore it. There are multiple reasons on why girls who aren’t lesbians are kissing girls, such as female closeness and party acceptance. As such, females who “discover” they may like females are likely to “experiment” with their attractions, especially if they have a more beneficial surrounding (party scene) for it or a comfortable environment (female closeness). After such steps, it possible that she may continue to identify as bi-curious, or she may then be more solidified in her sexuality after having experimented and more fully realized their identity.(1)	Morgan, Elizabeth M., and Elisabeth Morgan Thompson. "Young women's sexual experiences within same-sex friendships: Discovering and defining bisexual and bi-curious identity." Journal of Bisexuality 6.3 (2006): 7-34.(1)	Rosario, Margaret, et al. "Sexual identity development among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths: Consistency and change over time." Journal of sex research 43.1 (2006): 46-58.
In Rupp’s and Taylor’s article, they discussed the bi-curious tendencies of women in college. The paper split up the “girls kissing girls” incidents into three different categories. Getting Attention, Experimentation, and Same-Sex Desires. As it sounds, the Getting Attention aspect of female same-sex kissing was done to get male attention and in some cases, in attention in general. A circle of people would surround the girls, “egging” them on. Some of the girls admitted that their homosexual kiss may have been more than just a drunken dare, which leads to the Experimentation stage. In all of the cases reported in the paper, the girls were close friends.(1)	Rupp, Leila J., and Verta Taylor. "Straight girls kissing." Contexts 9.3 (2010): 28-32. This suggests that women are more likely and more comfortable in experimenting and solidifying their sexual identities. This is reinforced by Morgan’s and Thompson’s study, who researched the emerging factors in women realizing their sexual identities. They concluded that female closeness is a very important aspect to women who are exploring their bi-curiosity. It was identified that closeness was a “precursor and a result of a sexual encounter with a female friend” and that the girl typically described as feeling “comfortable” and relaxed with said friend.(1)	Morgan, Elizabeth M., and Elisabeth Morgan Thompson. "Young women's sexual experiences within same-sex friendships: Discovering and defining bisexual and bi-curious identity." Journal of Bisexuality 6.3 (2006): 7-34. Because of this result of female closeness, it could be connected to the increased amount of sexual exploration or bi-curiosity between women in college. With the prevalence of sororities and same-sex housing, life long friends are made in college. As such, women are surrounded with their comfortable friends and so in turn feel comfortable in exploring their sexuality.
Diamond’s study followed the sexual fluidity of females throughout their life. Here Diamond discovered one’s peer’s sex ratio could affect their sexuality. It was found that in a more male dominated friend group, women were more likely to identify as heterosexual while the same being true for a female dominated group and identifying as homosexual. This can be used to explain the rise of bi-curiosity in college. In the study, one participant was confused to her sexual identity and tend to identify as what the majority of her friend group sex was.(1)	Diamond, Lisa M. Sexual fluidity. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2008. As such, if girls are confused to their sexual identity and find themselves in a college atmosphere, where the female population is higher than the male population, it is possible that she may want to explore her same-sex options, especially with sororities in college. 
Sororities can also be traced to furthering the prevalence of bi-curiosity because of how they  act upon their romantic or sexual desires. The hook-up culture of college helped the girls “explore non-heterosexual possibilities” in the Rupp and Taylor paper. Because it was very normal for girls to drunkenly kiss each other, some girls used the “Getting Attention” tactic to actually explore her curiosities. Instead of the homosexual act being frowned upon, as one might worry, the same-sex sexual act was actually cheered and wanted by the men at the party. This positive effect of course could lead to the rise of bi-curiosity. In Stokes’ study, it was found that men with better mental health were more likely to transition to homosexual.(1)	Stokes, Joseph P., Will Damon, and David J. McKirnan. "Predictors of movement toward homosexuality: A longitudinal study of bisexual men."Journal of Sex Research 34.3 (1997): 304-312. This is not saying that the same is true for females, but it is possible that the positive party environment described in Rupp’s and Taylor’s article could have a female in a better mental state, thus allowing to pursue her bi-curiosity out of the party scene and in a more personal, experimenting scene.	
In conclusion, these studies and articles have shown that bi-curiosity has multiple factors on why and how it may be discovered and identified. Most of the articles presented were done over females, and so it is not safe to assume the same concepts for men. Nor should it be assumed that these notions apply to mature women, as the majority of the studies focused on young adults or adolescences.
- Jytdog (talk) 04:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Jytdog. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content added today 

message: I change the intro sentence to add "self-identified" before "heterosexual" because at least some people who are identified as strictly straight (either by others or self-identified) are actually closeted gays or bisexuals/pansexuals or simply in denial about being gay or bi/pan. This article needs to consider the possibility that some "straight" people are actually bisexual/pansexual or even closeted gay/lesbians who simply choose to label themselves bi-curious as they perceive that term as having less stigma then coming out as bi/pan or gay. Given that bisexuals/pansexuals receive stigma/biphobia from both the straight and gay community, some people may perceive bicurious as a more accepted label since they are "just curious" and thus they have an out if they receive criticism from bi-phobic straight or gay people by just claiming they were merely curious. While it's certainly possible that some or many "Straight" bi-curious types are really just 100% straight people who are truly just curious about gay/lesbian sex without any genuine sexual attraction to same sex people, without any objective way to determine another's sexuality we can never truly know if that's the case. Thus we can only take them at their word based on the self-identification. Only in a world where all sexual orientations are fully accepted would self-identification generally always reflect one's true identity (Save for the sexually confused). Notcharliechaplin (talk) 08:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  There's a problem with lead intro sentence as it seems to exclude the possibility of some  "straight people" actually being closeted/suppressed bi/gay.