Not to answer for them, but I don’t think being bi-romantic is a necessary trait for being bisexual. I get what you mean, but it just seems like one of those things some people will call you out on for not being truly bi.
I believe it was his choice, and it could’ve easily gone another way. Behind the third door there was a goat.
Ah, that’s where it went… they were wondering, up in MPSIMS.
Not much to say about Urban redneck that wasn’t included in the title. Even when I read the title I thought ‘is this even nessesary who doesn’t already know that’
So, is your name more than just a Wodehouse tribute? Did you actually attend one of those British “Public” schools of which we have heard so much?
That goat is a damned slut!
I heard she was under the wether!
Right here. I’ve never even noticed that douchebag before, as I’m sort of an on again/off again reader/poster here. But I just had the pleasure of interacting with him in the Mothers’ Day thread and I wholeheartedly endorse this pitting.
I’m with Peremensoe here – the 1st sentence and then the 2nd part of the 2nd sentence exclude a whole shit-ton of middle ground. In other words, the 1st part of the 2nd sentences seems valid to me, but then you tacked on a rider that involves a much higher standard for one group than the other.
Yah well haggis is gross and should not be allowed in polite company. You haggis lovers! Trying to force everyone to have haggis!
It’s the haggis pride parades that sicken me.
Hey, I got nuthin’ 'gainst haggises. But if you think we’re gonna stay quiet when they move in next door and start lowering the property values…
The first sentence is supposed to exclude a shit ton of middle ground. That’s the point of the post: there’s a lot of behavior that get lumped in with “bisexual” that I don’t think should be there - it weakens “bisexual” as an independent identity, relegating it to an “other” status for people who don’t pass some sort of purity test for “straight” or “gay.”
As for “higher standards,” :rolleyes: If it makes you feel better, change it to “is willing to entertain the idea of long term, romantic relationships with either gender equally.”
I like haggis.
ISTM that you’re insisting on your own definition of “bisexual” because of some personal preference.
From Wiki:
And (quoting the American Psychological Association):
I don’t intend to dispute how the term “bisexual” should or shouldn’t be used, but am just noting that my usage above was in line with the usage in these quotes (and is what was relevant in the context of the point I was making).
Og forbid I have to serve haggis in my restaurant – the one I would buy with an assurance that I would never have to serve haggis.
Perhaps you can push for an amendment to establish a permanent defense of the traditional haggis-free lifestyle.
Even if it were a heterosexual haggis?
Well, yeah:
What if I wanted haggis at my wedding? Would you be “too busy” to cater it?