Yes, so say that, your comment was so nebulous it could have meant almost anything. Lots of folks get accused of that........
No wonder lots of folks stay in the closet. I remember lots of folks my age secretly dating, they told everyone they were best freinds, had sleep overs, and no one the wiser.......
Homosexuals did so for a long time until recently. Getting married in the "traditional" manner and even having kids.
Pretending/faking to be straight is exactly what it is, pretending! So, when it gets too difficult to fight back and you drop the act to become who you really are, it does not mean that you ever changed your sexuality.
That is a different thing from what is originally being asked though. What about someone who has never had any kind of attraction to (and just picking a straight person as the example. It could go either way) the same sex, no struggling, nothing. Then in their later life, say after 50 (could be any age), they start finding themselves attracted to the same sex? Could they not be shifting? If they have been bisexual the whole time, why was it never a struggle with an attraction to the same sex? We could apply this to bisexuality too. Someone who has always been attracted to both over their whole life, and then start gradually finding themselves only attracted to one.
I didn't say sexuality changed. I said it's only confusing when you are trying to be something you aren't.
In none of your example does the person's sexuality actually change. They just choose to be monogamous. A straight person who has never felt any kind of attraction to anyone of the opposite sex is very rare, but - of course - exceptions always exist. What is the reason here is that they have just not met the right person yet. Once they do meet someone who gets them aroused, they did not shift from asexuality to heterosexuality. They were always heterosexual and just needed to find the right stimuli. Someone who "all of a sudden" finds themselves bisexual was always bisexual and did not change their sexuality. Etc etc. You are what you are. Sexuality is not a choice.
You are correct, I was however trying to understand. However, you can be a little bit mean sometimes, and I am your freind, or at least I would like to be your freind.
The choice to be monogamous or not has nothing to do with your attraction. You have this problem with trying to connect unrelated things. There are bisexuals who choose to be monogamous. Way to cross thread there. Asexuality had yet to be brought up here. Everything here so far was about going from heterosexual to either bi or homosexuality or vice versa. I went with a straight person not having an attraction to their own sex. I said nothing about a straight person not having an attraction to the opposite sex. For that matter, if they are straight (heterosexual), then they are not asexual. It's the same as how one can't be heterosexual and homosexual at the same time or homosexual and bisexual at the same time. At what point did I say it was a choice? Even if one's sexuality can change or shift, that does not automatically make it a choice.
I don't mind explaining things. Not at all. But carrying on and on about it is going to piss me off. Well, I'm sorry I was mean. You and I can absolutely be friends.
'Straight' is just another word for 'a heterosexual', right? 'Heterosexual' is the attraction to the opposite sex, and 'asexual' is the lack of attraction to anyone, right? I know that I'm pretty useless with all of this stuff as an utterly CLUELESS straight guy, but SURELY I've got all of that correct! Yeah I'm just making the point that 'asexual' is a bit of a ridiculous term, given that an asexual person who has sex is being sexual. But 'sexual' and 'asexual' seem to me to be opposites. No, I was just wondering if you deliberately changed the order around in "LGB." It seemed like "LBG" could have been an alternate form of "LGBT", intentionally placing the "B" before the "G" to make some sort of statement, and I swear it wasn't the first time that I saw you use it.
To some extent yes, what you are attracted to can and often does change over time. Just rarely as extreme a shift as straight to gay or vice versa. For example, for the first few decades of my life I found Asian women unattractive. But for the past few decades that changed and I find Asian eyes and other facial features particularly attractive now. And I don't even know why or exactly when that changed.
How can a whole race be 'unattractive'? Beautiful people are beautiful regardless of skin, hair, eyes, etc. Case in point:
Since beauty is subjective, then it is possible for a whole race to be unattractive to some people. While I happen to share your view point on what I find beautiful, it does not mean that it is universal.
Some people find some features more attractive than others. I personally have come to have a strong attraction to almond shaped eyes. Some people like big butts. Many like height. Many like dark or pale skin. These things correlate with races.
Sure. I personally prefer darker men (of any race), but I can absolutely find a white blonde or a ginger very attractive (especially gingers ). I don't have a race-dependent filter. Beauty is beauty.
Most of these images you posted are good looking but that doesn't necessarily translate to sexual attractiveness.
only bisexuals have a choice, everyone else does not so if one thinks it's a choice, they would be bi-sexual and not understand how the rest of us do not have a choice like they do