Where are you on the Kinsey Scale?

[Aequalitia]

1.3 is my accurate guess.

Not guess, just do the test.

Or else I go call in a whole fabulous group to you

[Luveria]

I don't find the Kinsey Scale to be an accurate way of rating human sexuality.

0 - Exclusively heterosexual
1 - Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 - Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 - Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 - Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 - Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 - Exclusively homosexual
X - No socio-sexual contacts or reactions

One example, is that if a trans female has a primary preference for transgender females, that's not making her homosexual, as it's a bisexual attraction to a certain type of female. Physically, that would be attraction to a female with physical characteristics from two sexes, making it a type of bisexuality from that view, and devoid of being homosexuality.

As another example, if a gay man has a primary fancy for trans men like Buck Angel, they aren't being heterosexual for that in any way as Buck Angel is a man who happens to have a vagina. Purely in terms of physical attraction, it's a form of bisexuality for a gay man to be attracted to Buck Angel. With that pointed out, bisexual attraction doesn't make a person any more or less heterosexual or homosexual if ultimately they are still only attracted to other males or exclusively to the other sex.

With scenarios like the above taken into consideration, it becomes difficult to categorize those sort of things on the Kinsey Scale which doesn't appear to take the above attractions and preferences into account.

[Xirtam]

Wait a sec there is a test that comes with the scale? Oh please do give me a link.

[The Revolutionary Fighters of Intel]

I'm an F.

That or I am 0.

[New Event Horizon]

Obviously I'm a type-0. I have yet to distribute my entire consciousnesses across the entire planet and access the entirety of its natural energy sources, nor have I converted a solar system into a Matryoshka brain and harnessed all available energy from a nearby star.

Oh, wait. I thought this was the Kardashev scale. Never mind.

[Meryuma]

I found a better test.http://www.mysexualorientation.com

Mean Sexual Orientation: 9
Sexual Orientation Range: 8

Sex Drive: 10.5 Same-Sex Attraction: 13 Opposite-Sex Attraction: 8

alternatively (couple of the questions felt ambiguous):


Mean Sexual Orientation: 9.5
Sexual Orientation Range: 7

Sex Drive: 10 Same-Sex Attraction: 13 Opposite-Sex Attraction: 7

The second seems more like me. In any case, my moderate attraction to females is eclipsed by my maximized gay desires.

I found a better test.http://www.mysexualorientation.com

Sex Drive: Personal. <.< Same Sex Attraction: 12 Opposite Sex Attraction: 9

Not all that surprised. I wish these tests brought up genderqueer people though.

They did have an "other" gender option, but they didn't fully follow through on that.

Ex-heterosexual asexual here.

Do you mean a celibate heterosexual? It seems you're confusing asexuality with refusing to have sex.

[New Waterford]

I got a 1.
Boring, I know.

[Confederacy of Maine]

I guess I'd have to say I'm a six, I mean I find girls attractive and flirt with them but sexually there Is really nothing there.

[Bralia]

I found a better test.http://www.mysexualorientation.com

I call bullshit on this one. Just because I've never been intimately sexual with women doesn't make me any less heterosexual. 1.5, my furry white ass . . .

You know what I really want to see? A gender quiz/test/etc. I know my sexuality thoroughly well. Women are flippin' sexy creatures. What I am unsure of is my gender . . . anybody know where I can find a good one?

[Maineiacs]

If I were truly honest, I'm more of an X, but that's really more de facto than by choice.

[Americanada]

I don't find the Kinsey Scale to be an accurate way of rating human sexuality.

0 - Exclusively heterosexual
1 - Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 - Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 - Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 - Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 - Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 - Exclusively homosexual
X - No socio-sexual contacts or reactions

One example, is that if a trans female has a primary preference for transgender females, that's not making her homosexual, as it's a bisexual attraction to a certain type of female. Physically, that would be attraction to a female with physical characteristics from two sexes, making it a type of bisexuality from that view, and devoid of being homosexuality.

As another example, if a gay man has a primary fancy for trans men like Buck Angel, they aren't being heterosexual for that in any way as Buck Angel is a man who happens to have a vagina. Purely in terms of physical attraction, it's a form of bisexuality for a gay man to be attracted to Buck Angel. With that pointed out, bisexual attraction doesn't make a person any more or less heterosexual or homosexual if ultimately they are still only attracted to other males or exclusively to the other sex.

With scenarios like the above taken into consideration, it becomes difficult to categorize those sort of things on the Kinsey Scale which doesn't appear to take the above attractions and preferences into account.

That is why I would think that, with gender variance become more understood and more people finding out whether are attracted to various types of gender variance, it is becoming increasingly difficult to try to have one term define a person's romanticism with the obvious exceptions of panromantics and aromantics. At some point, I think it might just be easier to just say what combinations of gender identity and sex a person is attracted to. Heck, what term would be used to describe a male androgyne who is attracted to intersex women, males who are third-gender, and females who are of the male gender? While an extreme example, it is meant to be a demonstration of how hard it is to categorize people's capability of attractions about gender and sex and combinations of the two when the capability of attraction is not either to either everyone regardless of sex, gender, or combinations of the two, or no one.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

The second seems more like me. In any case, my moderate attraction to females is eclipsed by my maximized gay desires.

So we are even more similar than coming out at 2008?

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

I don't find the Kinsey Scale to be an accurate way of rating human sexuality.

0 - Exclusively heterosexual
1 - Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 - Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 - Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 - Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 - Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 - Exclusively homosexual
X - No socio-sexual contacts or reactions

One example, is that if a trans female has a primary preference for transgender females, that's not making her homosexual, as it's a bisexual attraction to a certain type of female. Physically, that would be attraction to a female with physical characteristics from two sexes, making it a type of bisexuality from that view, and devoid of being homosexuality.

As another example, if a gay man has a primary fancy for trans men like Buck Angel, they aren't being heterosexual for that in any way as Buck Angel is a man who happens to have a vagina. Purely in terms of physical attraction, it's a form of bisexuality for a gay man to be attracted to Buck Angel. With that pointed out, bisexual attraction doesn't make a person any more or less heterosexual or homosexual if ultimately they are still only attracted to other males or exclusively to the other sex.

With scenarios like the above taken into consideration, it becomes difficult to categorize those sort of things on the Kinsey Scale which doesn't appear to take the above attractions and preferences into account.

Damn scale said I was a 2....


stupid quiz, it cheated on one question and another was ambiguous :|

[Arkiasis]

I'm bisexual so a firm 3. And no, contrary to popular belief my dating pool isn't "doubled". Being socially awkward fucks you over no matter who you are.

[New Frenco Empire]

I'm bisexual so a firm 3. And no, contrary to popular belief my dating pool isn't "doubled". Being socially awkward fucks you over no matter who you are.

Ain't that the truth.

Though, honestly, the benefits of finding attraction both ways is there.

[Leningrad Union]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Damn scale said I was a 2....

stupid quiz, it cheated on one question and another was ambiguous :|

LOL. Try http://www.mysexualorientation.com/

[Aeken]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

It scares you?

[Katyuscha]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

It's the best kind, I assure you.

[Blasveck]

I'm bisexual so a firm 3. And no, contrary to popular belief my dating pool isn't "doubled". Being socially awkward fucks you over no matter who you are.

Ain't that the truth.

Though, honestly, the benefits of finding attraction both ways is there.

Benefits? You're twice as likely to get dumped. There's no benefit there.

[Sun Wukong]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

It scares you?

As a child, he was mauled by a Care Bear.

[Uieurnthlaal]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

Not even a 2?

[New Frenco Empire]

Ain't that the truth.

Though, honestly, the benefits of finding attraction both ways is there.

Benefits? You're twice as likely to get dumped. There's no benefit there.

I don't exactly follow? It was a half a joke, either way, so...

[Katyuscha]

0. I think some guys are attractive, but I'm not personally attracted to them and gay sex scares me.

Not even a 2?

I'm equally disappointed.

[Blasveck]

Benefits? You're twice as likely to get dumped. There's no benefit there.

I don't exactly follow? It was a half a joke, either way, so...

So was what I said.

Jokes don't translate well over text....