• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

RF on the Kinsey Scale?

Where are you on the Kinsey Scale? (see diagram in OP)

  • 0

    Votes: 16 61.5%
  • 1

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • 2

    Votes: 2 7.7%
  • 3

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 4

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • 5

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • 6

    Votes: 2 7.7%

  • Total voters
    26

Eddi

Agnostic
Premium Member
Where are you on the Kinsey Scale? (click here to see its wikipedia entry)

This poll is anonymous

I personally will not vote until a few others have, so it is not obvious what my own personal response is :D

Here are two depictions of it:
Screen Shot 2021-10-07 at 02.46.46.png

1280px-Kinsey_Scale.svg.png
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Where are you on the Kinsey Scale? (click here to see its wikipedia entry)

This poll is anonymous

I personally will not vote until a few others have, so it is not obvious what my own personal response is :D

Here are two depictions of it:
View attachment 56141
View attachment 56140

It looks like Kinsey focused more on behavior. Many straight people engage in same-sex behaviors, so I guess straight (or gay people who engage in opposite-sex behaviors) would be on a sliding scale. I see it as an innate comfortableness or a "rightness" with someone you are with regardless the nature of the attraction (platonic, sexual, or both) and how much one has (near to asexual or highly sexual).
 
Last edited:

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Actually did the deed with females twice, but in 73 years, and given that I wasn't really interested, I think I'd have to say effectively "exclusive."
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
The original Kinsey report appeared to be badly flawed. The numbers from even the Kinsey institute keep dropping:


Diversity of sexual orientation

What the report did was to make us aware that homosexuality is not rare. It did quite a bit of good even if it had exaggerated amounts of homosexual behavior.
This is because a lot of the people Kinsey studied were not just mainstream folks, so there was some skewing. If you have too many incarcerated people in your sample, for example, more than in the general population, your results will not reflect the general population.

Not to mention that Kinsey (who was bisexual, and he and his wife had other sexual partners) encouraged his own staff to have wide sexual experiences so they could "feel more comfortable" talking to people about their sex lives.

I don't give his results much credence, frankly.

But while homosexuality isn't rare, it also isn't that common. I still think the number of around 2%, possibly a little less, of mostly exclusively homosexual is about right. I also tend to discount the kind of experimental things we all (or many of us) might have tried when we were young as having a lot of meaning. Hormones can be pushy.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
This is because a lot of the people Kinsey studied were not just mainstream folks, so there was some skewing. If you have too many incarcerated people in your sample, for example, more than in the general population, your results will not reflect the general population.

Not to mention that Kinsey (who was bisexual, and he and his wife had other sexual partners) encouraged his own staff to have wide sexual experiences so they could "feel more comfortable" talking to people about their sex lives.

I don't give his results much credence, frankly.

But while homosexuality isn't rare, it also isn't that common. I still think the number of around 2%, possibly a little less, of mostly exclusively homosexual is about right. I also tend to discount the kind of experimental things we all (or many of us) might have tried when we were young as having a lot of meaning. Hormones can be pushy.
I agree. The point is that small percentages is not an excuse to discriminate.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I voted 1. Until 2005 (i remember it well) i considered myself exclusively hetro and had never had any form of sexual contact with a female. It has happened ust the once with a very special person and to be truthful i quite enjoyed it. I wouldn't go deliberately looking for women but if the opportunity presented itself with the right woman chances are i wouldn't say no.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
Long time since I looked at the Kinsey report but from what I remember he got paedophilia a bit wrong, seemingly basing such just on the views of a few acknowledged paedophiles and not from any impartial research. Similarly perhaps with other data - as to the sexuality of children, for example.
 

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Long time since I looked at the Kinsey report but from what I remember he got paedophilia a bit wrong, seemingly basing such just on the views of a few acknowledged paedophiles and not from any impartial research. Similarly perhaps with other data - as to the sexuality of children, for example.
Kinsey is a bit like Wikipedia... or Freud. Acknowledged as a good starting point, but not great for in-depth modern analysis.
 
Top