Where do you get "the vast majority of us are technically bisexual"? I hear this often in connection with Kinsey, but he did not find any such thing, and I've never been able to track down any basis for the claim.

No, it's not. First, Kinsey's work is already "modern." Second, you simply presented your list of categories as "the Kinsey scale." It's not, it's your adaptation of the Kinsey scale; you should have presented it as that from the start. What the numbers actually stand for can be found easily in Kinsey et al., Sexua…

That's okay, though of course there's no way to measure attraction or "sexual orientation." The trouble is that many people, including many researchers, simply assume that the Kinsey scale is about sexual orientation or sexual identity. It's not.

The Kinsey scale is not a "simple way to look at things." It's not about "things." It's a simple way to look at the varying amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience in people's lives.

The Kinsey scale isn't even a "classification system." It is a way of visualizing the fact that many people have significant amounts of heterosexual and homosexual experience. It is "a frame that everybody can be made to fit into," because everybody's sexual history can be mapped onto that continuum. But it tells…

That's a misinterpretation of the Kinsey scale, but thanks for bringing it up.

Spoken like a true believer.

You were doing well until you got to a theory being something "rigorously tested and peer reviewed and debated, so that when it graduates to the 'theory' stage etc." That's overly generous. Darwin's theory of Descent with Modifcation by Natural Selection was a theory long before it had been rigorously tested and…

Gotta nitpick. Only one of Donoghue's three previous historical novels, The Sealed Letter, is set during the reign of Victoria. The other two, Life Mask and Slammerikin, are set in the late 1700s, before Victoria was born, let alone queen.

They weren't found because Saddam used them, against the Kurds and I think against Iran. So he was plumb out by the time Dubya made an issue out of it.

In other words, pretentiously claiming to be cooler than you actually are? Got it.

But I do appreciate all people on their own without being compelled to slot them into biological categories (though I'm not sure exactly what that means). I'm still only attracted erotically to males.

Well, if he identified as bi, he was bi, not pansexual. And I know plenty of bisexuals who say that for them, gender is just this big amorphous thing, they relate to people not gender/sex, etc. So what you're describing is not a good set of criteria for a pansexual identity. Someone else here has provided the…

(I'm coming in here late because I just saw the film.) His other films are very different from After Life, which mixes documentary material with fiction, so if you expect more of that you'll be disappointed. (As I recall, Koreeda started by making documentaries for Japanese TV; it would be nice to see some of…

Odd. I first read Stuart Little in third grade, and I loved that ending even at that age. It was the first time I felt that kind of bittersweet loss/hope emotion, and while I have no objection to simple happy-ending stories, I also like open-ended ones. It's DH's loss, I guess. Doesn't sound like he's ever gotten…

"Gay sex with a gay guy?" Can you have straight sex with a gay guy? Gay sex with a straight guy? Yes on the latter, since any sex between two guys is "gay sex."

Nope. I've seen writings, including published ones, by transpeople that do not use a space there.

That's capitalism for you!

"There's only differing opinions." Well, that's your opinion.

That's a prime example of what I'm talking about: proudly calling oneself "politically incorrect" (which of course means that one is really, Truly Politically Correct) is Orwellian doublespeak. It's like males who responded to second-wave feminism by calling themselves Male Chauvinist Pigs.