Platinum Shy-Bi Girl
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Country

    United States

Silo last won the day on March 23 2015

Silo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

188 Excellent

About Silo

  • Rank
  • Birthday 02/23/1989

Profile Information

  • Music
    Metal, Jazz, Country
  • Location
    Austin, TX
  • Interests
    Chess, reading, writing, gaming, and debate are some of my many hobbies. Mythology, religion, and politics are my major interests.
  • Signature Fragrance
  • Favourite Book
    Harry Potter
  • Favourite TV Show
  • Favourite Film
    Boondock Saints

Recent Profile Visitors

2,544 profile views
  1. Thank you Ona. That was extremely helpful feedback and probably the best I've had. Most people have just told me to dump him. As if I'd throw away 12 years and my desired future so easily. lol
  2. Hi guys! Since this is a married board, I thought - since I'm looking for someone who's had a similar experience to give me some advice. My husband and I met in college and married 3 years later. We were each other's "firsts" and we never really dated anyone else before each other. We don't really argue, and when we do we are quick to make up and forgive each other. We spent the past 12 years as each other's best friends and closest companion. Recently (like the past week) my husband informed me that he feels that he needs to experience what it's like to date someone else. Because we never dated others before we married, he feels this is an experience he may regret having, and would like to pursue it to see where it goes. We've talked at length about it and have been completely open and honest with each other. He has told me he still loves and is in love with me, but this is a curiosity that has been nagging at him, and he is worried if he doesn't pursue it, he may come to resent me or our marriage in the future. He insists that it's not a problem with us, and there's nothing about me that has caused this. He does not want to separate or divorce, and is hoping that this will satisfy his curiosity so that he can appreciate what we have even more. He also encouraged me to try this, as he feels it would benefit me as well. This came as a pretty big hit to me and I've been struggling with it emotionally. I am not nor have I ever desired to be with anyone other than my husband romantically. It doesn't help that he admitted (long before this), that he was attracted to one of his female friends. She is also a friend of mine and I trust them both not to do anything with each other unless I'm okay with it, but it still causes a monstrous wave of jealousy for me when it seems like he's more excited to talk to and be around her than me. I've told him this as well. He's been very regretful and has apologized for the upset that he has caused with this, but his desire to go through with this is still there. We have discussed what this would look like, and he describes it as 'casual' - meaning he does not intend to go looking for a girlfriend. Still, that's not a guarantee that he won't want one if he connects romantically with someone else in this experiment. My worst nightmare in this whole scenario is losing him - divorce or separation is the last thing I would ever want. Intellectually I can understand his desire to do this and can even see some logic in it, but emotionally I'm floored and the mere thought of it devastates me. We have discussed counseling, but because he doesn't believe there is really a problem with our marriage, he didn't really think there would be much benefit to us there. It's hard because even though I am bi and have been attracted to both women and men since we married, I have never had the desire to want to get romantically involved with anyone else. I'm afraid of the possible outcomes of this experiment, hurt because of the implications of why he wants to do this ( even though he vehemently denies that he has fallen out of love with me), and really just need some ideas on the next steps to take here. Thanks for reading, ladies.
  3. You'll have to excuse me, but I don't understand how "there is no spoon" really correlates to this conversation. Can you explain what you mean by using this?
  4. Perhaps an example of how existing on a spectrum constitutes a third, fourth, fifth, or sixth identity would be an excellent way of demonstrating the point - or perhaps it's all just semantics. If those who identify as neither male nor female would deign to enlighten me, I'm open to hearing their point of view. Hearing, however, is not the same as unquestioningly accepting - and that seems to be the problem here. Regardless, I've read the rules posted in the forum you've suggested and compared my responses with this thread. Though admittedly rough in my responses, I've not intentionally begrudged the humanity of nor downright attacked anyone who falls within the spectrum. I have disagreed with the view that this constitutes a new gender, and that is all. If that is enough to warrant censure, then Shybi should update their rules to redact the following statement "This is an international site with women from all over the world, and we welcome different perspectives and experiences on our posts" to more accurately reflect their stance that those who disagree with a person's self-identification outside of the classic definition of trans gendered are not welcome. I, for the record, disagree with the self identification of anything outside of male or female (and I've given my reasons, which also falls within the Shybi guideline), If my reasons are not sufficient, kindly point me to the thread which describes the guidelines for sufficient support of one's viewpoint. I actually have to thank Shybi's for my understanding of trans gendered people - as it was trans gendered people posting about their experiences within Shybi's that lead me to a better understanding of their hardships. It made me a very staunch supporter of transgender rights. Prior to that, I did not have a clear understanding nor connection with trans gendered people, as I am not one, nor do I get to interact with trans gendered people often. If I am wrong in my understanding on this matter, then I would hope someone withe greater insight will be able to enlighten me.
  5. Why does any extreme have to define the range? It's just what we've observed as part of our reality. In 20 years time maybe we find that there's more to gender than male and female. Alternatively, in 20 years time we may come to accept that biological males and females are naturally prone to sex specific behaviors and characteristics, and this is what we use to define gender. Point being, at the moment, male and female is the range because that's currently what we've been able to observe. It's fine to listen to people to better understand their experiences and world-view, but that does not mean that "their truth" is *the truth*. There's nothing inherently wrong with questioning or even disagreeing a person's perception of reality. It helps both parties, in the end, to grow as people.
  6. An interesting choice in song, considering the next few lines are: "An they're all made out of ticky-tacky, and they all look just the same." Meaning that they're constructed of poor material and structurally no different from any other one. Which is to be expected, since they're all built from the same blueprints. Slapping a fresh coat of paint on them doesn't alter the original floor plan. "Non-binary' as a gender really kind of rolls with my original point - people who identify as non-binary identify as a mix of both genders, or none at all. In the former case, this doesn't constitute a new gender. The gender traits which make up the individuals personality are still male and female/male or female. That one is not unilaterally male or unilaterally female doesn't constitute a new gender. In the latter case, I'm rather curious to see what an agendered person looks like. They lack the direct aggressive traits of males or indirect aggressive traits of females? They aren't prone to want to provide and shelter, or to want to nourish and nurture? They are neither verbally fluent nor adept at spatial calculation? No, I sincerely doubt such a person exists on this planet...that isn't dead or a vegetable. Simply stating that you identify as either doesn't mean you're not one or the other, or both. You can identify as a pacifist, but if you solve your disputes through brute force, you're just lying to yourself and to others. In like manner, you can identify as neither gender, but human nature guarantees that you will display actions, behaviors, and instincts typical of either gender. There is no "other" gender, because at the end of the day, you're exhibiting male and/or female behaviors and anatomy. I don't believe I addressed sexuality in my post and have never claimed sexuality is either hetero or homo. We're on a bi forum, after all. I recognize that sexuality is not a dichotomy, and I posted to a thread on Pansexuality in this same forum. If you read it, you'll see my response that bisexuality can include male, female, and trans. Pansexuality is redundant. It is true that people can be born with chromosomal makeup outside of xy or xx. There's xo, xxy, xyy, xxx, and a few other known variants. In these unfortunate cases, these individuals will often show mixed phenotypical traits of male and female, or show hyper-feminine or hyper-masculine traits, depending on the chromosome combination. In this case, it may be more accurate to say people can be male, female, or male and female. However, with both sex AND gender, male and female are the range. There is no value outside of that range that is applicable to humans...or to any other known species on this planet, really. That's the point I'm trying to get at, here. Even animals which can change their sex are either male, or female, or both, but there is no 'other' gender.
  7. I'm going to be the one to voice the unpopular opinion: Sex is biological. Gender is the culmination of physical, behavioral, and psychological attributes typically portrayed by one of the sexes. There are only two genders - male, and female. Characteristics of either gender can be displayed in any individual (i.e - people aren't always unilaterally male or female) , but being male with female characteristics or female with male characteristics doesn't change the fact that gender is male/female. Instead of dropping the 'B', let's focus more on dropping the 'B..ullshit' ideology that an individual's mix of male/female gender characteristics constitutes a new gender.
  8. If you're bi, you're attracted to members of either sex. Trans people are included in this, It doesn't mean you, as a rule, are less accepting of gender or sex. You can be bi and attracted to a trans person, a genderfluid person, or a...cis...person. Being attracted to someone who identifies as a unicorn, or a woman - but only on Tuesdays - doesn't necessitate a new word to classify your attraction towards others. It just means that you're attracted to what you're attracted to. If you like men or women as well as people who identify as female, but only on Tuesdays, you're still bi. In this day in age of "throw a handful of rocks, and whatever you hit is a new sexuality or gender identity", people are going a little overboard in trying to find new words to show off how inclusive they are. Bi works just fine. It means you like either sex. There's male, and female, and in some cases "both". Bi works for all of those.
  9. Not cheating. Cheating occurs in real life - real flesh and blood.
  10. I think spirituality is an openness to feelings or experiences outside of what we can taste/touch/measure. Like an innate feeling that there is something else to our existence that can't or can't yet be quantified scientifically. It's a gut feeling, essentially. I don't know what it feels like, per se. Most of my "spiritual" experiences could be scientifically explained. I guess spirituality is more of a..".yeah, science could explain this, but what if?" kind of feeling.
  11. Hiya Ladies! So I ran across this from facebook and it got me to thinking. (This is going to be a rant) There are people in this world who think carnivorous animals can and should be fed vegan diets for moralistic reasons. In my opinion, if you want to go vegan personally - that's fine. I don't agree, but it's not my body, not my choice. We can supplement the shit out of our diets to make up for the lack of nutrients provided by animal flesh. But I have to draw a line at forcing your dietary choices on animals...or children... but the children part is for another day. Right now we're focusing on animals, and I have to ask - what level of retardation do you have to be capable of to think it's totally okay to feed a cat/dog/fox/ferret a completely plant based diet, then smile and chalk their health issues up to a mere "dietary" allergy. Like no fucking duh, do you think? I have all the sympathy in the world for the pets who's owners think they can feed their canine and feline pets a vegan diet, yet they balk when those pets exhibit negative health symptoms. They aren't meant to eat that food to begin with. It's animal abuse, pure and simple, to enforce moralistic based human dietary standards on the animals in our care, in my opinion. I'll go one step further and wish a slow, agonizing, painful death of malnutrition on the owner, because that's what they're forcing their pet to go though. Has anyone ever had the displeasure of running into one of these vegan pet crazies? If so, what was your take? If you're a vegan owner or feeding your dog/cat/fox/shark/snake/ferret (or any other naturally carnivorous or omnivorous pet) a vegan diet, what's you're reason for doing so? Give me a legit reason to change my mind.
  12. I don't have a problem with looking into the root of why women are more inclined to worry about their partner's satisfaction at the expense of their own. My own thoughts on the matter is that it's likely a mix of biological and social reasons, What I do have a problem with is automatically assuming or implying that the actions of men are a direct cause as a rule, or that they don't care as a rule. This is an overly simplistic assessment that disregards the motivations of women in favor of having someone else to blame - a trend that becoming annoyingly problematic these days. Perhaps since women assume more physical risk from the repercussions of sex, we may be more instinctively prone to want to please our partners to keep them with us, which may include accepting discomfort during sex, because we wish (subconsciously or otherwise) to prevent them from feeling inadequate or undesired. From an evolutionary standpoint this would make sense because it would decrease the likelihood of that partner choosing a different sexual/life partner. Thoughts?
  13. In that the owner is no-longer anti-gay and doesn't donate to groups that are also anti-gay? No, I don't think that's changed - or at least I haven't heard of it. What I do know is that they still hire gay employees and serve gay patrons, which they did before the bru-ha-ha with Dan Cathy.
  14. Serious as a heart attack. Great movie, too. Genuinely did not see the twist coming.
  15. Long enough to strangle me in my sleep. That is to say, down to my hips, maybe a little lower. Dark brown with just a hint of grey. On another woman - I don't really have a preference - though I don't really care for the buzzed look.