No, that's perfectly normal.

I would only start to worry about Boston if he did NOT have such dreams

Kinsey was one of the first (if not the first) psychologists to take non-heterosexuality seriously, so I think he and his scale are alright. I'd peg myself a 5, can't help but be just a bit straight-curious ;)

Okay maybe like 5.7.

The methodology I was really asking was the scale, some people think this is not a valid method of gauging sexuality.

The study was really about figuring out how prevalent homosexuality was. I don't believe he himself did any work into the causes of it, although there is the Kinsey Institute that probably has done such studies.

They didn't give their own number, he questioned their sexual history (including fantasy, I think). I don't know if he actually assigned people numbers afterwards, it was a huge study, so maybe the scale was something seperate.

Nowadays they strap people up to things that monitor their pulse and other sciency things and show them photos of Ryan Gosling, and they use that to determine (without social acceptability bias) how gay they are. Except they don't use Gosling because everybody is totally gay for him, it wouldn't be fair.

You're on the internet though, so maybe just look it up on wikipedia rather than asking semi-informed warlighters.

More than incidental...

It's incidental if it's the only such dream he's had. If he dreams it more often than he sex-dreams of women then it is "more than incidental heterosexual behaviour" and puts him at 4.

---

Incidentally, I would never make such a pedestrian thread as this. Frank and I were playing a round of YAAT Golf, we each made a thread at the same time to try and get Aranka to reply in the fewest posts. I WON!!! By one post. THANKS ARANKA!!!!

what about non-sexual behaviour, thats where most WL players would be at

Really now Annoyng ?

I think right now Frank is winning again :)

Yes, you were the third to reply to my thread (frank's post and seahawk's reply are discounted), but you were the fourth to reply to frank's thread. So I won!!! thank you Aranka!!! :)

i am -1, pre-sexual behaviour

or perhaps a 7, post-sexual behaviour.... turns to the side and falls asleep, allowing the possibility of more sex to flow away

I disagree with Seahawk's post being discounted. The rule was that only our posts would be discounted, you can't make up rules just so you can win...

I agree, looks like you two will have to duke it out to determine the winner.

Or you could both create another thread... Even though Aranka already knows the game she won't be able to resist...

It's a new game so obviously some rules wouldn't occur to me until after it had been tried out. This has to be a rule, otherwise you could easily go on the other person's thread and start trolling so that it gets a bunch of responses before Aranka wakes up. Seahawks never would have replied if it wasn't for frank's post, therefore it's discounted.

Also, another rule is that whenever I play, I win. So that means I must have won. Don't be such a sore loser.

you guys must have noticed that she stopped answering as often in the fórum during the last few days.... her life must be going meaningless by now.... now she is probably injecting random drugs into patients arms in order to stand this

She doesn't give anyone drugs, she works in a hospice. After they talk to her, death doesn't seem so bad.

hahaha I laughed :)

On topic I am 1 and i hope its not a 2. That would be bad for my image and i would have to fight against even more ignorance and hypocrisy than i already have to.

Indeed, as to the thread. I'd have to go with the 1 option.

Thanks, I did a lap of honour around the house after I posted that one.

Snerk. I'm not at all surprised at the motives of this thread. You silly warlighters you.

Tee hee hee