Should bisexuals be banned from the military?

>>8645426
bump

>>8645426
>Facts: Capable of spreading HIV from gay soldiers to straight ones.
Except they don't have sex with straight soldiers because straight soldiers are straight.

Unless you're talking about female soldiers, in which case you have a bigger problem than bisexuals in the military, or, let's face it, even than homosexuals or transsexuals.

>>8645426
Bisexual Lt. here. I'm not having sex with soldiers anyway, anyone can spread HIV (use protection), and I want to serve regardless of who I'm into. Fuck you.

File: 1463644661028.png (207KB, 600x635px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 600x635px

>>8645426
>Trannies are gay men

>>8645426
Biscum who is aiming to be a Marine infantry officer once I finish college, fuck you.

>>8645800
>>8645906
i hope u both die in service or something

>>8645426
>that pic
Basically irrefutable evidence that all bisexuals will eventually end up a breeder, and that thus their status as members of the lgbt community is questionable at best.

>>8645927
I hope you go on to lead a productive life and find true happiness

>>8645940
The thing I find especially sad is that the homos were studied divided by sex but bis were not. So it's a fucking piddling 4.5% of bi guys and 4.5% of bi girls, presumably, unless one sex is more predisposed to same-sex partnership than the other. I'd put my money on a skew in favor of bi men since women have those babymaking instincts.

>>8645940
Gays are roughly 3% of the population, taking an average of several studies. This study says bi people choose same-sex relationships 9% of the time, which is threefold over the actual percentage of gays.

You could not possibly get those numbers merely by chance, which means that bisexuals are DISPROPORTIONATELY SEEKING GAY RELATIONSHIPS.

You dumb motherfucker.

>>8646019
That's...not how that works.

>>8646272
>which means that bisexuals are DISPROPORTIONATELY SEEKING GAY RELATIONSHIPS.
You know very well this is wrong.

>>8646348
>math doesn't real

>>8646348
Uh, no. No, I don't. That's what the statistics are telling me. You want to argue with them, go address what part of the sampling is wrong.

>>8646272
>This study says bi people choose same-sex relationships 9% of the time
Technically it says they "are in" same sex relationships 9% of the time, not that they "choose" them 9% of the time. Same-sex relationships might simply be longer-lasting leading to a higher proportion of bi people being in them despite not seeking them out.

>>8646356
>>8646369
>9% vs 84%
>see they're disproportionally seeking gay relationships
That's bullshit and you know it.

>>8645426
They're also dating trannies 7% of the time (given that gap and the fact they didn't include them)

>>8646414
It's not. I dislike biscum too but he's right.

A bisexual 's dating pool is 97% people of the opposite sex. If 9% of bisexuals are in relationships with that 3% minority, then think about it.

File: cock.png (479KB, 782x784px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 782x784px

>>8645800
>>8645906
>bisexual
>military

Aw, fuck yeah, dudes. Top or bottom?

>>8646446
Biscum are ravenous bottoms 90% of the time.

>>8646438
No.
2% of surveyed "gays" have an opposite sex partner.
1% of surveyed "lesbians" have an opposite sex partner.
84% of surveyed bisexuals have an opposite sex partner.
That's 42 times as likely as gay men and 84 times as likely as lesbians.
That is what I would call disproportionate.

Thanks to bisexuals alone almost half of lgbt might as well be straight.
Hence it's a outright miracle that B is still considered part of lgbt.

File: 1497503141513s.jpg (5KB, 212x250px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 212x250px

>>8646388
so bi's accidentally the gays? So how are they accidentally the gays so much exactly?

[spoiler]inb4 they're soulless breeder scum who are just biding their time for a straight[/spoiler]

>>8646485
....

Do you have an actual learning disability?

>>8645426
This.
They're not man enough to admit they're gay, so are they really man enough to serve in the military.
They're literally the most beta backwards retards on the planet.

>>8646601
No.
You are simply unwilling to consider the possibility that you are wrong and I am right, and you justify that unwillingness by projecting some learning disability on me in the hopes that you don't actually have to argue why you are right.

All on the basis that I'm supposedly stupid, thus not knowing what I am talking about, thus meaning that you must be right.
That's actually flawed reasoning though.

>>8646485
Dude, phones aren't allowed in summer school

File: wait a second this is not an argument this is wood.jpg (108KB, 598x792px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 598x792px

>>8646647

>>8646462
I wish, man. It's practically impossible to find masc homo bottoms in my area, so I pretty much exclusively chase bi guys these days. I don't understand all the hate for them. It must be a bottom thing - they tend to get more jealous and clingy and take breakups a lot harder.

I want to know where all these legendary "homoromantic" bi bottoms live. I'd love to have a proper relationship with one. Tops don't feel threatened by hetero feels in a partner the way bottoms do. I wouldn't, at least. However, all the bi guys I've been with were either already in hetero relationships or between them and weren't at all interested in anything other than sex with another guy.

>>8646643
It's not an opinion. This is what those statistics indicate, assuming they are accurate.

If 1/5 of my partners are black, I'm selecting a disproportionately high amount of black people relative to the general population considering they are only about 1/10th of the US population. Does this not make sense to you?

Based on these stats, one can conclude that bisexuals select same sex partners at a rate disproportionately high from the composition of their dating pool. This is not a subjective claim. It is quite literally what the data suggest.

Jesus fucking Christ.

>>8646676
"Masc". There's no such thing as a masculine man who likes dicks in his butt hole, you retarded delusional fuck.
The reason is gays hate biscum is because they're rapists.
I have met bisexuals who have claimed to be bottoms and then tried to drug me so they could fuck me in the backside.
Bisexuals are completely driven by sex which is why they're all fucking rapists and are not part of our community.

Stupid faggot fuck.

You and the dudes you're fucking like women aren't masc.

>>8645426
If you are unfit mentally or physically you have no place in the military. That's all that matters.

>>8646633
Not all bi guys are gay. But everyone has a preference for who they'd want as a life partner.
Bi people like me are no dfferent but are happy to do sexual stuff with men and women.
I genuinely get turned on by men and women if I'm in the mood but couldn't stand having gf. My bf feels the same way.

>>8646485
>2% of surveyed "gays" have an opposite sex partner.
>1% of surveyed "lesbians" have an opposite sex partner.
Closeted, we'd assume, and not because they chose a straight relationship despite being openly gay.

>84% of surveyed bisexuals have an opposite sex partner.
Despite the fact that, if they chose their partners based on random chance alone, they should have an opposite-sex partner 97% of the time.

They have same-sex partners more often than would be predicted by random chance, which means they are specifically choosing same-sex partners when they presumably could have chosen opposite-sex ones.

>That's 42 times as likely as gay men and 84 times as likely as lesbians.
This is totally irrelevant, since gay men and lesbians - by definition - would freely choose opposite-sex partners virtually 0% of the time outside of being closet cases.

This is like saying that George and Martha go to an ice-cream stand that only serves vanilla while Robert goes to a stand which has ten buckets of ice cream a day, 9 of which are vanilla and 1 of which is chocolate. If Robert is getting more than one chocolate cone out of every ten cones he gets (what you would predict according to random chance), then Robert is expressing some measure of preference for chocolate. George and Martha not getting chocolate at an ice cream stand that doesn't fucking serve chocolate is fucking irrelevant to Robert's fucking preferences in ice cream.

You.

idiot.

>>8646446
Top, but I have an open mind. Probably not gonna disclose it in the marines though, I'm big manly man irl.

>>8646668
It wasn't an argument, I was calling you an idiot, I fully admit that there was no purpose to my comment other than to call you slow

>>8646872
Exactly, most bisexuals are closeted gays and gay visibility is important. People can't know you are an upstanding gay person if they don't know you are gay.

>>8646684
>Based on these stats, one can conclude that bisexuals select same sex partners at a rate disproportionately high from the composition of their dating pool.
They have a total potential dating pool about (rough estimate) 6% same sex to about (another rough estimate) 49% opposite sex according to statistics.
Now the results of this survey say 9% same sex to 84% opposite sex.
If they were to be dating exactly according to the available dating pool then there should be about 10% bisexuals in a same sex relationship.
So not only are these results not "disproportionally" higher, they're in fact lower.
Now obviously there's still a lot of stigma about being in a same sex relationship, especially among straight women which explains the difference (and the marginal part of the LG group) so there are perfect reasons to explain the statistical albeit arguably marginal difference.

However that still gives you no excuse to sell bullshit.

>>8646751

>dank analogy

If this doesn't make sense to you, I think you might have some kind of problem

>>8646921
>Bullshit gay population estimated
The average across all studies is like 3.5%. it certainly doesn't start at fucking 6% you mongoloid.

>>8646921
>(rough estimate) 6% same sex to about (another rough estimate) 49% opposite sex
>total dating pool = 55%
What the fuck is the other 45%, little green men from Mars?

How in the fuck did you people ever graduate?

>>8645906
>Biscum who is aiming to be a Marine infantry officer once I finish college
hahaha

The grunts are gonna eat you alive.

>>8647174
I'm an overconfident fucking meathead, dirtbag. Just because I'm a college boy who isn't straight doesn't mean I'm nervous.

>>8646643
I bet you think Blanchard's wrong too.

>>8647516
Muh

>>8646701
0/10