Why aren't you bisexual?

why aren't you bisexual?

>if you don't reply you will have bad luck forever

I am.

::checking dubs intensifies::

I'm not a degenerate.

::checking dubs further intensifies::

i just dont like guys

I am, but this thread is getting fucking annoying.
Fuck off

i am, men women trannies i love em all

no u

nigger.

i kinda am

show your dicks, pls

Because I have no desire to fuck other men.

But I am bisexual

show feet pls

Pussy looks like a lovecraftian terror no matter how many times I look at one. Dick however is always a treat.

Trust me you don't wanna see my feet.

fug

Being bi is pretty fuckin gay

post dick then

>lovecraftian
I hate this word so much, kys

bcuz.

it's also pretty fuckin straight, by that logic

*bi-cuz

XD

which is funny cuz my cousin is bi :O

bcoz no

I am, it sucks tho

To many choices for porn

Not really.

then use this thread:

It's literally the same logic that you are using.

Bisexuals are bisexual, they aren't straight or gay.

Words mean things.

I'm not that guy, but the idea that the "same" logic applies doesn't follow.

Words mean what we decide they mean.

It's either NEITHER straight or gay, or BOTH straight and gay at the same time.

But bisexual = bisexual. It is its own sexuality.

>Words mean what we decide they mean.
They literally don't. You're fucking retarded if you believe that.

Words are defined by their usage, not by what you WANT them to mean.

God, I just lost a few brain cells having to even think about how retarded you must be.

personal preference, fag

checked

i am

>Words are defined by their usage
Who uses words? We do. If you and I decide that a word means something, then that's what it means.

Men don't have tits

...

...

This has to be bait.

Not an argument.

I AM SORRY FOR WHAT I'VE DONE

why aren't you straight? there ya go

being bisexual is awesome

Neither is anything that you typed.

You just made shit up.

Words are defined by their usage, which is what a dictionary does - it categorizes the way words are used by a group, not by a single subject. Words lack any meaning if they're only determined by an individual. It's the group's usage of a word that gives it meaning.

Jesus Christ you are so fucking dense it's ridiculous.

Common usage.
It has to be mutual understanding

Because I'm not attracted to dudes, don't like aids, and am not so desperate that I have to fuck dudes.

>You just made shit up.
Nope.
>Words are defined by their usage, which is what a dictionary does
Dictionaries are descriptive, not prescriptive. You can use them as useful tools to see how others commonly use a word, but you aren't bound by that.
>Words lack any meaning if they're only determined by an individual.
Wrong. They literally have the meaning that we give to them.
>Jesus Christ you are so fucking dense it's ridiculous.
Ad hominem.

>reposting the same thread with the same image a week later

>I'm not attracted to dudes
Why not?

>don't like aids
Nobody does. You're also retarded if you get them, since you don't know how to avoid them.

>not so desperate that I have to fuck dudes
You don't need to be desperate if you find them sexually arousing.

You and I don't have to go by the common usage. We can mutually agree on a non-common usage.

Never said dictionaries were prescriptive, dumbass.

They describe usage.

Linguistics 101: ((You)) don't determine was words mean, usage does.

>Why not?
imagine being such a faggot that you can't comprehend being normal.

>Never said dictionaries were prescriptive
Good, then we agree.
>They describe usage.
Correct, which the individual is not bound by. What part of this are you having trouble with?

OK but it isn't impressive.

>We can mutually agree on a non-common usage.
But there is literally no reason to ever do that if we know what a word already means.

You don't like the word "bisexual"? Tough shit. I don't like the word "shimmy", but that doesn't mean I get to either choose it doesn't exist or say it means something different than what it does.

I don't like men. Easy as that.

Please justify your assertion.

>imagine being this sexually repressed

Read a dictionary.

Linguistics MA student reporting, I support this product and/or service

I am

>But there is literally no reason to ever do that if we know what a word already means.
There are plenty of reasons you might want to do that, which assumes that you even need a reason, which you don't.

>imagine being so disgusted at your abomination of a sexuality that cause mental damage

>There are plenty of reasons you might want to do that
Then give us one.

How would reading a dictionary justify your assertion?

i am

Philosophical discussion.

>imagine secretly wanting dick but being so uncomfortable with it that you have to pretend you don't like it by calling others that aren't trapped by the prison of a religious mind "mentally ill"
>imagine being secretly bi but denying it and constantly replying to a thread you could have just ignored but you're actually bi so it somehow offends you that you can't deal with it

Nope. Words in philosophy still have established meanings. Otherwise, philosophical discussions would be meaningless, which they aren't.

While words can have vagueness they still maintain meaning, even if the meaning is "broader" in concept.

>imagine being gay but hating yourself so you go to your little fetish websites and talk to other scumbags until you've deluded yourself into believing that everyone is gay.

>Words in philosophy still have established meanings.
No, defining your terms is an important part of having a meaningful discussion.
>Otherwise, philosophical discussions would be meaningless
See above.

joke's on you I'll have bad luck anyway

Dictionaries provide the meanings of words, which is determined by their usage.

If you don't like that, tough shit, it's not decided by you.

Words have the meaning that we give to them. A word can mean one thing to one person, another thing to another person, and be gibberish to a third person who isn't familiar with it.

Defining terms is actually clarifying the particular usage of a term.

It's not just making shit up out of the blue, which is what you are suggesting.

You're going in circles. I've already responded to this.
>If you don't like that, tough shit, it's not decided by you.
Says who?

I disagree. What are you going to do about it?

As long as one person disagrees with you, you can't actually believe the view you take.

>It's not just making shit up out of the blue
It isn't typically, but it certainly can be. There is nothing to stop you from giving a term a completely novel meaning.

Linguistic communities, which is the only reason language exists in the first place.

I'm not a faggot like you

>What are you going to do about it?
I don't see that I need to do anything about it.
>As long as one person disagrees with you, you can't actually believe the view you take.
How do you reach this conclusion?

Even if philosophy were to be a special case - which I am not convinced that it is - provide another reason besides philosophical discussion where meaning is decided by the individual.

>Linguistic communities
Communities are composed of individuals.

Your request is malformed.

If you are saying that language is completely determined by the individual meaning what they want a word to mean, you still aren't providing a reason why people would completely disagree with that view. It turns out language is contentious. Words can be ambiguous, and they can change over time in their usage. But it doesn't mean that words aren't established by their usage in a group.

You seem to simply not like the word "bisexual", but this doesn't mean that it doesn't mean what it means, which is an individual attracted to both sexes. You can't just tell us it means something else, because you aren't in charge of the language that people use.

Care to explain what you mean by that?

>can't think of an example
>insults the question as a decoy

I am :^)

because girls are yucky

>this doesn't mean that it doesn't mean what it means
Words don't have intrinsic meaning.
>You can't just tell us it means something else
I demonstrably can.
>because you aren't in charge of the language that people use
Correct. Nothing I have said implies that you must go along with my usage, just like I don't have to go along with yours. All that means is that we will have a failure to communicate.

>already gave an example
>already stated that reasons aren't even needed
>provide another reason besides philosophical discussion where meaning is decided by the individual.
This part doesn't make sense.

>I demonstrably can.
No, you can't, because if you say bisexual means something else, and it doesn't mean the meaning that it has, then you are factually incorrect in your assertion.

You are delusional, and nobody will take you seriously, and rightly so.

this fucking thread

It makes perfect sense.

For the sake of argument, let's assume philosophical discussion is a quirky case. But you said yourself that there is every reason we should want to change the meaning of words. Give another example besides philosophy.

If you can't, nobody should take you seriously.

not interested

Your statement was: You can't just tell us it means something else.

I can demonstrably do this, rendering this statement false. You may well reject the meaning that I give to it, but that doesn't change the fact that I still did it.
>You are delusional, and nobody will take you seriously, and rightly so.
More ad hominem.

>You can't just tell us it means something else.
You literally can't.

>It makes perfect sense.
It doesn't. Read it again. Maybe shortening it will help "provide another reason ... where meaning is decided"
>But you said yourself that there is every reason we should want to change the meaning of words
I never said this.

You can't demonstrate it, because you are no longer using the actual meaning of the word.

Arbitrarily switching the letters of a word or taking a word and giving it a meaning that another word has does nothing. The word still has its established meaning by the use of it in the group.

YOU DO NOT MATTER.