BF using tinder to message both men/women

[upsidedownsmile]

Never posted before and this is going to be a long post so please be nice (but honest)

Two and a half years ago I met a guy and thought he was gay. He told me he was straight and explained about his past (which I feel I can't really go into) and explained it was firmly in the past and that he was straight. We got together and had a good relationship, but it was immature and we argued over silly things. We never broke up officially but he just cut me off and stopped speaking to me so I soon got the message. I went away to uni for the year and we met up and talked about what happened and got some closure.

About 6 weeks ago we met up again and had a series of serious conversations which helped us move on from things that were problematic for us in the past. Also, I think the time apart allowed us to grow up and we're no longer annoyed by the same petty things we were.

Everything was going really well, until a gay friend of mine found him on tinder. I've confronted him about it and he says he made the account when we weren't together and made it because he was lonely. I can't seem to get over the fact that he was a) using tinder and b) using it to find a guy. (Although he says he wasn't exclusively looking for a guy) There are other things that suggest to me he is attracted to men, his social media accounts seem to infer this all the time.

He has said he wants to work it out and sort it but I don't feel I can. I feel he lied to me about his sexuality because if he was looking for a man then he is either gay or bi-sexual. I have no problem with gay, or bi people, I have many friends who are and have never thought anything of it. However I know that I can't be with someone who is bi, especially in this situation where sexual activity with a man has previously taken place.

I don't really know what I'm hoping for. But I would appreciate hearing people's advice/opinions on it

Yes, to some people that does matter. Why does that mean they aren't prejudiced views?

It's a preference based on what we like sexually, it's not a statement about worth or equality.

Although bisexuality does not matter to me one way or the other, I would not want to be with anyone into medical or hardcore BDSM, nor those dressing up as ponies or babies! This is not a statement regarding equality, just my preference.

Prejudiced?

I don't know how much clearer I can be.

If you don't want to be with someone because you have prejudices about something they are like being black or being bisexual then you are free to, it's important in fact that you are able to exercise choices in that way.

But your choice would still be based on prejudiced beliefs. Just because your particular prejudice is shared by many people doesn't mean it isn't a prejudice.

And aping violence, bestiality and paedophilia during sex? These are things comparable to being sexually attracted to people of the same gender?!?!

I like BDSM too but I'd certainly understand exactly why someone else would be entirely put off by it. Simply being attracted to both sexes or having had sex with both men and women is entirely different.

Offred do you think lesbians who only want to be with women who prioritise women, and thus wouldn't be with a bi women, are also prejudiced?

If they are prejudging people as lesbian = prioritising women and bisexual = not prioritising women then yes, why exactly wouldn't I?

Being part of a minority that suffers discrimination based on prejudice doesn't mean you can never be prejudiced does it?

If it helps anyone who doesn't want to be with anyone because of prejudice about what being something that that person is is prejudiced. It really is quite simple, no they don't have to be with anyone, yes they have the absolute right to choose their partners but if they are prejudiced then they are prejudiced - why are you finding it so difficult to understand?

I don't know how much clearer I can be either. It's to do with attraction and not prejudice.

I couldn't be attracted to anyone who gets off on piss, shit, ponies, medical, cutting, blood. The thought leaves me cold!

Whilst same sex sex doesn't fall into my realm of turn offs, it does for others because that's not their preference.

Likewise there are some who won't be with people who like porn. Prejudice? Good luck in arguing that one on MN!

I am not finding you hard to understand, I'm DISAGREEING with you! That's what you can't seem to understand. You've been clear in your many posts in it and I understand what you are saying but I don't agree. Just like I wouldn't agree with somebody doing their damnedest to convince me day was night.

I couldn't be attracted to anyone who gets off on piss, shit, ponies, medical, cutting, blood. The thought leaves me cold!

Whilst same sex sex doesn't fall into my realm of turn offs, it does for others because that's not their preference.

Umm... really, really offensive comparisons being made here. Getting off on 'piss, shit, ponies, medical, cutting, blood' are clearly viewed as sexually deviant (and potentially a bit scary/dangerous), and having a sexual relationship that did not involve these things with someone who got off on them would presumably imply a sexual life that disappointed one of the partners.

Please tell me how this relates to having a sexual relationship with a bisexual person?

I'll freely admit, I wouldn't go near a bi-sexual man, or woman for that matter. I don't care if that makes me prejudiced....can't imagine anything worse!

Well, you sound delightful.

Incidentally, for whoever it was that said it, yes, saying that you wouldn't date someone of X ethnicity is extremely prejudiced. People vary widely in looks (amongst everything else that everyone varies in!) within individual ethnicities, so either you are writing off an entire ethnicity because of some kind of racist mindset or you're incredibly unimaginative to assume whatever characteristic you weren't a fan of in some people, would also be present in everyone else of the same ethnicity, or that said characteristic would be aesthetically unpleasing in the context of every possible combination of features in a person of the respective ethnicity.

Nope honeqcrich, I agree completely. I have never slept with a BME man either because I simply haven't fancied the ones I have met! I'm certainly not rasist, it is a sexual preference.

Offred, not al lesbians prioritise women, but some do. Bisexual women don't prioritise women.

Nope honeqcrich, I agree completely. I have never slept with a BME man either because I simply haven't fancied the ones I have met! I'm certainly not rasist, it is a sexual preference.

It's not a sexual preference, though. You're saying that of all the skin tone and eye colour and hairstyle and body type and personality combos BME men can come in, you know you would never fancy one. How does that work?

I tend to fancy men with blondish hair or very dark brown hair over men with medium brown hair, but I wouldn't say that I'd never find one I fancied. I have also intensely fancied (for example) Arabs, Indians, Chinese and Korean people. I don't fancy the majority of people I've seen of these ethnicities - but then I wouldn't fancy the majority of white people I see as opposed to actually meet in person and get to know, I just happen to have met a whole lot more of said white people and been able to develop an attraction to more of them proportionately. This 'I don't fancy BME/black/East Asian men' thing is ignorant nonsense.

Offred, not al lesbians prioritise women, but some do. Bisexual women don't prioritise women.

In what way would all bisexual women fail to prioritise women that some lesbians could also fail to prioritise them, according to you? You sound like you've never discussed sexual preferences with a real bisexual person in your life.

So, if a woman were to be put off by knowing a man liked anal, whether with a man or woman, and that's not her thing, is that prejudice or just good sense to accept that it would be a part of love-making that their prospective partner would have to miss through knowing them?
Is it ok to call that person prejudice because, they don't want to be put in a situation where they feel unable to give all that the other wants, so prefer not to try? What if that person has medical reasons not to engage with it?
Offered, off the wall I'm afraid. Sexual preference cannot be paralleled with racism. Though I do think you often talk sense, not with you on this one.

I didn't say I knew I would never fancy one; I said I haven't fancied the ones I've met! Thought I had made that clear.

So, if a woman were to be put off by knowing a man liked anal, whether with a man or woman, and that's not her thing, is that prejudice or just good sense to accept that it would be a part of love-making that their prospective partner would have to miss through knowing them?
Is it ok to call that person prejudice because, they don't want to be put in a situation where they feel unable to give all that the other wants, so prefer not to try? What if that person has medical reasons not to engage with it?

Writing off a partner because of things you imagine they would find disappointing about your sex life is ridiculous, ignorant and by virtue of it not actually being in any way tied to the necessary reality of a sexual relationship with a bisexual person, prejudiced, yes.

Should bisexuals only ever have four-way polyamorous relationships, two men and two women, to avoid this imagined problem you're ascribing to them?

I didn't say I knew I would never fancy one; I said I haven't fancied the ones I've met! Thought I had made that clear.

That's perfectly fair, it's just a statement of fact - you haven't fancied any up to now. That's not the same as suggesting you're not sexually attracted to the any of them, which is I suspect what the poster was suggesting.

Should bisexuals only ever have four-way polyamorous relationships, two men and two women, to avoid this imagined problem you're ascribing to them?

In addition to the above - what if one of the men likes (receiving) anal and the other guy doesn't like anal at all? How on earth do we resolve this terrible problem that obviously every bisexual person has? Sexually liberated mass communes? A giant computised sexual preference matching program to avoid such a situation? Surely it must have been invented to fill the gap already, since minor aspects of preferred types of sexual activity are clearly so high on bisexual people's priorities when choosing a partner.

Sexual attraction for me is very much based on a meeting of minds and chemistry.

If you know somebody gets off on an activity that turns you off then there won't be that meeting of minds and this can prevent attraction.

If somebody takes it a whole lot further and uses your sexuality and tastes to make a judgement about you as a person, or believes they have the right to limit your freedoms, THAT is prejudice. That's the distinct difference between prejudice and attraction, that's where the line between the two is.

We are all entitled to have our own tastes, we are not entitled to be predudiced by deeming people with differing tastes as a lesser person for it or impose our own views by trying to limit their freedoms. That's the big difference.

Sexual attraction for me is very much based on a meeting of minds and chemistry.

If you know somebody gets off on an activity that turns you off then there won't be that meeting of minds and this can prevent attraction.

I'm sorry, I would admit to being slightly prejudiced about people who like watching football. I can put that down to all sorts of associations I unconsciously make in my head about people who like watching football. However, the only reason I would write someone I otherwise fancied, but who liked football, off on only that basis, without actually getting to know them to find out whether my prejudiced view of people who like watching football was all wrong, would be because I discovered that a lot of our lives together would be taken up with there being football on the TV, or him (or her!) being off down the local stadium for inordinate amounts of time.

Weirdly, in an exclusive sexual relationship between a woman and a bisexual man, the bisexual man's penchant for cock would be unlikely to encroach on their lives in this way.

So no, I'm afraid I don't get it.

If a man who likes cock is happy to never have cock again in life because they are in a relationship with a female, well that's fine - anyone know stats on that ?
If said male is then trawling internet in search of cock, is it not understandable to think that the woman who suspected he liked cock may feel betrayed by believing them when told they are enough ?

If a man who likes cock is happy to never have cock again in life because they are in a relationship with a female, well that's fine - anyone know stats on that ?

Do you want to find some stats to support the offensive claim to the contrary you're making in such a slimy manner?

If said male is then trawling internet in search of cock, is it not understandable to think that the woman who suspected he liked cock may feel betrayed by believing them when told they are enough ?

Do we go around claiming all men are gaslighting, wife-beating cocklodgers just because we read about such men on the Relationships board, too? I thought that was frowned upon, to say the least?

Smill

I like the analogy

Each to their own. It's up to you whether your views limit your potential matches (did you see what I did there!) and are a deal breaker or not if you couldn't get past it. That's your choice, you don't need to explain or justify either way and nobody else needs to understand it.

The difference is that you don't try to impose your views about football on everyone else or try to ban the game because of your feelings.

That's the difference between taste and prejudice.

I'm bowing out now. I couldn't express myself any better than I have. I don't feel threatened or defensive when people aren't attracted to me because of my tastes. I do get bloody angry when they cross the line into prejudice.

Poor OP, she came here for support and advice re a potentially cheating boyfriend and her thread has been turned into a huge debate.

If she wants a monogamous relationship (and I'm hoping none of you are going to try to argue she's prejudiced against polyamorous people for wanting that) then it really doesn't matter whether he's chatting to men or women on tinder. He sounds like a liar and a possible cheater.

Each to their own. It's up to you whether your views limit your potential matches (did you see what I did there!) and are a deal breaker or not if you couldn't get past it. That's your choice, you don't need to explain or justify either way and nobody else needs to understand it.

The difference is that you don't try to impose your views about football on everyone else or try to ban the game because of your feelings.

If I'm honest I'm not following your argument, really. But you're entitled to your own feelings, of course.

I don't understand who you think would be imposing anything on anyone or banning anything in either situation?

I also don't understand why you think a man happening to also enjoy the sensation of a cock up his bum (for example) would in any way prevent a 'meeting of the minds'. Presumably my partner likes the feeling of his penis being inside a vagina. I don't share his perspective on that, as I don't have a penis. How is that any less of an obstacle in terms of experiencing a 'meeting of the minds' than you not liking a penis up your bum and your partner happening to like the feeling of one up his?

There are things I've done with past partners that my partner isn't interested in doing, I'm sure virtually everyone who has had more than one partner must have something like that. However our sex life is healthy and enjoyable for us both. Why is penis up the bum such a different thing in the minds of some people?

Poor OP, she came here for support and advice re a potentially cheating boyfriend and her thread has been turned into a huge debate.

But the OP revealed that potential cheating wasn't the whole problem. She has a problem with the idea that he might be bisexual. That's what started the debate, so I have less sympathy than you do, I suppose.