2007-09-10 01:47:25 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ People with Disabilities
They are all nymphomaniacs...surely this is a mental disorder?
2007-09-10 01:55:03 · update #1
No, it is kind of a curiosity.
2007-09-10 01:54:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, and being bisexual does not equal the person being a 'nymphomaniac'. It merely means that the person has a physical attraction to both the same gender and those of the opposite gender. Sex is only a part of amorous feelings. Spritual connectiveness and intimacy are other aspects of a relationship whether heterosexual, bisexual or homosexual. As long as the person is monogomous (thus for both ethical and health reasons), it doesn't matter what their orientation is. So bisexuality shouldn't be considered a disability but rather a sexual preference and nothing more. The person is not limited in any way that would preclude them from making a living and caring for themselves which is what one thinks of when hearing the term 'disability'.
2007-09-10 07:06:30 · answer #2 · answered by jannsody 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"A disability is a condition or function judged to be significantly impaired relative to the usual standard of an individual or their group."
Is who you decide to have sex with/date/marry a disability? I would think not. Pedophilia is considered a disorder, not a disability. That's just one example. Not that I'm saying bisexuality or homosexuality is wrong, people. Just stating that disabilities, illnesses, and disorders are not the same things.
Please have more of an open-mind.
This world we live in would thrive a lot more if everyone did.
2007-09-10 01:57:37 · answer #3 · answered by Erin M 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All bisexuals are not nymphomaniacs. And even if they were, that would not qualify as a disability.
2007-09-10 06:49:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It used to be considered a psychological ailment (along with homosexuality), but this changed many years ago.
It's nature. Many animal species have homo/bisexual members. It's happened all throughout history. It's no big deal except when people make it out to be. The sooner people accept that, the sooner we can get onto more important things.
2007-09-10 01:52:43 · answer #5 · answered by Kelson 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. A disability is defined as a condition which limits an individual's ability to perform "life functions" such as working, caring for oneself or one's family, recreation, etc.
Bisexuality does not limit any life function.
2007-09-10 02:57:17 · answer #6 · answered by dansinger61 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Up untill 1973, homosexuallity was considered as a mental illness.
2007-09-10 07:33:16 · answer #7 · answered by grumpyfiend 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
disabilities apply to the workplace... sounds like an unconvincing stretch
a military court might consider it a disability for some positions
maybe... it is debatable
2007-09-10 01:52:25 · answer #8 · answered by whirlingmerc 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can hardly see why that could be considered a disability.
2007-09-10 01:50:02 · answer #9 · answered by Victoria T 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sickness Yes, Disability NO WAY!
2007-09-10 05:44:23 · answer #10 · answered by yorkmaybeblue 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Sadly, in the USA, a "disability" is now a code-word for special protective laws, entitlements, and money.
I'm SICK of all this crap... the Obese are "disabled" =)) ?
2007-09-10 03:35:40 · answer #11 · answered by mariner31 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋