matchmaking divinination/4th orientation again

7 views
Skip to first unread message

David Dalton

unread,
Mar 9, 2019, 11:46:39 PM3/9/19
to
My ability to identify the sexual orientation of a person by looking
at them or a picture of them seemed to be working last night,
though I was mildly drunk at the time. This time it is not based
on perineum click divination but on observation of the individual
or their picture. But once again the determinations fall within
my four orientation theory, in which I claim that there is a
fourth orientation compatible only with bisexual by nature (i.e.
someone who is attracted to both genders) of the opposite
gender. If the theory is correct then it should prove useful
to other matchmakers.

However the sensitivity doesn’t appear to be quite as strong
tonight, plus note that my matchmaking divinations were
quite off from summer 1997 to spring 1999 and from fall
2004 to early 2005.

Last night I divined that Joni Mitchell is 4th orientation female
(significantly attracted to and orgasmic with only bisexual
by nature men, not purestraight men, gay men pretending
to be bi, or 4th orientation men).

I currently don’t have 4O.html on my web page but I do plan
to edit it a little and add it eventually, but I have some
academic work I need to take care of this week first.

But if my ability to detect someone’s sexual orientation by
looking at them or a picture of them is real, it should be
testable.

--
David Dalton dal...@nfld.com http://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
http://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
“This could be the final breath/This is life and death
This is hard rock and water." (Ron Hynes--Final Breath)

David Dalton

unread,
Mar 9, 2019, 11:49:32 PM3/9/19
to
I’ll have to proofread more carefully. “divinination” in the Subject
line should be “divination”. I guess auto spellcheck doesn’t work
in the Subject line in Hogwasher newsreader.

380295701

unread,
Mar 10, 2019, 9:01:25 PM3/10/19
to
On 3/9/2019 11:46 PM, David Dalton wrote:
> My ability

Yawn.

David Dalton

unread,
Mar 11, 2019, 2:34:34 AM3/11/19
to
On Mar 10, 2019, David Dalton wrote
(in article<0001HW.2234CE2E01...@news.eternal-september.org>):

> My ability to identify the sexual orientation of a person by looking
> at them or a picture of them seemed to be working last night,
> though I was mildly drunk at the time. This time it is not based
> on perineum click divination but on observation of the individual
> or their picture. But once again the determinations fall within
> my four orientation theory, in which I claim that there is a
> fourth orientation compatible only with bisexual by nature (i.e.
> someone who is attracted to both genders) of the opposite
> gender. If the theory is correct then it should prove useful
> to other matchmakers.
>
> However the sensitivity doesn’t appear to be quite as strong
> tonight, plus note that my matchmaking divinations were
> quite off from summer 1997 to spring 1999 and from fall
> 2004 to early 2005.
>
> Last night I divined that Joni Mitchell is 4th orientation female
> (significantly attracted to and orgasmic with only bisexual
> by nature men, not purestraight men, gay men pretending
> to be bi, or 4th orientation men).
>
> I currently don’t have 4O.html on my web page but I do plan
> to edit it a little and add it eventually, but I have some
> academic work I need to take care of this week first.
>
> But if my ability to detect someone’s sexual orientation by
> looking at them or a picture of them is real, it should be
> testable.

I think I have been tested on alt.philosophy.taoism with two rare cases.

And last night someone on a Facebook group challenged me to
identify his sexuality and tonight I correctly identified him as
a two spirited purestraight male/bisexual female.

The Millennium Wombat

unread,
Mar 12, 2019, 12:09:33 PM3/12/19
to
On Monday, 11 March 2019 06:34:34 UTC, David Dalton wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2019, David Dalton wrote
> > But if my ability to detect someone’s sexual orientation by
> > looking at them or a picture of them is real, it should be
> > testable.
>
> I think I have been tested on alt.philosophy.taoism with two rare cases.
>
> And last night someone on a Facebook group challenged me to
> identify his sexuality and tonight I correctly identified him as
> a two spirited purestraight male/bisexual female.

Neither of which was a double-blind test, so not a standard of proof which most of us would accept.

It's clear you have co-opted the term "sexual orientation" to mean something different to the rest of us. The standard definition is that it refers to the gender of people that the subject is attracted to. Gender can be classified as agender, male, female, intersex and nonbinary (though nonbinary covers all sorts of genders which vary between different cultures and times). Orientation can be classified as asexual, heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual (again, bisexual covers all sorts of orientations, notably including pansexual).

So there are already four orientations, but all of them refer to the gender of people one is attracted to. Your definition of "fourth orientation" refers to characteristics other than gender - so, according to the definition in common currency, what you are calling an orientation is not a sexual orientation at all, just like metrosexual, sapiosexual and the rest of these words which have sprung up in recent years. The other day I saw someone use the term "lumbersexual". Neologism is fun but it runs the risk of making important words meaningless.

J.

David Dalton

unread,
Mar 12, 2019, 2:03:14 PM3/12/19
to
On Mar 12, 2019, The Millennium Wombat wrote
(in article<9090bccb-a1bf-487f...@googlegroups.com>):

> On Monday, 11 March 2019 06:34:34 UTC, David Dalton wrote:
> > On Mar 10, 2019, David Dalton wrote
> > > But if my ability to detect someone’s sexual orientation by
> > > looking at them or a picture of them is real, it should be
> > > testable.
> >
> > I think I have been tested on alt.philosophy.taoism with two rare cases.
> >
> > And last night someone on a Facebook group challenged me to
> > identify his sexuality and tonight I correctly identified him as
> > a two spirited purestraight male/bisexual female.
>
> Neither of which was a double-blind test, so not a standard of proof which
> most of us would accept.

I won’t give his name since I don’t have his permission, but
I will quote from his Facebook private message reply to me
after I told him he was two-spited purestraight male/bisexual
female just from looking at his profile picture:

"Holy shit, I’ve nearly reaching androgeniety on the alchemical path. I’m
alpha male and very attracted to females. But I’m also effeminate and am
bi/pansexual”.

The Millennium Wombat

unread,
Mar 12, 2019, 3:06:59 PM3/12/19
to
On Tuesday, 12 March 2019 18:03:14 UTC, David Dalton wrote:
> On Mar 12, 2019, The Millennium Wombat wrote
> > On Monday, 11 March 2019 06:34:34 UTC, David Dalton wrote:
> > > On Mar 10, 2019, David Dalton wrote
> > > And last night someone on a Facebook group challenged me to
> > > identify his sexuality and tonight I correctly identified him as
> > > a two spirited purestraight male/bisexual female.
> >
> > Neither of which was a double-blind test, so not a standard of proof which
> > most of us would accept.
>
> I won’t give his name since I don’t have his permission, but
> I will quote from his Facebook private message reply to me
> after I told him he was two-spited purestraight male/bisexual
> female just from looking at his profile picture:
>
> "Holy shit, I’ve nearly reaching androgeniety on the alchemical path. I’m
> alpha male and very attracted to females. But I’m also effeminate and am
> bi/pansexual”.

Sure, quote from private messages rather than address any of my points.

Usenet has a long and venerable history of people claiming that private messages support them, though it's unusual for people to actually publish them (due to it being a breach of trust), especially when it turns out the private message says something significantly different to what you claim it does.

J.

David Dalton

unread,
Mar 12, 2019, 3:15:11 PM3/12/19
to
On Mar 12, 2019, The Millennium Wombat wrote
(in article<9090bccb-a1bf-487f...@googlegroups.com>):
>
> It's clear you have co-opted the term "sexual orientation" to mean something
> different to the rest of us. The standard definition is that it refers to the
> gender of people that the subject is attracted to. Gender can be classified
> as agender, male, female, intersex and nonbinary (though nonbinary covers all
> sorts of genders which vary between different cultures and times).
> Orientation can be classified as asexual, heterosexual, homosexual and
> bisexual (again, bisexual covers all sorts of orientations, notably including
> pansexual).
>
> So there are already four orientations, but all of them refer to the gender
> of people one is attracted to. Your definition of "fourth orientation" refers
> to characteristics other than gender - so, according to the definition in
> common currency, what you are calling an orientation is not a sexual
> orientation at all, just like metrosexual, sapiosexual and the rest of these
> words which have sprung up in recent years. The other day I saw someone use
> the term "lumbersexual". Neologism is fun but it runs the risk of making
> important words meaningless.
>
> J.

Well, it is just a question of notation, which is negotiable.

Instead of four orientations times two genders I could say there
are eight harmonics (1M, 2M, 3M, 4M, 1F, 2F, 3F, 4F) and
there are rare individuals who have more than one, who
I call multi-spirit individuals.

Colonel Edmund J. Burke

unread,
Mar 31, 2019, 1:21:49 PM3/31/19
to
"Mmm, so doctor, what's the prognosis on this one? Any recommendations?"

"Well, I recommend we keep this one locked up a while longer, or until the second coming of Christ--whichever comes first."
LOL


Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages