His reaction is SO ADORABLE! The little scream and fall-down! Aw

Don't worry, John, I can totally relate:)

Well, that's it. I'm going to Comic-Con next year.

He. John Barrowman reminded me a little of Freddy Mercury in this video. In a good way. :)

John is SUCH a fangirl! LOL!

Priceless. Absolutely priceless.

Barrowman rather delightfully supports my hypothesis that humans would be naturally bisexual in the absence of culture and other influences pushing them toward exclusively hetero- or homosexual orientations. It makes sense to me that this would extend to being naturally omnisexual, if we ever encounter compatible nonhuman species.

It may be difficult to see how any human could become sexually attracted to a really alien alien being, like the species in District 9. But maybe, when the time comes, we'll find out love really does conquer all.

Victor, Barrowman himself believes that he is pretty exclusively gay. I'm not sure that he would dispute that your theory applies to a lot of people, but I think he'd say it's unlikely to ever apply to him (I think he said "never say never" in an interview, but its pretty clear that his preference is strongly for men). There's an interesting documentary called the The Making of Me where Barrowman explores the idea of where his sexuality comes from.

The pressure from society to be heterosexual is so great, even now, that you have to be pretty sure that you're gay to describe yourself that way. I'm sure there are a lot of people who self-identify as straight who would be bisexual in a different society, but I'm not convinced that it goes the other way that often, although it is possible that some gay men and lesbians reject the bisexual part of themselves for the sake of maintaining a strong sense of who they are - although even then I'd guess that their basic attraction to people of the same sex is what's strongest.

Captain Jack Harkness, on the other hand, is partly Russell T Davies' exploration of the idea that, in the future, sexuality will be fluid for most people. As far as I know, Russell T Davies also considers himself to be gay and nothing else, but he's also interested in challenging the idea of rigid sexuality. All of the Torchwood characters do this, to an extent. However, I think Davies would still believe that some people in the 51st Century would still be exclusively homosexual or heterosexual, it's just that most people wouldn't be bothered about being in-between. There's an interesting Davies interview about sexuality here, talking about his series Bob and Rose:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2001/sep/02/features.review67

Ianto's conversation with his sister in Children of Earth is small reprise of this theme.

All of this reminds me of this bit of Peep Shoe (the internal monologue is in brackets):

Sophie: And have I lived enough? I mean, I've only slept with four men. Is that enough?

Jez: Four?... Oh... Yeah. (Jesus. I've had sex with more men than that, and I basically only sleep with women.)

Mmmmm....Skinny!Tummy porn.

Matthew, this hypothesis I mentioned (I doubt I'm the one who invented it; it's "mine" only in the sense that I agree with it) is not meant to tell any particular person what their sexual orientation ought to be. There is always lots of natural variation between people.

Also, my praise for Barrowman has nothing to do with saying he ought to be any particular orientation. (Not my place to tell others whom they should or shouldn't find attractive.) It's about his skill as an actor in presenting a convincingly omnisexual character, and also about the audience's enthusiastic response to that portrayal.

Thank you, Matthew, for the link to that fascinating article on Davies. His willingness to open his mind is admirable. The ideas he develops in his new series speak to the possibilities for greater human happiness when we start to form our relationships more on the basis of love, and less on worry about how others might label us.

I think human sexuality is a spectrum, rather than a rigid designation. Some people are on the extreme ends of the spectrum (very straight or very gay) and lots fall in between to varying degrees. It might be the same with aliens too; some people (and aliens, if they are anything like us) may be able to have sex outside their species, and others would stick to their own.
The absence of cultural influences regarding sexuality would result in no concept of "shame" regarding sexual orientation. Also, no hatred for those with different preferences. I'd love to live to see that day.

We seem to be mostly agreeing with each other, with slightly different phrasing, so I won't take issue with anything that's been said, just expand a little on the same themes.

The phrase "naturally bisexual" might not be the most accurate description for what I'm trying to say. Perhaps bisexual has more negative connotations than I'm aware of.

My thoughts arise from observing that we humans are naturally social creatures. (Some individuals may feel antisocial to one degree or another, and it's their right to feel that way, but wanting zero contact with other humans is extremely rare.) Most of us enjoy the ability to build relationships with many different kinds of people.

We are also naturally sexual. (Again, there's room for every conceivable variation, and even feeling totally uninterested in sex is not something I'm prepared to call "wrong," but it is exceedingly rare.) Most of us like sex, a lot.

When I put these observations together, and then re-evaluate the spectrum of "natural" and "unnatural" preferences, it seems to me that an inability to find someone attractive, merely because of their gender, is more "unnatural" than being able to feel attraction toward compatible people of both genders.

Part of what I'm trying to do here is disarm the word "unnatural," which has been far too often used to attack GLBT people and others with unpopular sexual orientations. Maybe it's too early, with so many people still openly expressing prejudice, but I hope my intended meaning can still break through all that.

Sounds like it's time for MaryAnn to review Humpday.

I don't know about omnisexual (remember Captain John Harper and that poodle) y'know does the dog get a say?

that's just animal abuse to me

Omnisexual applies only to sapient beings, intellectually capable of giving fully informed consent, of course. I thought that was obvious enough not to need mentioning, in the context of Doctor Who, but apparently I was mistaken.

The phrase "naturally bisexual" might not be the most accurate description for what I'm trying to say. Perhaps bisexual has more negative connotations than I'm aware of.

Victor, I've been told that there is a fair amount of prejudice against bisexuality in the gay community itself. The implication being that the bi person "can't commit."

It doesn't make any sense to me, but so say my gay and bi friends.

As for me, I believe there's a spectrum of gender, as well as sexual orientation, and the more diversity the better.

you're funny Victor!

Lisa, I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks!

Allochthon, now that you mention it, I seem to recall hearing similar prejudices about bisexuals, but I am certainly not using the term in that sense.

All I mean to describe is a person who finds people of both genders equally attractive as potential partners. It doesn't matter whether they seek a long term exclusive commitment or a short term fling. Gay and straight people seek one or both of those things all the time.

Anybody can have a conflict with any romantic partner when they realize they aren't both looking for the same level of commitment.