The conventional wisdom is that your sex, your gender identity, and your sexual orientation are separate entities. I am not completely convinced that is true in all respects. That seems simplistic and mechanical to me. I think it is clear that all three interact in complex ways and if they interact they are hardly separate. We are a complex of a vast array of traits and characteristics and those often influence each other. Sex is our biological foundation and primarily intended for reproduction only. But some animals, especially humans, use sex for recreational purposes as well as reproductive. Having same sex activity is fairly widespread in mammals, although not the usual in most species. Thus if a male feels, at some particular moment, they are female with regard to gender it seems to me there should be a tendency to follow the sexual orientation characteristic of females. Actually following through with that thinking or tendency is another matter, but it seems to me that kind of thinking and action is entirely possible and natural.

So bisexual behavior in a CD seems logical in a pure sense, but perhaps not in a practical sense. Other things such as faithfulness to a mate and the like may modify that gender - bisexual connection to a huge extent, but the thought and a hint of desire may still be there. So, I don't think the path you took was wrong or even weird. And I am not sure that in your mind CD preceded bisexual or the other way around. In you they may have already been joined but not expressed and it took a particular situation to bring it out.

The point of all this is that I am not so sure we can so easily separate sex, gender, and sexual orientation as if they are separate gears in a machine. We aren't machines. We are biological organisms and as a biologist I know all too well that everything in us is connected to everything else and the whole changes, adapts, evolves, experiments and, in general, interacts with such complexity it is hard to even decipher the pathways because the pathways are constantly changing. We are generally alike, but the individual is defined by the details and the possible combinations are almost infinite. I agree that if Walter forced you or manipulated you into having sex, that was wrong. But whether forced or not, you responded positively and with reasonable comfort with the new experience. Thus that possible pathway was perhaps already available even though not activated until you experienced it. A pre-disposition of gender variance AND a pre-disposition toward bisexual orientation that once experienced became active? Sure makes sense to me, but not all gender variant people also have a bisexual predisposition. Thus, considering the three BIG ONES as being separate doesn't make a lot of sense to me. To me, they form an interactive complex and that makes far more sense with respect to our biology and our other behaviors. We do things as an experiment and often, but not always, we find it satisfies some previously unrecognized need. But that is also the entry to the road to addiction and other undesirable behaviors based on needs that are not real.

I know this is all very intellectual, but as a biologist I often feel a need to present the biological point of view regarding who we are, as humans, and how things like gender variance, sexual orientation variance, and many, many other things often have biological foundations that may have evolved for a reason and may well persist even though the original function of that tool is no longer needed. But, simple explanations such as sex, gender, and orientation being separate entities rarely survive when the biological and evolutionary perspectives are incorporated. Just my point of view.