abt your post abt bi women belonging in the wlw community just as much as lesbians : i was reading the replies and youre so right abt how ignorant people are abt what comphet really is. im a lesbian and like yea i think we would experience comphet in the most intense way since were not attracted to men in any level, but comphet isnt only abt that, its a symptom of the patriarchy forcing women to center men in their lives and hell even straight women experience comphet, let alone bi women. people just have thrown around the word comphet so much they dont even know the true meaning

I was actually gonna post abt this soon LMAO so yeah!! I think it's also a misunderstanding of what "heterosexuality" as a dominant social force is to say that lesbians who are not attracted to men can experience "comphet", but bisexual women who are attracted to men cannot experience it. "Heterosexuality" as it is defined by dominant social forces is not only "a relationship between a man and a woman" - it's almost always a relationship between a "masculine" man and a "feminine" woman, and quite often a relationship between a man and a woman that results in monogamous marriage and childbirth. When people write about comphet, they're not talking about how movies and TV and fairy tales and children's books and my parents and my teachers and my religion all came together and told me to want to fuck genderfucky bi guythings. There is a specific kind of man centered in the heterosexuality enforced onto women, and a specific kind of role that a woman is expected to take on in that heterosexuality. I think the idea that bi people (women especially) cannot experience "comphet" overlaps a lot with people who believe that all bisexual people have the capability to become "straight-passing" if they enter different-gender relationships, which is in and of itself based on, in my observances, the belief that "gay/lesbian culture" and "bisexual culture" are completely distinct and that bisexual people are in some way innately less capable of being gender-nonconforming (or as some Tumblr scholars will call it, "visibly queer"). Bisexual people often date each other, we're often trans and/or visibly gender-nonconforming, and that's not something that we can just turn off the minute we enter into a quote unquote "heterosexual relationship." I'm bisexual, I'm nonbinary and id as both a man and a woman (so I take part in all these "sapphic" conversations etc etc u know the drill), I'm weird and kinky and switchy, I'm polyamorous, right now I'm dating a cis butch bi girl and a trans + nonbinary pan guy. At this point in my life I have absolutely no interest in relationships with cishet men, I don't want to get monogamously married, I never want to have children. I have not performed heterosexuality any better than, idk, a "gold star lesbian" has, and I FEEL it, I'm given shit for it, every relative I have pressures me already about boyfriends and grandkids and whatever. I do think there are bisexual people sometimes who do conform more to Straight Society but a) I think there are an equal amount of gay guys and lesbians who conform to Straight Society tbqh and b) it doesn't cover the breadth of bisexual people who do exist and who do feel the pressure to conform to the mainstream, dominant social system of heterosexuality and who CANNOT conform to it any more than you, anon, probably can. So yeah TL;DR bi girls can definitely experience "comphet" lmao and people are probably gonna hate that I said that

frank vs. russia

starting the episode in media res and the circular storytelling!! the writing in this episode is really good overall, just so clever and inventive and effective. go off megan

“you ARE ready. everything you need is already inside you” sunny is ready to do a gay, gay-ass love story you guys. the gays are already inside it

titling it frank vs. russia when that’s clearly the b-plot? because we’re burying the lead? because we’re telling lies???

the denny’s shirt…

“aren’t you like 60?” misogyny is so sad 😞

dennis ANYBODY can get a guy to bang them ONCE reynolds

everyone wants dennis’ help but who will help dennis? :(

when mac says “it’s VERY romantic” dennis literally smacks the counter like… yikes

“one day he will and it is going to be hot” - I choose to believe this means that rcg think old man yaoi is hot and they are excited to show it :)

sunnyblr university is producing so many brilliant scholars who understand the significance of the beads as a metaphor for queerness and whether the audience is in or out and how it doesn’t matter because the queerness is all the way in and as of this episode it’s been turned up to full blast and leads us to a resounding victory. I’m just rehashing what others have said but I wanted to make sure I include it with my notes from this episode because it really is such a central idea and yet one that can be so easily missed by someone who isn’t reading the show like this... ugh the duality of sunny will never cease to confound me

dee calling mac out like yes bitch get his ass!! (so to speak)

uncle fucking jack walks in saying “they dropped all those charges weeks ago” - playdate EW - “I don’t– I don’t have any ice cream” - “shut UP dude, that’s gross, man”

charlie is so PRECIOUS in his little outfit and glasses

is he schizophrenic? I wonder if that will come up again or if it was just a throwaway joke

violent heterosexual shushing from dennis

the backing track of the sinned system/date scene is “in the hall of the mountain king” and it’s just so fucking classic sunny and so perfect

how did mac show patrick that he needed his power? and how did he engage physically?? we need to know these things!!!

kaitlin’s whole performance in the date scene is so fucking good

“the person who made him feel powerful, but also powerless.” the macdennis of it all is truly overwhelming sometimes

 the person whose validation he’s been seeking his entire life :/

“it worked” jesus christ mac

“well yeah but listen, the dennis system is a system for getting a woman. this is a system for getting a man, and that’s why sinned is actually dennis backwards!!” when I first watched this episode I was high as balls and sick with anticipation and this whole bit nearly pushed me over the edge. I mean he basically just straight up says that it’s bad for him to like men (sin) after explaining a tried-and-true system for getting them???

and then mac and dee are like “what are the chances??” and dennis is like HIGH >:( because they don’t see it. they don’t see it even though it’s been plain as day the whole time :(

dennis: “I’m still buzzin from last night” 👀👀👀👀👀👀👀👀

AND I HAVE TO BE WITH HIM oh baby boy I pray you will be

the nastiness in dennis’ voice when he says “well no, see, that’s the thing – johnny doesn’t love you. he doesn’t even like you.” glenn I’m scared of you

“they ARE my favorite” he wanted mac to realize :( and yes the crabs are deeply metaphorical

“yeah, because I AM johnny” “then who’s dennis?” “what do you mean?!” “well if you’re johnny, then who– who’s you?” one of the best sunny exchanges of all time!!!!!!!! I cannot overstate how much I love this dialogue. it just captures so much about them so succinctly go off megan!!!!!

“I can’t engage with you on this right now” great delivery rob, so funny

does dennis want to control frank like a pawn bc he felt like that’s what frank did to him? or he’s just frustrated at mac and wants a situation he feels in control of?

kaitlin’s “... yeah” when dennis asks if dee has more pills is just so funny I keep remembering it and laughing randomly

“we’re gonna need to turn the lights out.” GLENN I’M SCARED OF YOU

the POV Being Frank throwback! I love the tossing of the clothes and the blackness and the sound of the door, cool little sequence

charlie’s such a good cheerleader 🥹 his little point is so funny

do you ever wonder what danny devito might be doing with his career if he wasn’t pretending to be split in half by giant vibrating anal beads on it’s always sunny in philadelphia??

“you don’t have to do this” this one speaks for itself I think.

dennis and uncle jack, two sexual deviants having a laugh in the van :| (also the van situation is so classic sunny obvs)

mrs. mac saying “nice” god there are just so many hilarious little character beats in this episode

“I DON’T KNOW HOW ELSE TO TELL YOU!!!” :( what’s in the texts rcgm

macdennis fightin :)

the full-blast alarm sound effect just gets me every time like to me that is peak comedy

The Burning Heart by Survivor is kind of macdennis coded tbh… “It's a primitive clash venting years of frustrations / Bravely we hope against all hope / There is so much at stake” “Does the crowd understand?” “Though his body says ‘stop!’ his spirit cries ‘never!’ (omg) / Deep in our soul a quiet ember knows it's you against you” like sorry if this song was supposed to be for straight people but it’s not anymore

so there’s something there about what’s acceptable and going full blast. the mommy issues are now explicit. dennis is bisexual. and he chose to have a romantic and sexual relationship with mac while pretending to be someone else, to the point that mac was in love with this other version of him. and he was so mad mac didn’t realize that he actually played his hand and told him, and mac still couldn’t accept it, upsetting dennis further. wtf man these homos are INSANE

can I ask: what's the issue with a woman proposing? I'm asking bc a.) I only ever imagined getting married to a woman so inevitably there would be A woman proposing in that scenario obviously but I'm curious as to the.... hetrosexuality? take on it (if that makes sense lmao) and b.) I went to school in a...fairly whiter mid class town and a fair amount of the girls who were (white) feminists and big on the "equality! women can propose! women can pay the bills!" energy and I didn't really care to think too deeply about it at the time since I wasn't dating or getting married. so I'm just curious as to your thoughts on the topic if you wouldn't mind sharing?

Hi!

My issue with women proposing lies solely with man/woman relationships. (I don’t know if I want to call it heterosexual, because one or both people might be bi.)

Men have social and financial privilege over women that permeates every aspect of relationships with them. The pink tax, plus the standards of beauty which are placed on women means it costs money for us to even step outside (and be treated like a human.) So when white feminism, something I wholeheartedly bought into for quite a few years, came with the hard swing against traditional gender roles and inequalities, it seemed perfect.

Except equality is not equity.

So women taking in the burdens of having 50/50 relationships, paying bills, splitting rent and the like, without actually... fixing the problems at the root of why feminism was even needed, meant that women were now actually sacrificing more under the guise of being “empowered” and “strong”. I’ve spoken a bit more about this here.

So women proposing to men falls along those same lines to me. Women already have the label of being “obsessed with marriage” and the stigma of being the “ball and chain” to a man who just wants to be free to be a bachelor. It feeds into a notion that women are just desperate. They won’t even wait for a man to get down on one knee and ask, they want it so badly, they’ll ask for themselves.

The other layer of this is, “If he wants to, he will.” Men very rarely are forced to do anything they don’t want to do. Society might side eye them for not being married around 25-32, but after that, they’re just grey foxes who can’t be tied down. So if he wanted to take the time to purchase a ring, plan a proposal, and ask... he would. I have yet to see an instance of a woman who proposed to a man who wasn’t begging for a proposal from him months or years beforehand. It reeks of insecurity.

Not only the way it looks, but the purchasing of the ring? Especially since women are often overly generous where the people they love are concerned. Then the planning, which is most likely incredibly extravagant, doing all of that when there’s a wage gap? Imagine taking double losses just because the guy they love won’t get down on one knee. It’s horrible.

Look at Bling Empire. Cherie is a beautiful, accomplished heiress who already had two children with her boyfriend. They have all of the privileges in the world, but she kept begging and begging him for a proposal. Society was judging her, she felt uncomfortable even without outside judgement, it was something she needed. Eventually, she proposed to her boyfriend at their baby’s 100 day party. It was awkward and uncomfortable because he felt embarrassed (as he should).

Overall, I think it’s one of those things where there’s so many factors. I think it’s reductive to just say women should now do all of the things men do, without actually taking stock of the systems in play and changing them first. So I’ll never be okay with women proposing if they’re in a relationship with a man, because societally, the scales are so unbalanced, there’s no benefit for the woman whatsoever.

(1) hi!! this may be a really dumb question but you seem kinda knowledgable and i really want to learn bc i’m clueless. basically, i’ve always wondered what the purpose (for lack of better word) was behind lesbian femme/butch roles? like ik it’s historically pretty significant, but is there a particular “revolutionary” reason behind a masculine person and feminine person being paired together and it being such an iconic part of lesbian herstory? like ik that gender non-conformity is p important

(2) within women, specifically lesbians, especially as a way to signal to other women/lesbians that they are, well, lesbian. it’s also rebelling against assigned cultural and gender roles and the idea that femininity is required to be a “real” woman, and also mainly bc most people assume feminine women and girls are het. but like, there are some lesbians who are feminine themselves and mainly like other feminine women/lesbians. is this a “wrong” or incorrect/narrow minded pairing somehow?

(3) are feminine-presenting lesbians somehow “less” revolutionary than, say, a gnc bi or straight woman? and like, w the femme/butch complementary roles within lesbianism, is this to show that a masc/feminine pairing isn’t inherently hetero/doesn’t exclusively belong to het couples? are feminine lesbians who date other feminine lesbians betraying lesbian culture and appeasing straight men somehow just bc they want to be feminine for each other? i’ve just always wondered about this and

(4) i’m a woman who presents pretty feminine, although if it were up to me i’d just be like. casual feminine. maybe a snapback or sth. but i am attracted to other feminine women and i don’t particularly have a desire to “look good” for a butch/masculine-presenting woman in a sort of complementary yin and yang role/dynamic, i.e “strong butch and soft femme” stereotypes which we see often in the lesbian community. so i was curious about your thoughts on this. thank you and sorry for the spam! 🌷

😭 i’m such a bad person to ask any questions about butch/femme because tbh i don’t really get it.

i think the historical reason for the pairing is that there really was no model for lesbian relationships, so women defaulted to a relationship model that resembled heterosexuality–butches and femmes had to date each other, butches who were fucked by another butch were ridiculed and feminized, people who didn’t fit into either category were seen as outsiders and called kikis, butches had to pursue femmes, etc, but with a little more fluidity because people would sometimes have different roles in different relationships. i think this is a contentious thing to say because it implies that butches are like men but… i’m not sure how you could argue that a system where masculine people Have to date feminine people isn’t drawing deliberate parallels to heterosexuality? especially when people in that time period said that it was safer to be out in public when at first glance you looked like a man and a woman? and i don’t think saying that there are obvious parallels is the same as saying that butches Are men. butches and femmes will also talk about how they each play different roles in the relationship–the butch protects the femme, the femme is a safe place for the butch, the femme protects the butch by existing at her side as a ‘respectable’ looking woman, etc.

i don’t think it’s intended to show that masc/fem couples aren’t inherently het or to rebel against gender norms (although people will say that femmes are revolutionary because they perform femininity for women and not men which i do Not get because the world doesn’t care why you wear a dress & makeup so long as you do it)–people will talk about how they knew deep inside that they were always femme/butch, that they always felt drawn towards protecting feminine women, that they always wanted to give themselves to a masculine woman, etc. i don’t really get it lol and i think @a-real-lesbian-speaks said this mooonths ago, but when i see poetry about like… work boots next to stilettos or a butch needing the arms of a femme and a bunch of people saying that it made them emotional and they can relate so much, i feel the same way that i do when queer people talk about their gender identities tbh. it seems like some internal lesbian-specific gender experience that needs that yin/yang complement and i literally don’t understand when people talk about it, but there you go lol.

i think feminine lesbians disobey cultural standards more than gnc bihet women, but it is a weird question to me because calling one more revolutionary than the other sort of gets into… homosexuality as revolution, when it’s just something we’re born with and that is given this deviant, rebel status by society. feminine lesbians and gnc bihet women also deal with different problems, so it feels like comparing apples and oranges to me.

also, it isn’t narrow-minded to be a feminine woman attracted to other feminine women! butch/femme is a subculture that tbh has gained this weird revered status on tumblr. the amount of people who talk about it compared to the amount of people who actually participate in it is very disproportionate, at least from what i’ve seen. there are many, many lesbians who are neither of them and we can go be confused in our own little corner lol. and who you’re attracted to or choose to date shouldn’t be political anyway.

I read boris as bisexual (and theo as gay) but I see a lot of people saying he is gay, did I miss something??

i really wish tumblr's tag system worked, bc then I could link you to my old post about this which would be much more detailed and eloquent, so I'm sorry about that!

But to be succinct (ahhaa as if i ever could be) everyone's hc about Boris' sexuality is valid, however in my opinion (and many others) it is textually obvious that Boris' liasions with women are either compulsive heterosexuality, just used for the simple hendonistic pleasure/ having the easy availability of a partner compared to the difficulty he would have finding a male partner in many conservative countries, used for status gain, or simply bold-faced lies.

Boris NEVER speaks of any sexual encounter with a woman unless asked (by Theo, about losing his virginity, and again by Theo, pressing if he slept with Kotku). Boris does not connect emotionality to his dynamics with women specifically (on purpose, because he doesn't care and they are not important to him), and he often makes up lies to cover up his true feelings or put on a show (when he deems it necessary to his own survival or opportunistic).

Boris is also VERY nonverbal in expressing his real feelings of love. This likely comes from fear and being raised in an abusive household. Boris fears putting in jeopardy anything he truly loves. Things he doesn't love or fear losing? Well they are truly game for vapid exclamations of showmanship -- meeting Kotku and "loving" her in one afternoon, talking about how "hot" Xandra is bc she is an attractive older woman who he "should" find desirable. The sex worker he lost his virginity to was "awesome" yet he js u comfortable talking about it. Theo? The person Boris devotes ten years of his life to? Does he ever outright say I love you? No. There's the evidence.

Boris keeps women at a distance and even is abusive to them when the limits of his adolescent understanding of himself/his psyche are pushed (he was raised in a violent household, he equates love with instability and violence and ingenuine feeling). He also uses violence to express his emotions - he and Theo frequently roughhouse and hit each other speficially at moments when they have romantic or sexual tension to displace that. With Kotku, he hits her when she seems like he is going to break up with him. An emotional fear of not being "the man that she wants". A fear of not being "a man". Of not living up to an image he never wanted in the firs place (sensitive Boris who loves reading and philosophizing and music and craves love and companionship).

On the other hand he openly flirts with Theo, watches him in class, compliments his glasses, sits next to him on the bus, can't stop talking to him all afternoon, begs him to come to his house, begs him to sleepover, asks him to sleep in his bed, cuddles him when he has nightmares, soothes him to sleep, listens to him, keeps him from comitting suicide, kisses him, and then when they are older he specifically mentions his sexual relationship with Theo, brings it up entirely on his own, outright professes his love for Theo with a kiss and longing guilt for a decade, willingly will give up his gang/life to retrieve the painting for Theo, and is open and flirtatious with Theo when they reunite (come to Moscow, come to Antwerp, shall we stand here tenderly and gaze?, telling him to eat, REFUSING to give up the painting aka Theo's soul to Martin on threat of his LIFE ... survivalist Boris finally finding something he's willing to die for).

Textually Boris' relationship with Kotku was engendered out of gay panic after the text suggests he and Theo had a relationship of some kind for a year following the pool scene in Vegas. Boris, who has only known love as instability and abuse (via Vladimir) and who also like has internalized homophobia in the sense that he feels he cannot flaunt this preference of is out in the open, flees to Kotku and essentially recreates his relationship with Theo with her, in a heterosexual lens. He gets extremely touchy when Theo asks if he was sleeping with her after boiling over in jealousy for months, and Boris gives an answer "What do you think? You want me to make you a map?" that can either be taken as a grudging yes or embarrassed no.

Boris also dates Kotku SPECIFICALLY because she already had another boyfriend and therefore his relationship with her is already moot. It is uncommitted. He denies the advances of all the other girls at school, much to Theo's confusion, even girls he asserts are prettier and more interesting. Cough. Boris just doesn't like girls. Boris even points out one of the girls, Saffi, is "too straight" and Kotku (who it was mentioned in previous pages is bi/pan/poly) is "like them".

Boris did not enjoy his first sexual experience, which he notes was with a sex worker in a parking lot in Alaska (undoubtedly the influence of the miners), and ONLY has a positive relationship with women (not abusive, as he is with Kotku) when he strictly emphasies he and the women are just friends (Xandra, Myriam his "right hand man").

When they are older Boris invents a cover story about a Swedish family that Theo sees RIGHT through and laughs at, letting us know how fake it is, after which Boris drops the lie immediately and doesn't continue it. But Boris did not know Theo at that point - Theo who was marrying a wealthy woman himself - and Boris needed to see if Theo was still the same person he knew in Vegas. He needed to pin their boyhood romance on Theo at first, to test the waters, and invent a family on par with Theo's own invented family connection-- the Barbours. He needed to know for sure Theo didn't despise him before he poured his heart out in him again.

Those are some of the many reasons I and many others feel the text indicates Boris is gay :)

2, 8, 8, 12? And in regards to your previous answer, I would be interested to hear if you a) think consensual, heterosexual intercourse is even possible in a patriarchy and b) if your take on homosexual erotica is the same one as the one you’ve described? (Only if you want to of course :) ) greetings!

aaah I think my first reaction to any of these ask games, thank u :’)

2. How do you feel about racial dating preferences? Are they racist, or okay?

this is a hairy one. to my knowledge people chose partners who look familiar, so they’ll look for people who sorta look like the community they grew up with, so people who didn’t grow up in a mixed community will have a rather narrow dating pool, their own “race” or ethnicity usually (also explains while I’ve always ended up with or only had crushes on other slavs so far :I ). oh and ofc this doesn’t only apply to looks but also to culture, religion (or lack thereof), traditions etc. bc you’re more likely to relate and have stuff in common with each other if you have similiar experiences.© goes out to some other radfem I can’t remember the url of where I read about this sorta race discourse for the first time ^^” at least the culture part bc I’m a superficial pos (ofc I’ve read abt attraction before and not only on tumblr!)I think that’s ok bc trying to force people into dating someone is really fucking creepy no matter if you reasoning is “progressiveness” or whatever. also most countrys don’t experience much migration and don’t have a very mixed population so it doesn’t have that much of an impact on peoples’ dating options anyway, unless you live in the us or central europe I guess. but even in countrys with huge mixed population people tend to form microcommunitys, based on their similiarities and not mingling much.

like imagine what an attempt at widening someone’s dating pool must look like: you’d have to expose them to as many different people as possible in their childhood, which is good when it’s done to combat racism and xenophobia, but if you do that with the specific goal to widen future generations’ dating options…. that’s fucked up man

I mean, stuff like better interwoven communitys, discouraging  the formation of microcommunitys (as an immigrant, I hated that my parents were doing this!) and media representation WILL result in people being more likely to date different races/ethnicites imo, but the reasons are key here, and manipulating someone into dating people they’re not attracted to for whatever reasons, whether they be actually racist or just due to lack of exposure and therefore no natural attraction developing, should never be someones’s goal ever. that shit is dangerous and unfair mainly for the marginalized target group!

so tldr: I don’t think that “race” preference is inherently racist due to what I know how attraction forms BUT I think people who are not attracted to other races, ethnicities etc. often justify that with racist bullshit.

8. How do you feel about the fat acceptance movement (the body positivity movement)? Why do you think it’s mostly women in that movement?

generally ok, I think people should not be bullied for how they look and I think doctors should be more attentive to their fat patients and not brush all of their symtpoms off as “well you’re just too fat”. I personally know people who suffered a great deal because of that negligence. for example a friend of my mom’s had an uterus infection (I think it was?) and it made her belly swell, her doctor thought she had just gotten fat so the infection got unnoticed for a long time before she got extremely ill and she had to have a hysterectomy to survive.

and I think it’s mostly women bc we’re socialised to show or rather perform (not necessarily feel…) in more empathetic ways. also we try really really hard to heal the world through individualistic self help stuff, because we tend to internalize problems. also obviously we face more harassment for our looks than men do, so we have more interest in making it stop.

some fat positive individuals are a tad weird and claim that you can still be mobile and healthy even if you’re morbidly obese which is wrong, but you get weird positivity nuts who are taking it too far in every movement I guess. I still think even very obese people shouldn’t be bullied, even if you claim you’re just “concerned for their health” bc that’s a blatan lie. Also bullying has enver helped anyone get better.

12. How do you feel about religions? Can a radical feminist be religious? Do you think all religions are equally bad (for women)?

my knowledge is mostly limited to abrahamic religions and yeah i think they’re bad. their very foundation is based on the reversal of creation and the worship of the father, both a punishing almighty ghost in the sky and an allmighty tyrant at home. and they invented all sort of rules to cement womens’ role as subhuman, worthles servant to men.

I don’t think abrahamic religious women can be feminists, at least not if they properly practice their religion, misogyny, homophobia, xenophobia and all. if they just pick and choose the “good” stuff and are interpreting bible verses in different ways than literally every other person practicing the same religion, I don’t think that has anything to do with said religion anymore and they’re just making up their own one at this point

I get it that religious communitys can be a massive support system, especially when they’re on of these more pick&chose kinda communitys, and I would never judge a woman for seeking support and belonging among welcoming, generally nice people who don’t really have much to do with conservative christians. but it’s still sorta sketchy that she and her friends would follow a belief system that is misogynist at its core :/

also churches sometimes help feminists, I think a church or at least a pastor (uuugh it’s been a while since I read that article, sorry) is helping sisters ev, a german foundation campaigning for the nordic model and helping women in prostitution. he seems to be helping out of the goodness of his heart and not because he is judging these women negatively. but I’m generally sceptic towards patriarchal religions and their followers bc of their misogynist foundations.

I don’t know enough abt other religions to have a propper opinion on them, I’m generally neither a religious nor spiritual person (was raised catholic tho) so not really interested in that stuff, but I think rituals like this witchy stuff and singing together etc. can be a nice bonding experience. I enjoyed it whenever I tried to engage in it with other radfems. the togetherness is just… well nice. people just like doing rituals and doing stuff together. .

so yeah I don’t think religion or spritiuality is necessarily bad, the rituals and sense of support, community and belonging is obviously good. It only becomes bad when it clashes with human rights, medicine and science, which christianity, islam and judaism do.

and I don’t think liberal religious people (the pick and choose ones) are “true” believers bc they don’t fully adhere to their religion anyway. but I think they are massive enablers for more orthodox believers, also even liberal followers are usually extremely protective of their religion (and therefore the more conservative parts/people) even if they don’t really practice it anyway which often leads to conflict with people who are critical of their institution

aaaah sorry this is already massive I’ll adress your other questions in a seperate post! sorry I tend to ramble and overexplain bc I don’t want to be misunderstood esp when the themes are “controversial” :x

my school offers a course on privilege & oppression and as someone who is an asian male i feel like i have the privilege of being a male which comes with its benefits but being asian also puts me at a disadvntage . i never really thought of this until i take this course but it's really opened my eyes to the concepts of privilege nad oppression. bc i love hearing your opinion on things (especially when you write long responses) what do these mean to you and what are your experience?

I’m proud that you’ve already given it some thought. It’s all just so... deep  in most cultures, that it’s often hard to notice that people aren’t all treated equally and fairly. After all, if you’re not the one being unfairly treated, you might not even experience it at all, unless you really think about it. When things have been a particular way, a lot of people just don’t think about it because it’s the norm for them. But that doesn’t mean it’s not harmful, or that it’s OK.

I’ll put the rest behind a cut because this is both long, and also because this is the kind of conversation that ends up circulating on tumblr, so I’d rather keep it on my blog where there’s context for it.

You’re right; it’s perfectly possible (and common) to have privilege in some areas but be disadvantaged in others. And it’s a complex, global thing  involving many axes or ways in which we differ in terms of how the system (or systems) leave us vulnerable. That’s why intersectionality is really important; we need to acknowledge that some people suffer from discrimination in many ways, and their situaiton is quite different from people who are privileged in some respects, even though they have some things in common. For example, the life of a black trans woman who happens to be a sex worker would be very different to the life of a middle-class white woman, so the second woman’s experiences should never be treated as universal. This goes for all sorts of things; ethnicity, race, language, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, class, disability, religion, and probably a host of things we could think up if we really thought about it. Privilege is many things, but I guess you can describe it as ‘the problems you don’t face’, because your privilege prevents you from having to deal with those things, whilst someone without that privilege doesn’t have that luxury. For example, in your case your experience as an Asian exposes you to racism I don’t experience, because my experience as a whitish Eastern European, whilst not always peachy, is different. We might both be ‘immigrants’, but the abuse handed out to people of colour, and especially black people are often far far worse; you just can’t compare my experiences with those of my friends of colour. As they are for immigrants who are deemed to be lower status or vulnerable; people whose English is still a work in progress, people in unstable employment, for example. So, the Polish cleaners (who look whiter than me, I’ll be honest) experience more abuse because they are vulnerable in other ways. My English accent and general middle-classedness matter in this context. Because the ways in which different ethnic groups have been stereotyped or treated has been different, the experiences we have differ wildly based on where we are, and the prejudices of the society we are in. However, you probably won’t have experienced the same things I have as a woman; the same constraints and fears and social pressures that I have. The pressures to have a career but also actively raise children, for example, and the judgement that comes with either. The pressure to dress in certain ways, or to live up to the image of what society tells us to is different depending on your gender.The very real ever-present spectre of sexual assault from strangers or loved ones is very different, depending on your gender. Many men might not plan their life around not being attacked when they are out at night. For example, my flatmate, a white man, gleefully walks home for hours from gigs or whatever at silly o clock with little thought or planning. I wish I could go through life with as little thought about my safety as most men seem to give it. Like, it doesn’t affect their dress, or their timetable, or their dates, or their way home? Intersectionalism is about recognising that we can be disadvantaged in some ways, and advantaged in others, and that the people who are most disadvantaged are usually in the most difficult situation and often have the least social power to make their issues known or have them addressed. So we need to work harder to ensure that they have a voice, and that we listen to them and encourage others to do so. The key is always to listen, and a space discussing oppression needs voices from all communities if it is to help them. So way back (was it my teens and early twenties?!) when I was spending time on feminst sites, I gravitated towards ones I knew had bloggers of colour and trans voices and people of different sexualities and ages and experiences. It’s not that those mostly run by white american women were bad as such; there was still some interesting discussion there, too. But it was that they focused on a much narrower range of issues and what it meant to be a woman. And my real education on my own privilege, and what I could do to help others, and what other people suffered, was from listening to the experiences of those more marginalised than myself. So you’re on a great journey, and you’re going to learn so much about so many great kinds of people, if you take the time to listen. There are lots of communities out there that take the time to explore these issues, and I recommend seeking them out; you’ll find places that feel right to you. But make sure they have diverse voices. It’s also a sad and angry journey; when you learn just how horrible things are for many people, you’re going to want to punch some walls and change the world (if you don’t already want to do both). Don’t punch walls, but do take that anger at injustice with you. People often complain that this means those with privilege are silenced, but I don’t think that’s true at all. It’s just that people with privilege about a topic usually don’t have much that is relevant to say; how can we talk about a problem we’ve not experienced? Doesn’t that sound kind of self-centred of us? It’s usually true that we need to listen first, to fully understand the topic. And that usually, the best expert on a particular topic is someone who is living the experience and has actual knowledge of it. It’s not to say people can’t ever speak about a topic; I’ve read some pretty enjoyable writing by male feminists who *get* it, and I’m not a believer in blanket statements that ‘people in X group can never have anything relevant to say’; they can, if they’ve given it deep thought and understand the limitations of their experience and stick to what they actually understand. Because we need people to work to address their own learned prejudices, and allowing for their thought or conversation in some contexts is a necessary part of that. In the right context. I want men to talk about women’s rights, for example. I want them to talk about how men around them have been sexist douchebags and how they are trying to call them out. I want them to reflect on how they are unlearning the problematic messages about women that they learned. I absolutely want us to talk about how gender roles also hurt men, and that these also need to be addressed. But here’s the vital part: it’s just important that this conversation isn’t used to derail conversations about women by women. And, for example, white people shouldn’t derail conversations about the ways POC are marginalised and disadvangaged and hurt. If you really think all lives matter, then you should absolutely agree that black lives matter and be listening to what they have to say about the ways in which they are being mistreated. It’d be great if more people who identify as cis or heterosexual thought about gender and sexuality rather than assuming defaults; I’d love to see people writing about dismantling their transmisogyny and homophobia and exploring how pervasive it is, and working to ensure that they are treating their LGBTQ friends supportively rather than hurting them through ignorance. But it’s not more important than the need for trans people and the LGBTQ community to be able to explore what their identity means to them, safely and without that conversation being taken over. And the list goes on. Society steeps us all in a stew of covert and not-so covert messages about people; it’s our job for our entire lives to try to undo anything hurtful and untrue that we’ve been led to believe. To question. To see the humanity in others. And to be kind; which means to help others as best as we can.

bi subj (thread I made on masto last night)

"The difference with bisexuals is they like it" [wrt theoretical “het relationships” they would be closeted in, as opposed to gay ppl] keeps coming back to my mind and I think it's very illustrative of why hate/distrust/dismissal of bisexuality comes from all angles... it ties into freud's old theorization of bisexuality as a sexuality that is both undifferentiated and immature, "polymorphous perversity" where sexual pleasure is not derived from a specific sexual act and role but, horrifyingly, potentially from anything.

The idea that we can choose from the whole spectrum of potential pleasures is used to frame us as both fickle and sex-driven... when it's always brought up that a bi woman could "end up with" a man and seem "essentially straight" it is never discussed in terms of falling in love, but as a strategic opt in we exploit that others can't. This is why "discourse" is overwhelmingly concerned with policing bi women who "choose" men and not straight women, the assumption is the straight women are simply doomed because they don’t have the “options” we do... but this is obvs. not supported by how abuse statistics play out.

Anyways, this kind of talk is so eagerly bought into by both straight and gay ppl because it is fundamentally resentful, and EVERYONE is hurt by how gender roles, presentation, and orientation are theorized and enforced under heteropatriarchy. Bi ppl get to "choose" and along with that comes also an inbuilt indeterminacy in terms of role, gender expression and so on... the bisexual as disease vector, as untrustworthy, selfish, immature, etc is all related to how we do not have to be any one thing. The straw man bi woman who can just "choose a man" and "seem straight" is an easy target because it pins the "bisexual" down as an existing, static sex role and gender presentation (see? she’s “really” a feminine, heterosexual woman). People like imagining this is what bisexuality is because it removes the horror that we are everywhere and can be anything (yes, there are gender nonconfoming bi women!) 

So long as someone has hangups about or feels trapped by their own gender role or orientation (which I have a lot of sympathy for, because I am also affected by these social rules and they generally suck!), resentment of the "bisexual who can choose" and associated biphobic beliefs will remain if they don’t question and challenge those feelings when they come up. internalized biohobia is often trying to "fit" yourself into one of these roles, presentations or narratives, precisely because the indeterminacy is frankly... isolating and painful and confusing in a context where you’re supposed to be a specific thing. Bisexuality can seem both extremely obvious but also like nothing solid to grab onto at all. It's a logical category given the other orientations and yet in a way it also "should not exist..." especially wrt a biological or psychological understanding of orientation and gender.

Sidebar! (my experience/more personal angle):

I think there is genuine anxiety non-bi people experience that a bisexual person can, in theory, be into any sort of sex act! It's the constant "my partner is worried I won't be satisfied with just X" we have to deal with but like... we're just humans lol we aren't powered by a specific combo of exotic sex moves and keel over if you can't provide it, and it's weird to just be expected to be ppls therapists about this as just part of dating (or even a first date...) This and like, the Relationship Audit and the Listening with Respect and Interest to How You Knew You Weren't Bi are the things I hated most about first dates as an openly bi woman like... this is therapist shit. Hearing this stuff over and over and being expected to just take it because “it’s a part of getting to know someone” and “well you are Bi and Proud aren’t you?” becomes invasive and invalidating.

Essentially, my overall point is that in online discourse and irl dating bisexual people bear a lot of the brunt of people's own insecurities about their gender role, orientation, expectation of monogamy and nuclear family etc., expectations that are enforced by society level heteropatriarchy, but the way "the discourse" filters down, it often makes people's dissatisfaction or unexamined feelings in those areas into negative attitudes aimed at bisexual people as "non-fits" who are somehow able to evade what you are “stuck with”... which is not remotely how it is, and beyond that this targeting is pointless bc we can’t really do anything about what heteropatriarchy does to you either (I mean, not moreso than any other single individual making choices to try and work with a fundamentally biased system), the real problem is over our heads

quick queer rant

im really tired of people within the LGBTQ+ community pointing fingers at each other and saying “you don’t really belong because you benefit from [insert type of privilege here]”

a heteroromantic asexual still suffers from marginalization. their sexuality has been pathologized as a mental illness right along with gayness and transness. in a hypersexual heternormative culture where we’re told we must enjoy sex and we must be in relationships, an asexual person is made to feel as if they’re broken, as if they don’t exist, as if forcing sex and intimacy on them is a corrective measure to “fix them”

a straight trans woman still suffers from marginalization. being able to “pass” as a woman while also being in a relationship with a man does not negate the fact that trans people face the most violence out of anyone in the queer community, must face a society that enforces a standard of womanhood that may not necessarily apply to them, and must navigate a political climate that seeks to banish them from public spaces and paint them as criminals

a bisexual man in a relationships with a woman still suffers from marginalization. compulsory heterosexuality not only erases this identity but enforces this idea that bisexuality is a phase or a kink that can soon be grown out of. bisexuality is the largest subset of the LGBTQ+ community yet has the least amount of representation and leaves bi people more likely to have mental illnesses. being constantly recloseted when you date different genders has psychological and emotional consequences

individuals in a polyamorous relationship still suffer from marginalization. they exist in a society that hails monogamy as the only acceptable relationship model and attempts to make polyamorous individuals feel as if their relationships are abnormal, deviant, and inappropriate for children. they are treated as the example of what not to do, seeing as how society fails to acknowledge the breadth of relationship models that don’t necessarily have to include just two people. 

examples like these can go on and on and on and on

these critiques also exist without the context of race, ethnicity, immigration status, ability, and/or religion. we’re so focused on worrying about whether certain queer identities even belong in the LGBTQ+ umbrella yet fail to see how whiteness, Christianity, citizenship laws, access to disability services, etc. further compound on the experiences of those who are told by a cishet world that we are abnormal. 

and that’s what it comes down to: there is a formula for privilege in our society, and part of that formula involves being straight, being cis, wanting to marry, desiring sex, and believing in only two genders. queerness was always meant to represent those who live in opposition of those formulas, in opposition of systems that enforce and perpetuate those formulas. 

our job is not to gatekeep our community because that is childish and unproductive. our job is to understand the systems that oppress us, figure out how to navigate/change these systems, and advocate for all people who fall victim to the violence and oppression that these systems were created to enforce. 

we don’t do that by telling people that they don’t belong in our communities bc “they’re not as oppressed as we are.” this isn’t the oppression olympics. this is a time to fight, to love, and to advocate. 

Why (Black) women should cap for (Black) Bisexual Men

Recently I was a part of a rather unfortunate “debate”: would you date a bisexual man? What is there to debate? “Yeah” I answered as I shrugged and lifted my fork back to my lips. Eyes widened and silence fell. They’re men who like women. I’m a woman who likes men. It was pretty simple to me. But apparently it’s not so simple if you’re a bigot. Within minutes I found myself in a cloud of myths and stereotyping. From HIV to infidelity, the “reasons” for not dating bisexual men were SPEWING. I actually think I was the only decent person at this table (trust me I wasn’t there because I wanted to be). There were some quieter bigots who didn’t shout any “reason”, but kept repeating that it just wasn’t their “preference”. For me, this was almost worst than the outright stereotyping. Be a bigot with your chest! That’s the whole point. “Preference” has become the “impenetrable” fort of bigotry. If I just say I prefer not to date them and don’t say anything bad, then I’m not hurting bisexual men. They have their space and I have mine. Not so fast sis. Preferences don’t exist in some vacuum or some black hole. They are 100% guided by what you consider the norm and the systems that guide you on what to consider the norm. If you find yourself agreeing that you wouldn’t date a bisexual man, have you ever asked yourself why? Too often with the “preference” conversation, people sit on their very high “because that’s what I like/don’t like” horse and never come down long enough to ask themselves how they got up there. It’s the classic ignorance of a bigot. And we’ve seen what happens when the ignorance of a bigot goes unchecked for too long (Trump and EVERY single one of his supporters. Yes, including the ones who regret their vote). Thank God you’re not Trump. You can do better. And speaking of doing better... Using “I prefer” when you mean “I’ve been conditioned” is DANGEROUS, but so are stereotypes and harmful assumptions. Let’s dive into a couple of those. 1. Bisexual men can give you HIV. Though HIV strongly impacts MSM (men who have sex with men), not all MSM have HIV. Historically, MSM (and many other LGBTQ community members for that matter) were seen as sexually deviant and socially shunned. This made it that much harder for them to access preventative and health care (if you think social norms stop at the doctor’s office.... WHEW). Think of the paranoia and embarrassment of buying condoms times 100 because you could lose your job or be killed. The association between HIV and MSM that we see today is not because LGBTQ people are not more innately prone to HIV. The association we see today is a result of a bigoted and dismissive American history. AN UNETHICAL history should OUTRAGE you and make you an ally. It should not make you turn up your nose to people in a disenfranchised group. Let me repeat: not all MSM have HIV and not all MSM are in danger of getting HIV. Also, if you’ve ever had unsafe sex with ANYONE you could’ve gotten HIV or another STD. This isn’t just an MSM issue. Your excuses are thinning. 2. Bisexual men will cheat (with men). I hear this one a lot and it’s crazy because most women who wouldn’t date bisexual men have suffered infidelity at the hands of heterosexual men *scratches head*. There are LGBTQ people who prefer monogamy. This includes bisexual men. Being attracted to more than one gender does not make you a non-monogamous person. For whatever reason, hetero women seem to be ESPECIALLY scared of a bisexual man cheating on them with a man. Let me break down bisexuality (QUICKLY): you’re a bisexual if you’re at all attracted to men and women. It can be 50/50, 60/40, 99/1. There are bisexual men that prefer men, there are bisexual men that prefer women. It makes no sense to have a “fear” of being cheated on with a man when it could also be with a woman. If you’re scared...Be scared of both sis lmao. The issue is that hetero people in general do not allow men flexibility. The attitude of “He’s gay or he’s straight” perpetuates a fear of bisexual men cheating with men that may not be any more or less likely than them cheating with women. Simply put: A cheater is a cheater is a cheater. If it’s monogamy you’re after find it! But know there’s plenty of bisexual men out there looking for it too. Being attracted to more than one gender doesn’t automatically make you a cheater. The excuses are thinning like your grandmothers edges at this point. No woman should shun bisexual men nor exclude them from a dating pool. If you do this you’re a homophobe. But guess what? It’s better to recognize that bias and unpack where you got it from than to pretend you don’t have that bias and hide behind “preferences”. The title calls out Black women specifically and it’s not to give us more responsibility than other women, but more to make a point about how Black bisexual men need us to unpack especially in light of the Black community’s bigotry. Also (possibly bc of my membership) I’ve seen more slander of bisexual men from the Black community than others lately. We cannot allow homophobia to continue under a different name. “Preference” does not refer to taking ideas and stereotypes from oppressive systems and reinforcing them with our own beliefs. Have a “preference” for red hair. Have a “preference” for big a**. But don’t be a straight up bigot and scream preference when you’re asked to defend your position. Asking yourself “why” is something we should all do with everything, but especially with something like this. The unconscious perpetuation of hurtful stereotypes kills people. Not to be dramatic, but it does. Asking yourself why, digging deep, and unlearning what they’ve taught you can save you, future generations, all of us. Oh and Black people, dismantling homophobia does include you letting go of the whole “I accept but kids just shouldn’t see it” or “I accept but they just push their agenda too much”. You think like that... you’re not doing enough. You let children watch things with heterosexual relationships all the time. If you’re a good parent, your kid is watching kid-appropriate things. They will not ever see a MSM scene. They will see genuine representations of love like they always did. Everyone deserves to see themselves in others. Everyone deserves to feel like they can relate and connect. No one is pushing any agenda. Black bisexual men, I love you. XOX KB

Chapter Twenty : B IS FOR BI

“… But it ain’t no lie, Baby Bi Bi Bi (Bi Bi)” N’Sync, 2000

Prior to the redaction of this article, I asked a very close friend of mine, who happens to identify as bisexual/pansexual (more on that later) one simple question — a way for me to see if I was heading in the right direction and be sure to do justice to this part of our community. What do you think the biggest obstacle for bisexuals is in 2019 ? “Invisibility. The lack of representation of bisexuality as a legitimate identity. The more you are out there, the more everything is normalized, and there’s so much talk about the G in LGBT, Gay men, and next to nothing when it comes to Bisexuals.”

Communities tend to make the same mistakes as societies, as we are born in the same environments and are influenced by the same principles. When it comes to the Queer Community, patriarchy wins. In the L G B T Q I +, the G is omnipresent (because they represent the MAN, usually white), the L takes a little place on the side, T is the most persecuted, I is invisible. But it’s the B that keeps being so fascinating to me. B is the most under appreciated, denied and dismissed of them all.

WHAT IS AND WHAT IS DEFINITELY NOT

Bisexuality : romantic or sexual attraction to both males and females, or to put more in a 2019 kind-of-term, to more than one sex or gender. Bisexuality is part of the three main classifications of sexual orientation alongside heterosexuality and homosexuality, but we’ve already talked about this. This is bullshit and it doesn’t matter. These are just principles that the world kept cramming into our faces when they didn’t know any better. Not anymore. Just like its three other “main” terms, Bisexuality was coined in the 19th century, and its history is as old as the rest of them.

Ancient Greeks (at least 550 BC) incorporated bisexual relationships into their practices, but not exactly in a sexual way. Men with wisdom and experience would often pass along their knowledge or strength (if you were a soldier) to the younger generation through the act of sodomy. Once the young would reach maturity, the relationship became non-sexual — supposedly. It did interesting to point out that stigmas were present when the sexual relationship continued after the boy’s adulthood. A preview of things to come, in terms of bigotry.

Another interesting detail into History, it is never mentioned that women could have sex with other women as well. Sure, Sappho wrote about the female beauty, but this was just poetry. History itself only mentions the Men, as only them could dominate and be part of the wisdom. In Ancient Rome, it was acceptable for a man to have sex with other men outside of marriage, as long as they were younger, not another man’s son (so, slaves) and if the man would be the one to penetrate. Patriarchy, La-dee-da, La-dee-da.

In our modern society, what is REALLY interesting to point out though, is that when it comes to bisexuality, it is not easily owned by the person who could represent him/her/themself as bisexual. Terms like queer, polysexual, heterofexible, homoflexible, MSM or FSM are thrown around as alternatives to bisexuality. Hmm.

Bisexual activist Robyn Ochs defines bisexuality as “the POTENTIAL to be attracted — romantically and/or sexually — to people of more than one sex and/or gender, not necessarily at the same TIME, not necessarily in the same WAY and not necessarily to the same DEGREE” which is going into more detail than the human heteronormative brain might comprehend at the moment, but pretty accurate to my knowledge.

What bisexuality is not, though, is what some papers found smart to call a transitional period. A study ‘found evidence of both considerable consistency and change in LGB sexual identity over time’ (there it is again, the confusion between orientation and identity. See my article from June 9th). Apparently, youth under that study who had identified only as bisexual at earlier assessments would then assume the gay/lesbian “identity” over time by 30 to 40%. I feel the need to clarify the situation ONE. MORE. TIME. Sexual orientation and identity are two separate things. Yes, scientists substitute those terms as easily as you might replace regular mayo with non-fat mayo, and it would be correct. But it creates way too much confusion. Sexual orientation is who you are attracted to. Identity is who you are, and it includes but not limited to sexual orientation. You can’t define yourself by your sexuality only. What the study is trying to explain (I hope) in a very broad and clumsy way is that sometimes, social circumstances prevent you from assuming and owing your real sexual orientation, whether it is straight or gay or whatever your orientation is. So a nice teenage cover up is the use of the term “bisexual” as a transitional period of time. I get it. I’ve done it. I made myself believe it for a long while. But that doesn’t make us bisexuals for a while THEN something else. I was always a homosexual. My non-nurturing environment didn’t give me the tools to put my dick on the table and say “I’m gay, bitches”. But to keep going back to that stereotype of the half closeted homosexual when it comes to have a general image of bisexuality is just so fucking wrong. A cliché, my dear. And now that I’ve mentioned it.

COMMON UNREAL NOTIONS

A person can be smart. People are dumb. So when it comes to understanding someone that you are not, crowds tend to go to the silliest questions. Like :

“So… Is there a percentage of how gay you were and how straight you can be?” Nop. Maybe someone can put a number on it, but it seems quite unrealistic to say “I’m like 40/60”. Sexuality is not be quantifiable.

“Do you think you’ll ever make a choice ?” There is no choice to make. Bisexuality is a definitive (though somehow less finite exploration of the human form) sexuality and thinking it has to evolve is offensive. Like saying that a gay man will get over it and go back to women eventually.

“But if you had to choose ?” You’re dumb. Your mother definitely fucked your uncle nine months before your birth.

“So you are dating someone of the opposite gender. Are you straight now ?” Fuck no. The gender of the person that I’m dating does not tilt the needle of the fucking outdated Kinsey scale.

“You are probably confused” You are probably ready to go fuck your mother’s pussy with a rake. And that was not a question.

“I could never date a bisexual. I would never be sure if he/she’s not looking at another guy/girl” So ? Your straight/gay boyfriend/girlfriend can still look around no matter what. If he/she’s a horn-dog, you should be worried. Bisexuals do not have more sexual desires because they can be attracted to multiple genders. Still not a question, dumbass.

“You’re so lucky, you have twice the chances to find someone, right ?” You failed math and it shows. AGAIN, being bisexual does not mean that romantic and sexual feelings are constant towards all genders all the time. They have the same troubles with human connexions as everyone because people are dumb, remember ?

“But you can’t actually know for sure until you’ve tried it both, don’t you think ?” I don’t know, did you try humping your uncle/father before you realized you were incestuous and you liked it ? Sorry, I meant to say sexual orientation does not need a try run to be real. You are what you are no matter what. You may sometimes ignore it for a while but it’s mostly because society never showed you it could exist.

“Do you believe that everyone is bisexual ?” No, I’m not Freud. I’m a grown man perfectly capable of understanding that bisexuality is not an umbrella-term for ALL sexuality.

“Don’t you think Bisexuality is a myth ?” This whole conversation is a myth. Gurl, Bi.

And that’s just the tip of the crushingly big iceberg. Bisexuals are constantly under the microscope of the rest of the world for existing outside the binary system of human recognition. You are a woman or a man. You like women or men. Simple. It never was. But the public (whether LGBTQ+ or not) insist on pushing the idea of bisexuality to the side and ignoring its legitimacy.

OSTRACISM

Worst than the usual queer rejection from society, bisexuals have it both ways by being denied true existence by society AND by the Queer community. Just look at their flag. The purple is crushed between the blue and pink, ready to disappear, not taking much space. You queers who are reading this article, don’t try to cop out and say “but I have no problems with bisexual people”. Fuck the fuck off. You fall into the same trap as heterosexuals. You fear someone who isn’t exactly like you. And do you actually date a lot a bisexual people ? Because last time I checked, bisexuals weren’t really talkative about their sexuality since it’s welcomed with such cold shoulders the white walkers are asking if they put on a nice little sweater. I keep coming back to a conversation I had a few weeks ago with a lesbian woman I know who said she could never date a bisexual woman as she would never be sure if she would stay gay for her and that she liked girls who knew what they wanted. Bisexuals know what they want. It may change from Monday to Tuesday (matter of speech) but I do believe the sexual attraction does not come from a switch inside them with two modes (either gay or straight) but from the individuals, whether closer to masculine or feminine traits, they might encounter that day. Again, that’s prejudicial and it makes you kind of a bigot but whatever.

Still on the subject of rejection, it’s not just romantic or sexual. If you go on the internet, there are countless examples of bisexual men or women who, after they came out as WHO THEY FUCKING ARE, had to face a change in the way people would treat them and act around them. A straight girl who couldn’t sit too close to her bisexual female friend because she could have a crush on her. A straight man who stopped giving hugs to his close bisexual male friend in case he would get the wrong ideas. OR a gay man or woman who would just end a relationship when they found out about their partner’s sexuality. Yep, I went back to sexual. Sue me.

Let’s put this out there : bisexual people are just as capable to commit to a monogamous relationship. It’s not because you fell in love with someone with a V that you’re gonna suddenly get hungry for the P. Don’t be a child.

Now, being rejected by society is one thing. We are queer, that’s our song, we twerk to it with vigorous enthusiasm. But the treatment of bisexuals in the Queer community is plainly unacceptable.

In France, when the Mariage pour Tous (fuck, I promised myself I wouldn’t use France again. Fuck. Fuck. Fuck. Whatever.) succeeded after months of lobbying and manifestations from all sexual orientations, this was considered a victory for the LBGTQ+ community as a whole. But really, it was a success for Gay men and Lesbian women, as Bisexuals are not viewed as a consequential orientation. They are not visually recognizable to gay, lesbian or straight people, they don’t have the same historic tragedies that the general public know about and their sexuality has been used and abused as a motor for heterosexual male fantasies in pornographic movies and myths, thus keeping it from becoming a reality in people’s minds. It then becomes a vicious circle where the moral is low and the activism is nowhere to be found, so nothing changes. Bisexuals stay in the darkness (until they make a fucking choice, right ?). By the way, the term biphobia is never uttered but it’s real and it happens constantly.

WHAM, BAM, THANK YOU PAN ?

Something I haven’t totally mentioned yet is the term Pansexual. It’s actually the part of the article I was the most apprehensive about as if uninformed, is quite difficult to distinguish with Bisexual. Bisexuality is the romantic or sexual attraction to more than one gender. Well, Pansexuality is the romantic or sexual attraction to all genders, outside of the binary scope of what gender is, I guess ? That’s when things get complicated because people are really attach to the label “Bi” would argue that it does not limit them to only boys and girls but other genders. And then those really attach to the label “Pan” could argue that their term is more inclusive to transgender people, who are men and women but also non-binary individuals who do not identify with male and female identities’ basic definitions. Then I would say that to me, bisexuality is the more known and comprehensive umbrella term for what this romantic or sexual orientation is and that pansexual is a more recent word and kinda beyond the scope of bisexuality (in a good way). And then someone would tell me I have it all wrong and then I would shut the fuck up. Definite differentiation between bisexuality and pansexuality is a mindfuck for the ages, as is the term “feminism” to some these days. By the way, “Pan” means “All” in ancient greek and a synonym to Pansexual can be Omnisexual (“omni” is latin for “All”). But I don’t want to get too much into that, I don’t feel like I have the energy.

DOUBLE JEOPARDY

As I kept my searches broad for this article, I ran into a term that was used by SOS Homophobie to talk about discrimination of bisexual people. Double Jeopardy. We talked a lot about ways that straight folks can discriminate against bisexual people and a little bit about biphobia inside the Queer community but I would like to come back to the latter. I do write these articles for everyone but I seem to keep repeating myself quite a lot at the end of each of them, only because the problem seems to always be the same : as long as we are tearing each other apart, we won’t advance as one. Live together, Die alone, that sort of thing (Damn, I really do repeat myself).

To my queer peeps, do not fear the sexual preferences of your partner as your relationship do not depend on what gay or straight orientation she/he/they is/are gonna have that day. Do not make the mistake to judge them by their supposedly easy-way-out heterosexuality as they are not straight. They don’t hold more privileges than you in this world, as they might flip flop at convenience from one side to the other. A bisexual woman who falls in love with a man is still a Queer woman. It’s not your queer experience, but it is one and you need to embrace it. Do not put them down for it because they are already being put there by straight people on a daily basis.

All of this is based only on your own insecurities which have been fed by your minority status, your heteronormative education, your own ostracism from said heteronormative society and possibly your capabilities as a lover (ndlr : your fear of being dumped).

But most of all, do not ignore them. Those are your people. They hurt just as much as you (but between us, you can’t rank genders but in the prejudice scale, I’d say it comes at a close number 2. Think about it.) and they need your support, as you needed theirs when it was time to get that Mariage Pour Tous — damn, last time, I promise. Remember that this MPT was also for them. Every action you take as a community is an action to benefit them as well. As they are the B in LGBTQ+. Say it out loud. See how weird it sounds without the B.

Mic dropped.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUDab9piv_U