On a lighter note-sheekaytNovember 14 2006, 01:00:45 UTC
* Assuming bisexual means "available."
My first thought was, "this is even more so when you're bi and poly. Which then reminded me of a button dancinglights mentioned yesterday that she wants, which simply reads, "Bi. Poly. No."
I think the difference here is that bisexuality is viewed as an attraction to both sexes not the availibility to have sex with both of them. Someone in a relationship with one sex isn't going to stop finding the other attractive just because he or she is in a relationship.
I'm having trouble with this PSA because I'm also not sure where you're getting some of these points from. Why would someone assume that a bisexual person would fulfill their sexual fantasy? I've never encountered someone who's been afraid to confront a biphobic remark for free of being labeled bisexual. I think that's part of why some queers are biphobic, because it doesn't have the same stigma as being gay because right now it is trendy. That's not to say bisexuals are such because it's trendy but that right now our society views being bisexual as trendy. Also the one statement that I kind of get stuck on is
( ... )
Not quitesoarhiunfreeNovember 14 2006, 04:54:48 UTC
I think you might be missing the point. As to the sexual fantasy question, lets be honest here. Men are jerks. I can't count the number of times when I have been in a room with a bunch of guys when there were no women around and the subject of bisexuality is brought up with snide comments and knowing grins. Our culture has engendered the idea that men who identify as bi are gay, and woman who do are into threesomes. We admit to the stupidity of that type of stereotypical bull, but the snickers and elbow nudging continue regardless. Another point you miss is this. If I were in a relationship with a woman who was bisexual, she does not become hetero just because she's walking down the street with me. She still feels attracted to women whether she's with me or not. Unisustree's point was about assumptions, and our annoying human habit of putting labels on people and relationships when we have no real insight as to what lies beyond that first glimse of them.
Re: Not quiteprisoner007November 14 2006, 06:18:38 UTC
Actually it seems like you missed the point I was getting at. If you look at my other posts you'll see I did talk about how just because a person is in a relatioship with one sex doesn't stop them from being attracted to the other. My problem with the PSA was the wording. If it was meant that people in relationships aren't defined by the orientation of that relationship it should have been said that way because as I pointed out it's impossible to have a bisexual relationship. There's a difference between assuming that someone who's bisexual will fullfill your fantasy and assuming that a female bisexual is into threesomes. If the former is meant then it should have been said.
Ariel just did a whole post about how part of the problem with the free wisconson movement was the confusing wording in their ads. I felt she was falling into a similiar trap here, perhaps I did as well in my response.
Re: Not quitesheekaytNovember 15 2006, 00:48:47 UTC
The idea behind the wording was the incorrect assumption in labeling the *person* not the relationhip. I get your point that a relationship strictly between two women is a lesbian relationship, but the fact that two women are dating/screwing does not mean that either or both of the women is necessarily a lesbian.
I'm listeningsoarhiunfreeNovember 14 2006, 04:29:37 UTC
I will watch myself, I will approach every situation with an open mind, and an open heart, I will not deny my ignorance, but will learn and listen and struggle to broaden my understanding. I will not assume that just because I mean no harm that I will do no harm. I will not judge, I will not patronize, or give false promises like I will never be guilty of the above, but I will challenge my preconceived notions, purge them, break them down and look at them with new eyes. -Sha
Comments 8
My first thought was, "this is even more so when you're bi and poly. Which then reminded me of a button dancinglights mentioned yesterday that she wants, which simply reads, "Bi. Poly. No."
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Our culture has engendered the idea that men who identify as bi are gay, and woman who do are into threesomes. We admit to the stupidity of that type of stereotypical bull, but the snickers and elbow nudging continue regardless.
Another point you miss is this. If I were in a relationship with a woman who was bisexual, she does not become hetero just because she's walking down the street with me. She still feels attracted to women whether she's with me or not.
Unisustree's point was about assumptions, and our annoying human habit of putting labels on people and relationships when we have no real insight as to what lies beyond that first glimse of them.
Reply
Ariel just did a whole post about how part of the problem with the free wisconson movement was the confusing wording in their ads. I felt she was falling into a similiar trap here, perhaps I did as well in my response.
Reply
Reply
-Sha
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment