ALL I WANT IS A NEW MALEVAL MODERN DAY AU THAT DOESN’T MAKE ME CRY, IS THAT SO MUCH TO ASK FOR?!?!
okay so alan tudyk is at new orleans comic con
and someone asked him one of his favorite memories from filming firefly and he...
The more I think about it the more I hope there isn’t a Maleficent 2.
Don’t get me wrong, I would totally go see it, but I feel like fans are...
Heterosexual character who develops feelings for someone of the same sex; “I’m not gay! Am I? Oh but I love this person. Well, turns out I’m gay!”
EVERY DAMN TIME
Just erase every other sexuality
Here’s an idea
Maybe they’re bisexual!
Maybe they’re pansexual!
Maybe they’re heterosexual, but this person is an exception!
Maybe they don’t know what the fuck they are and don’t really care!
Maybe people don’t just suddenly become gay because of one person
Maybe gay isn’t the only alternative sexuality out there
Maybe media starts to realise this
First of all, this question is awful. It’s classist and rude. Not everyone can afford to have their queer work distributed, because in the entertainment industry you often have to have an in, and to have an in you have to have money.
Secondly, I am a college student. I’m studying creative writing, so yes, I do create queer characters and include them in my work. I certainly can’t afford to self-publish, and there is not much of a market for bisexual media, due to biphobia. I hope that one day I can have work published and widely read, or maybe even work as a script writer. But right now I’m a student. Guess what? I still deserve to have representation.
And it’s not a simple matter of “getting what we want,” for oppressed groups it’s a very serious issue, because we have poor mental health, and it doesn’t help to have poor representation. So you can fuck off with your tone, thanks.
oh yes i’ll just go commission bisexual characters on a bunch of tv shows i am the head of, and publish a million books with queers in them via the numerous publishing houses i own, and i’ll just create movies with all the funding and contacts i have in the industry. better yet, i’ll do it all my magic because i’m a fucking wizard
Can we start using this argument on everyone else?
"You don’t want a black Human Torch? Why don’t you make and cast your OWN Human Torch?"
"You don’t want a female Thor? Why don’t you write your OWN comic book series with a male Thor?"
HOW DOES IT SOUND NOW?
so if a bisexual dates someone of another gender, they’re really straight and looking for attention
and if a bisexual dates someone of the same gender, they’re really gay and calling themself bi out of internalized homophobia
and if a bisexual is polyamorous, they’re the reason bisexuals “can’t be trusted”
and single bisexuals are predatory liars
what the fuck are we supposed to do
dance fiercely to Queen songs and tell everyone who says bisexuality isn’t real to go fuck themselves
Ah yes all that sweet sweet bisexual privilege.
Like having more psychologists attribute your mental health to your indecisiveness.
or doctors not believing when you’ve become sexually active
or the government believing your ~~**straight marriage**~~ to be tax fraud
or having the biggest demographic in the LGBT community next to the trans community be homeless and suicidal
and then having nasty little monosexual queers dictate your own identity to you like you’re the fucking problem.
because that doesn’t add up to an entire life spent doubting your own identity so badly you can no longer, not even for a second, trust your own attractions romantic or sexual or otherwise.
until you feel so fucking messed up inside you think you’re lying to yourself and you have no way to validate who you are or how you perceive others.
because you’re straight enough
you’re not straight enough
you’re queer enough
you’re not queer enough
you’re lying you just want attention
so much privilege
look at it all
Arguing on the basis of roots is problematic because roots have a meaning derived from the history and politics of actual use. For example, we don’t interpret “transsexual” to mean “sexual attraction toward people sitting across from me” even though the root “trans” in Latin is used predominantly as a spacial adjective or adverb. The pairing of a spacial adjective with a linguistic noun to describe gender in ways that were quite binary until the last few decades is a social construction.
Similarly, the history and politics of “bisexual” starts with Krafft-Ebing borrowing the term from botany and zoology to describe people who were not exclusively heterosexual or homosexual. Arguably he and other early psychologists including Freud are responsible for constructing heterosexuality as well. Gender deviance and homosexuality were widely considered to go hand-in-hand under those theories, and still are outside of America. So there’s a fairly rich and complex history of trans people and nonbinary people within gay and lesbian communities until quite recently. If we’re going to discard bisexual as tainted by the theoretical assumptions of prior generations who imposed the term on us, we should reject the entire kit and kaboodle, including the Freudian relic of “pansexual.”
The 80s and 90s saw the emergence of a bisexual movement which considered autobiography and autoethnography to be more important than either the theoretical approaches of people like Kinsey and Klein or linguistic roots. And what we found is that people identified as bisexual were not necessarily binary either in gender or sexuality. Central to this conflict is what I consider to be a fundamental principle of queer theory, that abstract theory derivative of heterosexist science is less important than politics, history, and most importantly, the voices of diverse queer people. The entire point was to deconstruct the idea that human sexuality can be classified into sheep and goats based on largely theoretical dividing lines like the number of genders.
The idea that complex histories, attractions, and relationships should be reduced to single words for the sake of convenience has less to do with communicating those concepts than with constructing political shibboleths. If you want to understand my sexuality, gender, relationships, and politics you need to 1) buy me a cup of coffe, 2) ask, and 3) be prepared to listen for a good half-hour, because I don’t speak in label, I speak in complete paragraphs. I have a button that’s older than many people participating in this discussion that reads “don’t assume I’m attracted to you/don’t assume I’m not.”
Bisexuality is inclusive of nonbinary gender and sexuality because we as bisexual people said so in describing our own lives, ideals, and experiences. We have done so repeatedly, consistently, and firmly over the last 25 years. So the question needs to be asked as to why Victorian and Edwardian shrinks are more authoritative in defining bisexuality than bisexual people.
And on the other hand, I’m bisexual because I am identified as bisexual by a biphobic culture. Playing hokey pokey with language doesn’t change that, and until you erase anti-bisexual prejudice, I will insist on using “bisexual” as an adjective to describe my relationship with those forms of oppression.
obviously not all monosexual privilege is the same, hets take the cake of having both heterosexual privilege and monosexual privilege. but non-monosexual queer/bi/pan folks have every right to name our oppression that exists within queer power dynamics. that oppression includes being erased from both within our community and outside our community.
the word ‘bisexuality’ is a taboo
it isn’t said on tv. orange is the new black, for example, features a bisexual protagonist who points out the biphobia at one point in assuming she can’t be attracted to multiple genders, but no one Ever says the word and she is ignored and referred to as a straight girl or a lesbian depending on the situation
other bisexual characters later turn out to have been Really Monosexual All Along. or are attractive, promiscuous women with commitment issues
this isn’t a coincidence.
people who are attracted to multiple genders, when asked about it, often describe themselves as “Fluid”. “I’d rather not label it.” “I don’t need to define it.” “It’s just whatever.” as if people are afraid of even implying the b word
this isn’t a coincidence.
the word ‘bisexual’ gets you different reactions in different places. straight people think you’re either faking for attention or a deviant. straight men are afraid of bi men and think bi women are just particularly promiscuous straight girls who want to have threesomes with them
gay men accuse bi men of being in the closet. lesbians accuse bi women of being straight girls going through a phase. and the ones who don’t do either of these things still often assume bisexuals are promiscuous, indecisive, and can’t settle down.
the theme throughout is that bisexually is illegitimate, deceptive, and always a front for something else.
this isn’t a coincidence
people are constantly encouraged to ‘settle down’, to ‘just pick one’, to ‘not be greedy’. abandon bisexuality. you’re really gay. you’re really straight. you’re too young. how can you know you’re bisexual at 16? 18? 20? 25?
this isn’t a coincidence
the word ‘bisexuality’ is constantly, persistently manipulated, by people who aren’t bisexual at all. the meaning twisted on shallow rationale. accused of being transphobic, or of being exclusionary. this has been happening for over 20 years now despite the existence of outspoken trans and/or non-binary bisexuals. whatever they can do to make you not say the word. pick a different one.
this isn’t a coincidence
bisexual people - whether implied or literally, deliberately saying they are bisexual using the word - are constantly rewritten as gay or as straight. gay icon. he was never interested in men. bi actor comes out? headlines say ‘came out as gay’, or articles outright ignore it
it’s never, ever a coincidence. bi erasure is a constant, ongoing thing.
omg stop straight people 2k14
It really was at one point in time, though, and there are STILL teachers forcing left-handed students to write right-handed, STILL entire communities telling kids they’re possessed by the devil for using their left hand.
No, being “teased about it sometimes” is not the same thing. But
a) I’d be surprised if this was the whole story, both from the perspective of the person posting it AND from the person who said it;
b) did you know that sometimes people say things casually, seemingly minimizing their personal impact, to avoid triggering themselves?
c) for some people it is actually very similar rhetoric being thrown at them;
d) left-handedness is only a couple decades ahead of bisexuality as far as attitudes against it go.
Congratulations on your missing of the point, you must be so proud! Call us back when left handed people are assaulted, raped and murdered.
So these are some people who still exist: http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=49703
Left-handedness has been considered a disability for hundreds of years. I don’t think I need to google for you evidence that disabled people have been killed for being disabled. Certainly there is plenty of lore about left-handed children being killed for being evil you can find, but most of it is pre-internet-era with good reason.
I’m not sure that pretending others haven’t suffered makes our suffering bigger somehow, and attacking other oppressed groups for being more accepted than you sooner certainly doesn’t make our suffering more important.
you do realize landover baptist is a group satirizing fundamental christianity and the religious right?????
Does this person realize that saying “I’m left-handed so I know how biphobia feels” is like saying “I’m Irish so I know how racism feels”?