DiscussionSexual orientation vs. Misgendering

submitted by JulienMayfair from self.LGBDropTheT

On one of our favorite ongoing communities to observe (AGB), I've noticed the following inconsistency. If a guy comes on and says, "I'm basically straight, but my gay friend sucks my dick," or something along those lines, you'll have a bunch of guys responding, "Whatever you are, you're not straight. You're bisexual."

But bring up gender, and it's all about self-ID. You absolutely have to take the other person at his/her/their/xer word that they are describing themselves accurately or else you are misgendering them, engaging in "literal violence."

Is it just the convention that trans is somehow sacred and cannot be challenged, while people seem perfectly happy to challenge some stranger's description of his sexual orientation?

It just seems like such a glaring case of hypocrisy to me. If we have to take someone's word for their gender, why shouldn't we have to take their word for their sexual orientation??

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]gloomy_bear 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

I never understood that. It's still homosexual regardless if it's a dude or a mtf sucking a dude.

[–]artetolife 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Depending on who's posting at the time you do see the same applied to sexuality, sometimes even more so because they want to believe they can get a straight guy to fuck them.

[–]JulienMayfair[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree that part of it is about the fantasy, but it just seems to me that you get many more posts saying that someone who claims to be straight is bisexual if he has any interest in sex with another man.

[–]lunarstrain 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're not allowed to question the sexuality of a TIP, either. What they say goes, even if it's something as asinine as "bi-lesbian", "aroace gay", or one of those micro labels like "lithsexual", otherwise you're just spouting TERF rhetoric.

[–]Sadbisexual 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

'Bi-lesbian'... Jesus christ, if I didn't know any better, I'd say they were afraid of being just bi, lesbian or gay... I don't know how they don't see the homophobia in that.

[–]INeedSomeTimeAsexual Ally 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I feel like with the example you brought up in your post it's simply seen as ok to question straight people but it's taboo to question someone who identifies as anything but straight or "cis".

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was thinking this, too-- the problem is that these guys say they're straight. Which, according to the current regime, makes them contemptible.

Not that it's contemptible (weirdly enough) to actually BE straight, of course; in fact, you're scarcely allowed to be anything else, are you? Certainly not homosexual, or bisexual; no, the only form of gay or lesbian or bi permitted these days is a heterosexual claiming that as an "identity". That's the secret of TQ+'s success, I think: having straight people play us. Because society is much more comfortable that way. When we can pat ourselves on the back for being so open-minded that rainbow flags are everywhere, and you're free to openly have any sexual orientation... just as long as it's straight.

[–]wafflegaffWoman. SuperBi. 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We know what sexual orientation terms mean.

The only way to gain power one doesn't have by virtue of fitting such a description is to make up a new reality and club people into submission with it. Hence the cognitive dissonance. Many are trying to be nice and accommodating and give the benefit of the doubt.

That might have worked without the high percentage of Cluster Bs misappropriating that open-mindedness for power and control and gratification reasons.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. This is very annoying.