will you finally let me be an anime girl? by Aerozine in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Except all the enemy has to do is misgender them and the futas will have a collective nervous breakdown.

Russian/Chinese/etc. troops: "Lookin' real MANLY there bro!"

UwU troops: "I feel unsafe! YOU WANT ME TO DIE!!! Transphobe! Bigot! TERF! REEEEE" (self-harming and frantic attempts to get the big meanies perma-banned from Reddit & Twitter ensue)

will you finally let me be an anime girl? by Aerozine in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Because AGPs really are very conventionally masculine in personality and interests, I think. Stuff like the military naturally attracts them.

That's what makes them AGP in the first place, apparently: they have an erotic-humiliation fetish, and, since they totally buy into gender-roles-- men are superior, women are inferior-- what could be more humiliating (thus hawt) for them than... 'feminization'? But this wouldn't work unless they actually knew they were (and identified as) traditionally-defined men, would it? Because womanhood isn't humiliating for women in their eyes; we have no superior status to lose, after all... there's no place lower for us to go than where we already are.

It's like a billionaire CEO dude paying for a dominatrix to call him a little worm. The only reason he gets a thrill out of it... is that he knows perfectly well he's actually not.

Can’t have problems if you’re white by zpgnbg in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

How 'bout Latino and white? As so many people from Spanish/Portuguese-speaking countries (and their descendants) are? No, no-- they're all "POC"! Even the pale, blonde ones! Even if they themselves identify as white! Latino = brown IT'S THE LAW

When our biologically based aversion to incest that helps preserve our species survival is too “ableist” and isn’t “woke” enough. by BioEssentialism in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think you’re mis-reading your classic case of the “which came first, the chicken or the egg” question. Gender Roles only came about because of man’s need to propagate his genes and impregnate and rape as many women possible.

I don't think that I'm misreading this. If gender roles came about in order to promote man's need to propagate his genes, why are they so often geared towards doing the exact opposite? Two examples: the prevalence of fathers refusing to provide financial support for their minor children following a divorce, and of men to become the most violent towards their wives/girlfriends during pregnancy. Both of these phenomena are characterized by men behaving in a way that actually DECREASES the likelihood of their genes being passed on (because his children don't survive). What sense does this make in "selfish gene" terms? None.

And I hope you're not saying that men raping women is good! Beyond the ethical/moral objections to this, though, how the hell does it work as a reproductive strategy? In most animal species, the offspring reach maturity within a matter of weeks or months (sometimes even less); many have no need of any parenting whatsoever. So a "quantity, not quality" strategy makes perfect sense here. But children need an ENORMOUS amount of care for an EXTREMELY long time; a man would do much better to invest his resources in a few of them than just run around impregnating women. Particularly by means of rape, which maximizes the likelihood that the woman will kill these offspring (either by abortion, or, in past eras, simply abandoning them to die of exposure). Again, this is counter-productive if successfully passing on one's genes is the goal, but perfectly in keeping with the imperatives of gender.

Gender roles, I'm convinced, are based on something else entirely: faulty reasoning. Just like the idea that the Sun revolves around the Earth, witchcraft is real... and people can be "born in the wrong body".

I don’t put that much stock in the concept that humans are so highly evolved as to be somehow an exception to this rule, we’re just another type of animal at the end of the day.

Oh, I don't put ANY stock in this concept, myself! That's not at all what I'm saying. It's not a matter of humans being "so highly evolved", or somehow not an animal species. It's a matter of how the element characterizing us-- for both good and ill-- is unique: conceptual intelligence. When comparing our species to any other, you have to factor this in. Only we can be shaped by ideas. And those ideas can be erroneous. Conceptual intelligence is a two-edged sword, really: on the one hand, it's the most versatile tool for survival that evolution has ever come up with... but, on the other hand, it allows us to make factual errors, and create artificial devices/conditions, which may well bring about our extinction in record time. So as to whether human intelligence makes us "superior": I'd say that the jury is still very much out on that one.

Which still wouldn’t explain this supposed prevalence of fathers raping their biological daughters since gender roles just serve to enforce man’s need to fulfill their reproductive imperative, and a heterosexual’s 1st degree relatives should automatically be excluded from the list of “viable sexual partners” for obvious reasons.

That's because gender roles are first and foremost devoted to reinforcing male superiority; this is often inconsistent with the welfare of his own biological children, and may in fact promote his neglect and abuse of them (quite possibly to the point that they do not even survive). Not that gender roles only threaten men's children; this ideology is destructive to people in general (though women most of all).

I think something else might be going on here… And if it’s not paternity uncertainty (I find it interesting that there are apparently zero cases of brothers molesting their biological sisters in comparison) I have to wonder… Tell me, do the majority of these father/daughter molestation cases take place when the daughter herself is prepubescent or is she usually a menstruating teen?

Oh, brothers certainly do molest their biological sisters; I didn't mention it because, during the period when their sisters are still children, so are most of these boys, and many aren't physically-mature enough to be sexually-predatory yet. This isn't true of fathers/grandfathers/uncles, obviously.

Most father/daughter molestation begins when the daughter is prepubescent, usually well before her teens. However, it will typically continue until he's forced to stop, usually because his daughter has gotten old enough to successfully resist and/or escape him.

The biggest lie ever told."Gay people want nothing to do with transgenders." by jacques1102 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can i get a poll that shows most gays are against this?

Probably not, given that the LGB are (and have been for some time now) under siege by the TQ+ Pod People (in an Invasion of the Body Snatchers remake that no one wanted). Our major organizations have been trans-captured; they now represent THEM, not us. And in fact make it their business to attack us at the bidding of their new masters. Gay and bi people (particularly lesbians) are mostly keeping their heads down, at least when in public, trying not to draw any more trans-fire than we already are.

Look at it this way, though: what is "trans" short for? Transgender. Meaning the belief that "gender" is of paramount importance, overriding biological sex.

Gender is where the stigmatization of same-sex attraction comes from. And if gender overrides sex... what happens to gay (and bi) people, whose very identity is based on biological sex? (Your own sex + that of those to whom you're attracted = your sexual orientation.) How can gay people resist pressure from straight people to fuck them, once "gay" has been redefined as "attracted to the same gender"?

Does this sound like something that gay people would support to you?

Trans activist use the brain argument a lot,but what does it mean to have a female or male brain? by jacques1102 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

THIS. Somehow, it's been decided that the claim of "trans-ness" automatically makes you special-- meaning interesting, compelling, attractive, generally exceptional, etc.-- and everyone else is now obligated to perceive you as such. But that's not the way this works, at all. "Specialness" of this kind, like beauty, exists in the eye of the beholder. You know that you're interesting, etc., only if people keep telling you so (implicitly and even explicitly) through their reactions. It's not something you can command of them: "I hereby order you to find me special!" And proclaiming that you've based your identity on a profoundly-regressive, cruel (responsible for more human misery than anything else we've ever devised), stupid ideology like "gender" sure does nothing to prove your OH SO ✨SPARKLY✨ credentials.

This is exactly what my gender queer ribbon dance therapy instructor said too. by Adventurous_Ad6212 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

You seriously need a flow chart to keep track of all the bullshit.

When our biologically based aversion to incest that helps preserve our species survival is too “ableist” and isn’t “woke” enough. by BioEssentialism in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

While definitely an inappropriate and unethical grooming relationship, I don’t count this as incest so for me the point here is moot.

I consider it incest because it's driven by the same factors as with incestuous fathers (see below).

Question, is Grandfather or Uncle heterosexual incest more common than father/daughter?

Hard to say; it's my impression that father/daughter is the most common. Which, yes, contradicts the Westermarck Effect... but there are other factors at play here, specifically cultural ones. Never forget that being the one species to possess conceptual intelligence means that our behavior is shaped not only by evolution and biology, but also by ideas. Including ones that are wrong. In both sense of the word. As well as destructive and, sometimes, just fucking stupid. Like the "trans" train wreck! And, indeed, "gender" as a whole. That's the ideology underpinning the incestuous abuse of girls. Which leads me to:

The father/daughter cases being as common as you tell me is what really astounds me, why isn’t the Westermarck Effect working on these men?

Because something else is working on them, and it's stronger: gender roles. The ancient, pervasive system of sex-based stereotypes which classify "female" as inferior and "male" as superior. Female people are seen primarily in terms of the value given them by male people; since most male people are straight, this is fundamentally sexual. Most men don't extend this rule to their daughters, of course... but, unsurprisingly, quite a few do. Because that's what girls are for, in their minds (and it's one logical way of reading gender roles, tbf).

Which is the basic reason why I hate gender-woo. And everything that arises from it. Because this is the original evil ideology. Whether anyone tries to disguise it with colorful, New! Improved!TM packaging or not.

When our biologically based aversion to incest that helps preserve our species survival is too “ableist” and isn’t “woke” enough. by BioEssentialism in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure if "homosexuality", per se, exists in any species other than our own, you know? I mean, same-sex sexual activity certainly does... but does ANY sexual orientation? That entire concept seems like an inherently-human thing. I don't know that I'd even say that bonobos have it, and they seem more human-like in their sexual behavior than any other species I can think of. Calling them "bisexual", or the majority of animals "heterosexual", just seems weird to me.

Maybe it's because, in all other animal species, sexual behavior is instinctive. They don't need to be taught about "the birds and the bees". They know what to do; it's programmed in them. Not so for us. Children are famous for their oddball, spectacularly wrong-headed notions of where babies come from. All we have is our sexual orientation to guide us (at least if we're not asexual)-- and that's only a matter of the sex/es we're attracted to; it tells us nothing about how to act on that attraction-- and what we manage to learn (or figure out). Otherwise, nature's left us pretty much on our own, as far as sex is concerned.

Queer literature, SJW & Tumblr culture and the readers who praise that by FlyingKangaroo in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Easy to do, isn't it, when so many of 'em use the same names? Dudes-with-ladyfeelz seem to gravitate towards "Sophie"; ladies-with-dudefeelz are notoriously fond of "Aiden" (to the point that a popular synonym for "gay transman" is now Gayden).

Somehow the former never opt for the kind of androgynous/boyish names (like Alex, Adrian, Cameron... or Aiden) that women actually tend to favor, and the latter rarely sport unstylish (yet clearly-masculine) ones a la Jeffrey, Gary, or Doug. Why, it's almost as though (gasp!) they continue to act in accordance with the gender-role they were originally assigned! SO WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS FUCKING "TRANSITION" THEN???

The biggest lie ever told."Gay people want nothing to do with transgenders." by jacques1102 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 32 insightful - 1 fun32 insightful - 0 fun33 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Longtime LGBDropTheT member here. Not at all convinced that we're a minority-- our sub was around 20K strong when Reddit axed it (for not kissing the T's ring).

So of course all you see online is LGB support for the TQ+... cuz the tech overlords ban everything else!

When our biologically based aversion to incest that helps preserve our species survival is too “ableist” and isn’t “woke” enough. by BioEssentialism in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Homosexuality meanwhile not only isn’t harmful to any outside parties (unlike inbreeding) but it also actually helps our species and planet by mitigating overpopulation and being spare hands to take care of all those orphaned and abandoned children out there. (I’m pretty sure this is the exact reason why being gay even exists as an orientation in the first place)

I doubt that this is the reason why homosexuality exists, actually. Not that I disagree about it being a functional product of evolution-- this seems clear enough to me-- only about what makes it so.

I don't think that could be mitigating overpopulation, because, for most of human history, there just weren't that many people-- in fact our species was nearly wiped out more than once. The explosion in Homo sapiens's numbers took place far too recently (in evolutionary terms) to have driven the development of homosexuality.

Basically, I think that homosexuality is just one example of how, for an intelligent social species, "sex" will naturally come to be about much more than just reproduction. It will have other meanings: social; emotional/psychological. And these are, in their own way, just as important. They can also contribute to the species's welfare; they can help it survive.

You can see this principle in action throughout the animal kingdom. The less intelligent a species (like, say, insects), the more sex is strictly-reproductive; it has no other meaning for them. Then look at one of the two extant species most closely-related to us: bonobos/pygmy chimps (Pan paniscus). Their entire social structure is shaped by sexual behavior... most of it non-reproductive (and often same-sex). What purpose is it serving, then? It's being used to diffuse tensions which, among our other closest relatives (chimpanzees, P. troglodytes), cause regular-- often violent-- conflict. Bonobos rarely fight, and therefore rarely inflict the serious, sometimes fatal, injuries on each other than chimps frequently do. All because of sex having meanings for them well beyond the reproductive (important though that is).

And if this is true of a species far less intelligent and complex than our own, I think that it must go double for human beings.

When our biologically based aversion to incest that helps preserve our species survival is too “ableist” and isn’t “woke” enough. by BioEssentialism in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Where the fuck is there suddenly such a big increase in (heterosexual) incest? Isn’t it still one of the rarest things in the world? (Not counting cousin marriages)

I don't know about a big increase, but no-- it isn't esp. rare, and never has been... unfortunately. At least if we're talking about fathers (and even more particularly stepfathers) preying on their minor daughters. Also other male adults in a girl's family: uncles; grandfathers. When you're talking about incest... that's the prototypical example of it. Which, being male/female, really does fly in the face of the idea that there's any great aversion to it based on reproductive considerations. (And of course, with a stepfather, genetics aren't even a factor.) The aversion in contemporary culture is mainly because it's child molestation, and in a context where the child is even more vulnerable than usual-- because the man molesting her is someone whom she's emotionally, and legally, dependent on; one of the very people she has a right to look to for protection. It's a terrible betrayal of a child.

Disliking the golden retriever stereotype is biphobia by NerveActive in TumblrInAction

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

There’s a crucial difference between bisexuals and trans people here, though.

In order to date trans people, you must cater to their delusion, by pretending that you can’t perceive what sex they are. This is understandably a deal-breaker for pretty much everyone (“trans” people themselves included; most categorically refuse to date each other).

In order to date bisexuals... you don’t have to cater to, or pretend, anything. Because we aren’t pretending anything. Same as (non-trans) straight or gay people. So the only thing distinguishing us from straight or gay people here... is our sexual orientation. Which is, therefore, what we’re being rejected on the basis of. That straight and gay people find bisexuality/bisexuals distasteful somehow.

Well, if a bi guy refused to date gay men because he found homosexuality/homosexuals distasteful somehow... what would you call that?

To be clear, I’m not saying that, even if straight or gay people’s rejection of bisexuals is unambiguously motivated by the most virulent biphobia– “I won’t date bi people because they’re disgusting subhuman animals!!!”– it shouldn’t be treated as final; everyone gets total veto power in this area. Always. Whether I agree with their reasons or not. (And whether they even give any reasons or not; “because I don’t want to” is reason enough.) Would I like to see the no-bisexuals dating policy’s demise? Yes. But only organically, as a natural outcome of biphobia’s demise in society at large. And not because anyone is guilted (much less bullied) into it.

Disliking the golden retriever stereotype is biphobia by NerveActive in TumblrInAction

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

I think that biphobia legitimately is different than homophobia, though of course they both have the stigmatization of same-sex attraction in common. When that's the focus-- and it often is-- biphobia and homophobia are indeed functionally-identical.

The thing is, each form of prejudice consists of two parts. The one that bisexuals and homosexuals don't share is the SECOND type of stigma: for homosexuals, that's lack of opposite-sex attraction; for bisexuals, it's lack of monosexuality.

The first stigma-type only gets us in trouble with heterosexuals. The second gets us in trouble not only with them, but often with homosexuals as well. Neither can understand a sexual orientation that includes both sexes. And therefore, to them... it often doesn't look like a sexual orientation at all. Hence the plethora of alternate explanations: "you're REALLY gay or straight, just confused, or screwed up, or a poseur, or a sex maniac", etc. Which are all just another way of saying: "you don't exist".

Disliking the golden retriever stereotype is biphobia by NerveActive in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Disliking the golden retriever stereotype is biphobia by NerveActive in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And it doesn't actually have anything to do with us, fellow bi person! Thank effin' god...

(Though of course that never stops the spicy straights from dragging us into their perpetual mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-who's-the-SPESHULEST-of-them-all quest anyway)

Disliking the golden retriever stereotype is biphobia by NerveActive in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 18 insightful - 1 fun18 insightful - 0 fun19 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good question! I'm bi and I don't know either!

20% of bi people claim to have long covid. Almost as if a large amount of crazy straight people identify as bisexual. by jet199 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In fact a large number of supposedly straight actress are known as bi in the industry. They could all be bi and just be massively over represented or they could just be screwing whoever is going to get them on.

First, this sounds a lot like the all-too-familiar "Biphobia: Female Edition" in a nutshell. That is: "women who call themselves bi actually aren't (cuz there's No Such Thing of course)-- they're REALLY straight, just slutty!" (As distinct from "Biphobia: Male Edition", i.e., "men who call themselves bi actually aren't [cuz blah blah blah]-- they're REALLY gay, just cowardly!")

Second, since the vast majority of power-brokers in the entertainment industry are men... how would being bi (as opposed to just plain straight) help a woman "sleep her way to the top", exactly?

Third, the whole "sleeping her way to the top" thing itself seems pretty dubious. Both because it plays on the aformentioned bi-women-are-sluts stereotype, and also the centuries-old "actress = whore" stereotype (which, along with the euphemistic term "casting couch", is a convenient cover for what's actually just good old-fashioned sexual harassment). Regularly being faced with "fuck me or you'll never work in this town again, bitch" doesn't make YOU ambitious; it makes THEM predators. And whatever you do about it... you lose. When the one paying the price in this scenario should, by all rights, be the fucking rapist.

Fourth (and finally): I suspect that bi (and gay, and lesbian) people actually do account for a high percentage of the acting profession. Because we grow up learning to act, don't we? Specifically, learning to act straight. And thus developing a sensitivity to people's behavioral cues. So we know how to pretend to be something we're not... and hide who we really are.

In fact, I think that there's a strong connection between being LGB and being "creative" in general. Not because of anything inherent about us; because of the stigma that being same-sex-attracted carries, and the internal conflict that this tends to cause. Creativity/the arts are a major way of trying to resolve that inner conflict. Sure, anyone can have this kind of talent-- that itself is no more common for us than for straight people-- but we're disproportionately likely to focus on and develop it. Because (thanks to homophobia/biphobia)... we're disproportionately likely to NEED to.

most attractive transgender by meisthebigdumb in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 8 insightful - 7 fun8 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

"Corporate needs you to find the differences between this picture and this picture."/"They're the same picture."

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right, which happens because of homophobia and they feel horrifically ill the entire time and basically rape themselves by willingly engaging in it. They're basically forced to do it. Gays and lesbians don't suddenly decide to go straight because their preferred option isn't around. So why would you call a straight guy who chooses to have sex with other males when there aren't any females around (or just gets a hate boner for feminine gays) heterosexual? The correct term would be bihet.

And what makes you think that these straight guys aren't doing the same thing?

I think that you're missing something here. Remember, we're not talking about contemporary western cultures. We're talking about cultures where this is normalized. That straight men will have sex with each other until marriage. It's expected. It's assumed. It's what one DOES. Those are the rules. And, everywhere, most people follow the rules.

And, when you think about it, this is what sex has been like, in most places, for most of recorded history. You DON'T have sex with people because you're attracted to them. You have sex with people because you're told to. By your family (you'll marry whoever we choose for you, like it or not!), of course... but, in a larger sense, by your society. To the point where you may well lose track of what, and who, YOU actually want.

Sexuality is one of the basic things that societies control. And dictate. The details vary... but I'd say that self-rape is a common outcome. And not just for gay people.

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How am I refusing to define a distinction that I never made in the first place?

These things AREN'T separate. What IS separate: attraction to a person AND ACTUALLY HAVING SEX WITH A PERSON.

You can certainly have one without the other. Just ask all of the non-"gold star" gay men and lesbians out there. Or anyone, really, who-- for whatever reason-- ever had sex with somebody that they just weren't attracted to. Or are you saying that this never happens?

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

How is that a non-definition? I'm saying that the only person who knows whether you feel attracted to someone is you. Who else would it be? Me? The Toledo Mud Hens? The guy down the street?

I mean, maybe you don't know when you're attracted to someone, and have to ask somebody else to tell you whether you are or not. But that's definitely the exception to the rule.

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

My definition is consistent. You just don't agree with it, apparently.

And if yours is "anyone who has experienced sex with both sexes, even if they're only attracted to one of them, or neither", then there's really nothing to discuss anyway.

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Why would I determine it? Surely it's a matter of that "someone"'s feelings, not mine. Or anyone else's.

Do you really want the question of whether someone is attracted to a person decided by some third party? "I hereby find that you ARE attracted that dude over there! So don't argue! Go and mack on him forthwith! THAT'S AN ORDER"

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sexual attraction to both sexes. Not having sex with both sexes.

I mean, otherwise, if you're sexually-attracted to both sexes but only have sex with one, you wouldn't be bisexual. Which doesn't make much sense to me.

Also, having sex with someone doesn't mean that you're sexually-attracted to them. Sure, it should-- there ought to be no such thing as having sex you don't want, with people you don't want-- but that's not the world we live in. Unfortunately.

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Straight men having sex with each other isn't characteristic of other societies, though.

And I certainly agree that same-sex sexual activity is widespread in many other species-- notably one of the two most closely related to our own. What isn't at all clear is whether other animals can be said to truly have a sexual orientation, be it homosexual, bisexual... or heterosexual. So I don't know if it's possible to say what heterosexual males of other species get up to... since ours may be the only one where they exist.

Your honest opinion on transgenders? by detarame in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Well, I don't know that it's homosexuality (or genuine bisexuality, for that matter)-- more like what inevitably happens when the sexes are kept strictly-segregated. Then the straight guys use each other as an outlet. Which may be part of the reason why they're so hostile to same-sex sexuality in these cultures: for heterosexual men, those experiences aren't gonna be good ones, any more than the opposite-sex version would be if they were gay. So they assume that's the OBJECTIVE reality of sex between men. Instead of realizing it's just because this is literally unnatural and wrong for them. Not for everyone.

Coming out as delusional to my mom by lunarstrain in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

And if he gets stroppy with you about it... have him neutered.

Plus NO GETTING UP ON THE FURNITURE. No! No! BAD boy. [squirts him in the face with water bottle]

Somebody. Anybody. by Effective-spell-616 in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 21 insightful - 2 fun21 insightful - 1 fun22 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Man, I know the feeling... do I ever. Had more days when I'm downright despondent over this genderology plague than I can count.

But there is cause for hope. An expose of the Tavistock in the Times, the policy changes in athletics... even (horrible as it is to say) the overturn of Roe v. Wade. The latter because it makes the reality of "woman" being about biological sex, NOT "genderfeelz", painfully clear. No "transwoman" is going to be forced to serve as a brood-mare, that's for damn sure. Maybe this will cause the otherwise trans-captured women's organizations to wake up. Ditto LGB organizations, now that the right to same-sex marriage, and even to engage in same-sex sex (Lawrence v. Texas), are next on the chopping block. Neither will affect "transbians", "gay trans men", or "non-binary" straight people one whit; you'll still be perfectly free to marry/date/fuck those of the opposite sex, regardless of how you (or they) "identify". Proof positive of how meaningless that actually is.

Overall, when this situation feels especially bleak, I'd suggest that you remember three things:

  • This is a fad. Like Pet Rocks, eating Tide Pods, and the Macarena. And like all of those, it will become passe and die off.
  • Lots of other stuff seemed so entrenched that it would NEVER go away... until it did. The unassailable power of tobacco companies and the ubiquity of cigarette smoking; drunk driving as funny and no big deal; the impossibility of same-sex marriage ever being legalized on a national level in America (civil unions were the best that we could hope for, everyone assured us).
  • When the emperor has no clothes, most everybody can already see it; they just need a critical mass publicly declaring, "he's BUTT-NEKKID!!!" to show them that they're not the only ones.

Please don't give up, OP. Reality needs all the support that it can get these days! And so do those of us who recognize and value it.

Today on things that happened: by WhenImBanned in TumblrInAction

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This is what I keep thinking! Like, in order to actually live on a diet of insects, you'd have to eat ENTIRE BOWLS of 'em! For multiple meals! Every day! Who the hell would (or could) do THAT? Plus, how much nutrition do you get out of an insect? Including calories? Not much, I'm guessing, at least for a non-insectivore species like us humans. Sorry, wokesters, we just didn't evolve to subsist on bugs. Probably the same people advocating this who think that veganism for cats (or, yanno, humans), and low-fat diets for babies, are also a good idea.

Rest in peace r/TumblrInAction by lunarstrain in TumblrInAction

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

Why is discussion labeled "hate"?

To bluff people out of engaging in it, because whenever they do, the T are revealed as deluded and/or charlatans.

Rest in peace r/TumblrInAction by lunarstrain in TumblrInAction

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

I keep wondering if they'll get their wish... by driving everyone else away from Reddit. So that it consists entirely of the T and their minions.

At which point, Reddit will cease to be economically viable. And collapse.

Or maybe Reddit's Powers That Be will see this coming, and kick these fanatical wackadoos to the curb before they take the entire platform down with them.

why AGP sometimes takes over by TRapostate in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hey, did you delete your post, OP? Why?

Is this something that you regret having brought up? Do you not want to discuss it any further?

Because I won't pursue it if you don't want to.

why AGP sometimes takes over by TRapostate in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But that's just it: how does being "feminine"-- that is, exhibiting traits (presentation-wise and behavior-wise) identified with women-- reduce your manhood? Unless women are "lesser"? Do you see what I mean?

Also, do you know why it is that you're afraid of women? That might be worth exploring.

Nothing to see here, just another completely normal 28-year-old bisexual woman, not at all suspicious by [deleted] in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Oh god... have these creeps finally tired of impersonating lesbians, and, instead of taking this as a wake-up call about what monumental assholes they've been, exclaimed, "oh, the problem is that I was a BISEXUAL woman all along!1!"??? :(

why AGP sometimes takes over by TRapostate in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you think that your fundamental turn-on is feeling humiliated, and the AGP is just an outgrowth of that? Because you regard women as inferior, so, for a man, there's nothing more humiliating than "feminization"? How do you think of women, of femaleness? What are women to you? What do we represent?

why AGP sometimes takes over by TRapostate in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

IMO, while at first blush this may seem like a contradiction (macho-men who imagine themselves as cute anime girls???), in actuality it's perfectly consistent.

AGPs are, by definition, big believers in gender-roles. To them, "woman" = dresses, makeup, long hair, pink, submissiveness, etc., etc. It's all about gender bullshit. So of course "man" = tough, dominant, unemotional... macho. The military is a natural fit.

It's as though their understanding of "man" and "woman" never matured beyond preschool age, I swear.

🌺💋The skittles will make you fluffier hons✨💖 by [deleted] in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ha, the only reason people like this would ever seem less than pervy is that now they're perving on their ostensible lack of perviness!

too young to know by MarkJefferson in LGBmemes

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

And especially if it's BISEXUAL

What do you think others mistake and/or need to realize about bisexuality? by TumbleweedFireflies in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That it's a sexual orientation. Nothing more, nothing less.

And that "sexual orientation" does NOT equal "monosexual". Being attracted to only one of the two sexes isn't required. Just that you're attracted to (i.e., oriented towards) people based on their biological sex. Which, like both homosexuals and heterosexuals, we are.

What is biphobia? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, I think the previous commenters already did.

But if you're looking for the in-a-nutshell version, here's one word that sums it up: monosexism.

That's the basis for all of the anti-bisexual attitudes which others have mentioned, I think. The assumption that sexual orientation = monosexual (because, for most people, this is indeed the case). And that, therefore, there is no such thing as bisexuality: it's not a sexual orientation at all. Hence the alternate "explanations" for it: being confused, indecisive, wishy-washy, immature, slutty, phony, etc. And the erasure (cuz, after all, we don't exist).

What memories stand out for you with noticing you were both opposite-sex and same-sex attracted? by TumbleweedFireflies in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Hiya! <3 Yeah, it's my clueless ol' ass, inadvertently derailing things as per usual! With you gently but firmly guiding me back on track once again :)

So, by way of apology, allow me to be the first to answer the question posed in your actual post!

What stands out for me, in retrospect, probably is the "first inkling" that I ever had: seeing Raiders of the Lost Ark at age 13... and being attracted to both the male villain AND the female lead. (Yeah, I thought that Harrison Ford was pretty damn fine, too, but somehow bad-boy Rene Bellocq was the guy who really made an impression on tween me.)

Though I didn't appreciate it at the time, this amounted to Bisexuality: Condensed Version. Especially when these two characters/actors appeared together in the same (often sexually-charged, what with Bellocq lusting after Marion) scene! Bonus points for how, even at this early stage, my long-term pattern of being drawn to each sex in quite different ways (women more physically, men more emotionally) was already present.

About me, demographics-wise: female; GenXer; USA.

What memories stand out for you with noticing you were both opposite-sex and same-sex attracted? by TumbleweedFireflies in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Oh no! So I guess that's what befell me, huh? I really got slammed here the last time I commented... it actually scared me away till now.

Any idea how this came about? It seems so unlikely for a bi-specific space, you know? We don't seem to draw much fire, typically-- one of the few benefits of being invisible, I guess! So why are we suddenly beset with trolls and attempts at sabotage, do you think?

What can we do about the colossal proportion of closeted bis? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The solution, I think, is getting everyone to understand bisexuality as a sexual orientation. Nothing more, nothing less. It's people coming up with other (erroneous) explanations that causes all the trouble. If we're REALLY gay or straight, then it must be a matter of... confusion! denial! pretentiousness! immaturity! greediness! sluttiness! fill-in-the-offensive-bullshit-blank! etc.

Or, as s/Nani notes above... supposedly being a "poseur" who's "choosing" this: promiscuous and unable to decide. Just the sorts of things people assume when they don't know the REAL reason for our being the way we are.

How can we convince more bisexuals to care about homophobia? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

While I agree that homophobia is a threat to bisexuals, I do NOT agree that it's the main one, nor that bisexuals are doing little to counter it.

LGB spaces always have a substantial bi contingent, and our primary focus there is, invariably, opposition to homophobia. This makes some sense, as it's an issue that affects bi and gay people alike. However, what I never see is any collective concern about, much less taking action against, BIphobia. And THAT, I'm convinced, is Public Enemy #1 for bisexuals.

Why? Well, first, because we're only vulnerable to ONE aspect of homophobia: its stigmatization of same-sex attraction. That's what we share with gay people. What we DON'T share is the other aspect: stigmatization of the LACK of opposite-sex attraction.

But you know what affects us full-force, 100% of the time? Biphobia. Which I would define this way: not recognizing bisexuality as a sexual orientation at all. So that neither it, nor we, really exist. Meaning that bisexuals are actually phonies, deluded, liars, sexually-indiscriminate, etc. In other words: we're just straight or gay people. Usually "bad" ones, sometimes "good" ones a la the Noble Savage/Magical Negro-- more open-minded/evolved/enlightened (so that we should love/fuck EVERYONE, like some slutty Jesus!)-- but never, ever ourselves.

Basically, this all comes down to monosexism. Which is to say: the assumption that sexual orientation itself can only be monosexual. This is the default attitude, not only among heterosexuals, but also homosexuals (who are if anything even more vehement about it, what with forever having to defend the exclusiveness of their own sexual attraction)... and, all too often, bisexuals. Causing us not to even recognize ourselves as BEING bisexual, think bisexuality is something other than a sexual orientation, and/or remain closeted. Because who's gonna come out when no one will believe you? Including GAY people? And you'll have to do a fucking PowerPoint presentation every time? All on your own, without any backup?

THAT, I think, is the real issue here. Not that bisexuals don't care about homophobia (those of us who identify with LGB are pretty vocal about it); not homophobia itself; not bisexuals posing a problem to homosexuals (the reverse is at least as true, given that we tend to have their back without them returning the favor). For us, the main threat is biphobia. Particularly due to the fact that: 1.] gay people are, for the most part, unconcerned about it; and 2.] we don't really have any movement/organization of our own to address it.

TL;DR: for bisexuals, the main problem isn't homophobia-- it's biphobia. And while we often DO care about homophobia, gay people rarely care about biphobia (same goes for straight people). Until there's a real awareness of, and effort to counter, biphobia, many bi people won't come out (since it often keeps us from realizing that we ARE bi, or being believed/understood when we tell others).

How can we convince more bisexuals to care about homophobia? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Some more examples in Afghanistan include the tradition of Bachi Bazi boys. Bi men will keep young gay boys as sex slaves.

I doubt that the boys' sexual orientation is much of a factor (especially since they're often too young for it to have even emerged yet).

And why would bisexuals be particularly well-represented among the men who prey upon them? I'd assume that they'd be like the average child-molester everywhere: a man who is attracted to women, girls, and boys... but not men. So he loses interest in boys as soon as they start to resemble adults. That sure doesn't sound very "bisexual" to me.

How can we convince more bisexuals to care about homophobia? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

What can we infer is the sexuality of a man who rapes a gay man in order to "punish" him, but has a wife and kids at home?

Not much, in a culture where opposite-sex marriage is obligatory, and when rape-- especially of this kind (i.e., an overtly-hostile act)-- need have nothing to do with sexual attraction. Are all-- or even most-- of the men who rape other men in prison bi (or gay, for that matter)? I doubt it. Similarly, many men rape women to whom they are not sexually-attracted. So that X rapes Y is no proof that X is attracted to Y, or to anyone of Y's sex. In many cases, I think, rape pretty much comes down to bullying using sex.

Is sex a factor in your attraction? In what way, specifically? by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. Because for certain features, I find different things attractive in men than I do in women. For example, male voices turn me on more than female voices usually. Women's breasts turn me on more than men's pecs usually. This isn't an across the board thing. Nice thighs and a good sense of humor are appreciated regardless of sex, but I'm not blind to sex. Mens' and women's bodies and socialization are different, and give rise to different things that attract me sometimes.

As the saying goes: are you me? :) Much the same story here, actually-- have a real thing for men's voices, and women's breasts, versus the other sex's equivalent. Who the hell knows why! And to segue into OP's questions:

  • 1. As indicated above: yes. Partly a matter of my having very different physical "types" by sex (see below); also, many of the physical traits that I find attractive are sex-specific (and, often, attractive to me because they're a marker of difference between men and women). For example, I really like the iliac furrow (seen here: http://www.fuelrunning.com/repository/fitness-humor/0082.jpg), Adam's apples, and tallness on the one hand, and wide curvy hips, "dimples of Venus" (yeah, men can have 'em too, but they're more common and prominent in women), and narrow waists on the other. Which is not to say that there aren't "unisex" traits I go for, only that in many cases, what I respond to is the opposite of that.
  • 2. Yes and no! I'm seriously intimidated by both sexes... but for different reasons, and with somewhat different results as far as my role/behavior goes. What's the same is that I'm very deferential, unassertive, and don't want to be the one in control. I can be rather aggressive with guys, though always in a conventionally "feminine" sort of way (flirty and seductive, but signaling them to come after me); however, I don't really have any idea how to apply this to women, especially since I don't like the whole "butch" thing and am pathologically insecure about my looks where women are concerned. (Not that I feel confident about them vis-a-vis men, but at least I'm not comparing myself directly-- and unfavorably-- to the object of my desire in that case.)
  • 3. Yes, physically: tall thin (though the latter is much more important than the former) guys and busty, curvaceous women. Which may, once again, be about "difference", though I prefer a certain femininity in both (minimal body hair, pretty facial features, a "swimmer's body" for the guys-- defined but not bulky muscles and a smooth, sleek look overall). I also tend to favor conventional attractiveness in women a lot more-- my standards for men's looks are quite "negotiable". Like much the same personality for both, though (intelligent, complex, good balance of the rational and the creative).
  • 4. Really hard to say; since my attraction to each sex feels so different, they don't really compare-- kind of an apples-and-oranges thing.
  • 5. Yes: I'm more physically attracted to women, but I've never experienced the kind of intense emotional pull towards them that I do with men. This may have something to do with being more emotionally-wary with women and physically-wary with men... but who knows?

Good lord, the IKEA bisexual-themed couch is a disaster. by [deleted] in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

What, is this from the Bad Acid Trip Collection? ("oh god HANDS SPROUTING EVERYWHERE MAKE IT GO AWAY") Or some alternate universe where Ed Gein became an interior designer? Maybe a virtue-signaling remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre? (please tell me that "inclusivity" does not extend to a yaas-kween!-fabulous KweerTM Leatherface...) Perhaps damned souls sentenced to an eternity of imprisonment within this Sofa From Hell? And who else can't look at this... THING without thinking "BAD TOUCH!"? Apparently even FURNITURE can be rapey! Who knew?

In any case, as they used to put it on Mystery Science Theater 3000: "good old-fashioned nightmare fuel"!

Withering sarcasm aside, has anyone else checked out IKEA's full range of Pride Loveseats? OK, maybe you value your eyeballs too much (with the prevailing puketastic aesthetics, it's really more like "Shame Loveseats" ["Hateseats"?], amirite?), but I couldn't help noticing that, out of 10 designs total, only two-- count 'em, TWO!!!-- are based on, yanno, LGB. (Well, L and B, anyway; G is nowhere to be found.) Other than "Progress" and "Asexual" (WTF is not being oriented towards any sex, including your own, doing here???), the MAJORITY-- 6 out of 10-- are all about (you guessed it) "gender". But oh, why stop at just more than half, IKEA? When every 13-year-old Tumblrite produces as many new genders as pimples? Where's the Loveseat for all of THOSE? Stargender and Beegender and Whateverthefuckgender! Soon you'll have more goddamn couches than asses to sit on 'em!

Christ, can't we even have fuckin' eyesore FURNITURE to ourselves now?

Why does bisexuality get de-legitimized so much? by dgsf in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think that it comes down to monosexism.

Basically, because most people (heterosexuals and homosexuals) are monosexual-- attracted exclusively to one sex-- they make the assumption that sexual orientation itself is inherently monosexual. Not just for them, but by definition. Therefore, bisexuality cannot be a sexual orientation, which means... it doesn't exist. So all evidence to the contrary must be explained away. By recasting bisexuals as either straight or gay, and their motivation for bisexual behavior as anything BUT sexual orientation.

Also, at least in this one respect, heterosexuals and homosexuals usually stick together: they may not agree on much else, but share a tendency to be biased in favor of their mutual sexuality... and against our own.

Bisexual women are being failed by their partners: Bi women dating cis straight men are the least likely to be out and here’s why by MarkJefferson in Bisexuals

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

Really appreciate this post, OP. Lots to comment on here, but a couple things stand out for me:

  • Bi men, as well as bi women, are usually partnered with straight people. This is the result of sheer math (they're the vast majority), plus the fact that we tend not to be out, which makes a bi-preferred dating policy pretty unworkable.
  • Having straight partners, at least in the current climate (where ignorance about/prejudice toward bisexuality prevails), is likely to cause problems for us. Especially since straight people are, in effect, the only game in town (gay people being far less numerous, and also prone to bi-unfriendly attitudes of their own).
  • Therefore, one solution would be more bi/bi pairings... which would require our being out (at least enough to find each other), and spaces to facilitate dating within our own community. Does this prospect appeal to anyone else? Any ideas as to how we could effectively promote coming out, and what kind of settings would help us get together?

"my friend claims to be bi but has only dated men/women" by [deleted] in Bisexuals

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

THANK YOU. Yeah, I'm pretty fed up with having this "we gay people require proof of your SSA credentials!" crap directed at us, too. As though it's up to them whether or not we qualify as bi. Oh yes, HOMOSEXUALS must be the experts on THAT. Dafuq?

I think what this comes down to is their unwillingness to accept us on our own terms; they demand that we conceal the side of ourselves which they don't share-- that we act like their Mini-Mes. So they're not really recognizing us as bisexual at all. In effect, by "editing out" our opposite-sex-attracted side, they're recasting us as homosexuals. And if our dating history is opposite-sex-only... we're not cooperating.

Bi erasure yet again! Gay people need to start dealing with us as who we really are-- in full, not just the part that's convenient. Until they accept the way in which we're DIFFERENT from them, rather than the same, they're not getting us at all. And it's high time that they did.

(Saidit) PEAK TRANS I: Please continue to share your stories!! by Irascible-harpy in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nope, not a fetish, he's just living his fucking perverted truth.

Well, yeah-- the truth that he's a fucking perverted fetishist!

(Saidit) PEAK TRANS I: Please continue to share your stories!! by Irascible-harpy in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

at the time I still believed that most people understood the difference between sexes and viewed gender ideology as a coping mechanism for those who couldn’t handle enforced gender roles and stereotypes and needed to fit in.

Yes, this is pretty much what I originally thought, too! Even though I've firmly believed that "gender" was a pernicious lie ever since I was 20 or so, I mistook "trans" for the kind of compromise that many people have to make with parts of their culture-- stuff which is too pervasive/deeply-rooted to just ignore, or end overnight. So on that basis, I was willing to accept that this was some people's way of dealing with the burden of gender roles. In the words of the old song, "whatever gets you through the night", you know?

Yeah. Then, like you, I came to realize how wrong I'd been... and that "trans" wasn't a way of finding a workaround for gender-roles (enabling people to just live their lives); it was a way of reinforcing them. :(

Bi Colours in Natural Minerals (Beads) by MarkJefferson in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ooh, this really brings out the artist in me! (Not to mention the jackdaw.) Can I play? Cuz while you of course picked some nifty ones (Lapis Lazuli is an old fave of mine-- even its NAME is lovely!)... this post has made me wanna go a-prospecting myself!

So, for each bi-pride color, I've found:

  • FUCHSIA: spinel; sugilite; tourmaline
  • LAVENDER: jade; kunzite; quartz; spinel; sugilite
  • BLUE: benitoite; blue opal; sodalite; spinel; tanzanite; tourmaline

Of course most of these are translucent, so they may not be to your taste, and could all be old news to you anyway... but I wanted to share 'em just in case :)

[Meme] Semibisexual is someone who's bisexual BUT... by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The ONLY way that this might make any sense is if it's defined as: attraction to a single gender... but both sexes.

So, for example, someone who's attracted exclusively to men and women with "feminine" presentation/behavior (in gender-role terms).

The problem, of course, is: 1.] that's almost certainly not the term's intended meaning; and 2.] there's really nothing "semi" about such a person's bisexuality! They're just a particular flavor of bi-- bisexual with a gender-related preference-- rather than something else altogether.

Bisexuals and AGP/AAP Pseudobisexuality by usehername in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Neither; just sounds like heterosexuality with extra steps to me.

Cuz a man who's turned on by imagining himself as a woman is simply... female-attracted. Sure, he's attracted to himself, but that "self" is, in his mind, A WOMAN. The fact that he's really a dude isn't part of the fantasy. Like, if a guy is turned on by a first-person prose account of a hot woman doing sexy stuff, does that mean HE'S bisexual? How? The erotic focus is on women. And women ONLY. So he's Straighty McStraighterson as far as I can tell.

Have I ever experienced this or something like it? Only in the sense of enjoying sexual scenarios from a male, as well as female, perspective (though I don't literally imagine myself as a guy, or another woman, for that matter). And, crucially, my erotic focus is on BOTH sexes.

So I'm not a "pseudobisexual"; I'm the real deal :)

[Bi-Erasure] What are your thoughts on the "queer" movement? by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

SuperBi is a cool concept but despite the fact that I disagree with gender ideology, I'm not a SuperBi. I do find some trans people attractive.

Here's the thing, though: what is it about them that you find attractive? Are you attracted to them based on their "gender identity"... or their sex?

Because, while the SuperSexuality movement is often understood to mean "not attracted to trans people", I think that it can also be interpreted as "attracted only to biological sex, NOT 'gender'". In that case, you could be attracted to trans people on the same basis as non-trans people-- their sex-- and still be a SuperSexual. In fact, despite not being trans-exclusionary, you'd need the "super" identity's protection as much as those who are, since just finding some T people attractive isn't enough; you also have to find them attractive in the trans-approved way: based on their "gender". If that very pretty, feminine trans-identified male gets your motor running because he's male... you're a transphobe, and it's REEEEE-in' time.

So I guess what I'm saying is: feel free to call yourself a SuperBi! Cuz whether or not a trans person could trigger your "yum!" response, you're a gender heretic in the Church of T's eyes, and that's all that matters :)

Trans identified male wants TSA to treat males as if they were women. by linda_senora in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

“The root solution is to believe transgender people when they tell you who they are,” she says.

Um, I don't think that's how security checkpoints work.

Lol yeah, if they do, what do we even need TSA screenings for???

"Do you identify as a terrorist?"

"No, I do not!"

"Oh, OK, you're good to board, then! You might want to stop by one of the airport stores and pick up some clothes and toiletries and stuff, though-- the X-ray shows all that you've got in your luggage is guns and explosives! Have a nice day!"

A vegan group published an article stating that referring to farm animals by their biological sex is transphobic by BEB in SuperStraight

[–]PenseePansy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well we wouldn't want all those trans farm animals being traumatized by MISGENDERING now would we.

Trans-identified male, "...It's what's between our ears, not what's between our legs.” Hear that, Super +? It's NOT ABOUT WHAT'S BETWEEN YOUR LEGS! Forget your genitals, your sex is IN YOUR HEAD by BEB in SuperStraight

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh good, then they can just select their sexual partners based on GENDER, not biological sex! Thus leaving those of all SuperSexualities alone!

Win/win! :)

Bisexuals and same-sex attraction... by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

  1. This is a huge problem, and I talked about it briefly in the thread on drop the T. I think this mainly stems from the patriarchal view that dick is powerful enough to 'ruin' or 'turn' anyone it comes in contact with sexually. It's why people think bi men are 'just gay' and bi women are 'just straight'. Both circle back to the idea that if you're attracted to men, that's the ONLY type of attraction that carries any weight. Bi men get the worst of it because of how homophobic society is already.

Completely agree that this is a huge problem, but have a somewhat different theory as to what's behind it.

I'd say that attraction to men essentially cancels out attraction to women for both sexes because of the way that gender-roles work.

For the female and male gender-role alike, men are central (they're the ones who matter, after all), but-- when it comes to sexuality-- in opposite ways.

Women MUST be attracted to men. Aside from the female gender-role dictating that our entire existence revolves around men, this is something that men (as our superiors) are entitled to. Attraction to women, therefore, is merely incidental; we aren't fulfilling any obligations with that. (And since no penis is present, whatever we do with each other doesn't even count as sex anyway.)

What this all adds up to is: bi women = straight.

The male gender-role also requires opposite-sex attraction. But, for men, "straight" is defined less as a matter of being attracted to women than of NOT being attracted to men. Women aren't entitled to men's love/desire (the way that men are entitled to women's); attraction to them matters mainly as proof that a man isn't gay. THAT'S the important thing. Why? Because male desire is perceived as an act of dominance; it puts the recipient in a subordinate, demeaned-- otherwise known as "female"-- role. So directing that at fellow men insults them, and wanting that FROM them is "humiliating". Taboo either way.

Therefore, if a man is male-attracted... he's gay. Because female attraction doesn't really even count. And bisexuality? No such thing, DUH!

Does this strike anyone else as the kind of dumbass "reasoning" behind the all-too-familiar "bi women = straight/bi men = gay" bullshit?

Bi-cycling/Fluctuating by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think a lot of bis who report experiencing "the cycle" are people who don't lean very heavily towards one sex or another, so their attraction appears to "cycle" due to random encounters. As someone who quit porn after using it regularly, I also think that this is heavily influenced by porn use. After quitting, I no longer have a fixation on sex or daily fantasies.

I hadn't thought of this; really interesting take. While I don't seem to lean heavily either way (or at least the "apples-and-oranges"-ness of it all makes comparison difficult), "the cycle" still hasn't been a thing for me. The closest I come is my attraction to men getting blocked by what looks like PTSD (never been diagnosed), sometimes for long stretches, but this feels different than what those experiencing fluctuation describe.

I'm curious, do gender roles influence your feelings for each sex, and in what way?

I think that they do.

With men, I find the sort of personality that often results off-putting at best and threatening at worst; I'm also actively afraid of men in general. But the flip side is that they tend to be rather emotionally-contained/reserved, which I like (in moderation). And being less empathic can also make them less inclined towards the kind of "feelz > reelz", who-cares-about-facts-or-reason attitudes that piss me off no end.

More women are "my type" personality-wise, and they haven't been socialized to use physical violence against me. But the female gender-role's emphasis on beauty/prettiness really influenced me, and if I find a woman attractive, it's hard not to compare myself unfavorably to her. The whole "lesbian U-Haul" thing is also scary to me in some ways; it feels like emotional overload. And women often have a penchant for the kind of "bleeding-heart"-ism that makes them prone to becoming SJWs/trans-dupes (I first saw this many years ago, when the dogs-running-loose-in-public-is-a-civil-right! movement was at its zenith where I live; its most aggressive-- fanatical really-- proponents were all women), which really bugs me.

Bi-cycling/Fluctuating by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What are you all referring to here? Porn use? Feeling attraction to strangers?

Any and all forms of attraction: on an individual basis, and/or in general. Including fantasy/imagination and just an overall heightened awareness of a sex's appeal to you. Whatever someone experiences-- I'm sure that there's a lot of variation, and as far as I'm concerned, it all "counts". Only just realized that this had been left undefined; thanks for making me think about what I actually meant!

I don't believe in the "cycle".

Do you believe in the "cycle" for those bisexuals who report experiencing it?

I have never experienced a "cycle" and don't relate to those bis who say they have/do. I also have the same "type" for men and women.

I don't think that I've ever experienced it either, actually, though it's hard to be sure, since the way that I'm attracted to each sex feels so different; it's something of an "apples & oranges" situation for me. Possibly because my "type" isn't entirely unisex, and/or I may have PTSD with respect to men. Which prompts me to ask: do gender-roles not influence your feelings for each sex, then? Such as potential misogyny from men, resulting in a kind of caution that you wouldn't have with women?

Bi-cycling/Fluctuating by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for taking the time to give such a thoughtful and detailed response!

First, hope that this sense of upheaval (whatever its source) is something that you can at least ride out, and perhaps even learn/benefit from. I've been experiencing something similar recently-- in my case it's more like belated emotional growth-- and can attest that just because there's a silver lining does NOT make the process easy, or painless. And of course it can be less a matter of change/growth than just... shit you hafta go through sometimes. I certainly sympathize in either case.

Sounds like my post could hardly have been timed better from your perspective, huh? Me: "do you experience "bi-cycling"/fluctuation?" You: "AND HOW!!!" To say the least! Interesting that this is an entirely new phenomenon for you. And also associated (whether coincidentally/causally or not) with upheaval in your life. Wonder if this might even be something of a pattern among bisexuals? Amazing how little seems to be known about us, isn't it? I really feel as though study of the LG has reached grad-school level while we're still struggling to put together Bi 101. Especially when it comes to bi-specific stuff like this.

I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it. I'm not in a relationship, but I think this sort of long-term fluctuation in particular could conceivably cause some issues with monogamous relationships in a similar way that a lengthy loss of romantic attraction/libido could cause a problem for a monosexual in their relationship. I don't think it's something that's thoroughly unique to bisexuals. Of course, the elephant in the room is that Bisexuals can have some competition for their affection from one sex that the other sex wouldn't necessarily be able to adequately satisfy.

Yes; I also find myself wondering how many forms this could take, in a monogamous relationship-- desire for what's unique to the sex that you're not with. Strictly physical? Is it sometimes just a matter of wanting those other secondary/primary sex characteristics? Can it be about how male and female acculturation tend to produce rather different personalities? And/or simply that our attraction to each sex is itself very different-- in what we find appealing, the "rules" governing it, even how it FEELS to us-- so they're essentially apples & oranges: inherently not comparable?

This last also suggests a built-in problem with monogamy even for those of us who don't experience "bi-cycling"/fluctuation: we could be thoroughly satisfied with our partner as far as THAT sex goes... and also find that this doesn't dampen our desire for the OTHER sex one bit. Cuz of the "apples and oranges" factor. In fact, where the sex-we're-not-with is concerned, we could feel as though we're effectively single... even LONELY! How's THAT for making bisexuals look like the mates-from-hell?

Could the upshot of all this be that the whole "poly" thing (eyeroll-worthy as it so often is) means something different for bisexuals than monosexuals? At least those of us who experience such a strong pull towards "both", either periodically or constantly? Because while we're certainly not ALL that way... this really is one natural outcome of being "dual-attracted", isn't it? That some of us would experience our bisexuality like this seems inevitable.

Is this what you call it, or do you prefer another name?

It'll have to do for now until someone comes up with a better pun.

:) "Cyclilust", maybe? (I'll show myself out...)

Bi-cycling/Fluctuating by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can monosexual people come to understand it? I see it as being similar to bridging the gap between men understanding women's sexuality and vice versa. Someone who Isn't can never have the visceral lived experiences of someone who Is, but starting conversations like this is a key part of removing the mystery that lets people get anxious and start filling in the blanks on their own. The Truth must be accessible in order for people to learn from it.

Good way of putting it. Yeah, they're certainly capable of understanding this phenomenon (it's hardly rocket science, after all!)... guess the part they really have to work on is understanding that they NEED to; that we deserve to be understood. On our own terms. Listened to; taken seriously. As opposed to being seen only through a monosexual lens... and thus always found wanting. Like we're no more than an inferior reflection of them. Or a punchline.

That's the overall challenge, I suppose; how do we get through to monosexuals with this message? "We're a sexual orientation, like you; not "half-gay, half-straight"... we're our own thing. You need to learn what that means. To us. Instead of assuming that we're either basically the same as you, or some weird aliens. Have respect for our differences. And our experience."

This post was written after Valentine's Day alcohol wiped its ass with my sleep cycle, so hopefully it made sense.

It certainly did, plus putting it this way made me lol for real :) I wish you a sleep cycle that's shed all vestiges of Valentine's Day ass-wipery!

Bi-cycling/Fluctuating by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah :( I'm sorry that this is a negative thing for you; maybe having a place to talk about it where the phenomenon isn't automatically condemned ("this means that you're gonna cheat! See, you bisexuals can't be monogamous! You're just a sex maniac!") might help? At least a little? (Hope so anyway.)

If it isn't too personal, may I ask whether, when you're in a relationship, this affects your desire for your partner? Does your attraction to them decrease when your attraction to their opposite sex increases? And/or does it affect your attraction to the sex that isn't "on the upswing" in general? Or do you feel more attracted to one without feeling less attracted to the other?

Also, what is it that makes your "fluctuation" so frustrating/exhausting/pain-in-the-ass-y? Could this perhaps be somewhat alleviated by thinking of it as intrinsic to bisexuality? A natural (if sometimes inconvenient) consequnce of being attracted to both sexes? Maybe you're judging it too much by monosexual standards, you know? When stuff like this may work quite differently for us, and not mean the same thing as it does for them. I realize that it can be difficult to shake the feeling of "unlike monosexuals = WRONG!!!"... but hopefully not impossible :)

5 Most Common Misconceptions About Bisexuality by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Probably it's because I grew up hearing this, but I don't see what's problem with point 3 (half gay, half straight). Maybe because it's makes bisexuality out to be exactly 50/50, but I can't see this being the most tragic thing to be said about it.

Not so bad in itself, I'd agree; the problem is more a matter of implications. If "bisexual" = "half-gay/half-straight", this naturally leads to the assumption that we're equally-attracted to both sexes... so anyone who isn't (because they have a consistent preference, or it fluctuates/"bi-cycles", or each feels so different from the other that it's apples-and-oranges = not really comparable) therefore doesn't "qualify" as bisexual. Which I've seen play out numerous times: bi? Impossible! They/I ain't 50/50!... despite, yanno, feeling attraction to both men and women! So silly... yet dismayingly-common, and I can't help but think that it robs us of our true numbers, as well as preventing many bisexuals from figuring out who they really are.

Thoughts on the Term "Marriage Equality" by mvmlego in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I definitely prefer "same-sex" marriage, particularly over the competing term which I've heard far more often than "marriage equality" (my objections to which OP and others here have already covered): "gay marriage".

While the term "gay marriage" DOES come out ahead of "marriage equality" (way less vague and needlessly-prissy), the problem is... it excludes us. If a bisexual marries a gay man or lesbian, is that a "gay marriage"? How about when two bi men, or two bi women, marry each other? Then you have a "gay marriage" where neither spouse is actually gay! Sure, I guess it's not really a big deal... but what with the widespread tendency to erase us and let the LG eclipse the B, yet another example is still far from welcome.

Which doesn't happen with "same-sex marriage": it puts gay and (m/m or f/f) bi people on an equal footing. And that's the ONLY kind of "marriage equality" that I'm interested in. :)

Thoughts on the Term "Marriage Equality" by mvmlego in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"pro-choice" only makes sense within the context of the debate, but makes more sense than "pro-abortion" would I guess… but the right to an abortion is always described as "a woman's right to choose" which, while we all know what it means, for clarity should probably be "a woman's right to choose to have an abortion".

The term "pro-choice" has always bugged me too, for the same reason (though-- again I'm with you on this-- not as much as "pro-life" does). Maybe it'd be better expressed as "pro-abortion rights"? Or is that too long, and/or too close to "pro-abortion" for comfort?

Biden's press sec. asked question about TiMs competing against "cis" girls in sports. Press sec. answers, "The president's belief is that trans rights are human rights..." & then dodges the question. Biden knows he's a laughingstock, but the gender $ are worth it to sell out women by BEB in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Who are the P family?

The Pritzkers, I expect (notably billionaire James Nicholas "Jennifer Natalya" Pritzker), one of the wealthiest families in America.

Bi culture: possible? desirable? what should it look like? by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

What do you think of the double crescent moon symbol ?

First: thanks for the link-- bookmarked! New bi-related stuff is always welcome :)

About the double-crescent-moon symbol: I confess that I've never really "gotten" this one; what's the significance of the lunar theme? Though maybe, as noted above-- re: bi-cycling/menstrual-cycle synchronicity-- there actually is some moon-related relevance after all! (At least for some bi women.) How does this symbol strike you, Sandwich?

As far as bi symbols go, I'm kinda partial to the interlocked ♂ & ♀ (Mars & Venus) ones, myself, especially if blue is used for the opposite sex, pink for the same sex, and lavender for the "central" (bi) man or woman. (Definitely prefer that to the more typical color-coding for the bi person's partners: pink = woman, blue = man-- ew! Gender-role bullshit alert! No thanks!) That seems to get the point across in a simple and aesthetically-pleasing fashion. Like, being lavender means that we're not "half-gay (pink), half-straight (blue)"-- we're a blend which results in something else altogether. A "color" in our own right, you know?

I would like a symbol on the order of the violet-flower for lesbians, or the pansy/green carnation for gay men... haven't been able to come up with anything suitable, though. If you guys think of a good one, please let me know!

Bi culture: possible? desirable? what should it look like? by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, I see, I do see your vision and it is appealing. Yes, that would be nice if we had our own FULL culture instead of sub(?) cultures. It is rather...whacky that we hardly have anything.

Glad that it ain't just me! :) Especially when even subcultures for us (let alone the full-fledged, comprehensive bi-culture that we dream of) are so thin on the ground. Yeah, this sad state of affairs does seem pretty strange, doesn't it? Where is our version of what gay/lesbian people have?

My theory is that it has to do (at least in part) with the following: 1.] bisexuality not even being regarded as a sexual orientation at all; and 2.] our fledgling community/movement somehow getting shoved aside by, and then ignored in favor of, the "TQ+".

In brief: the first causes "bi invisibility" so pervasive that it often makes our own bisexuality invisible even to us, and we consequently identify as either straight or gay; such people aren't available to help build a bi culture (though they may be enthusiastic contributors to gay/lesbian culture). It also promotes the misconception that "bi = half-and-half", which suggests that having a culture of our own is unnecessary-- we can just go to either straight or gay culture (as the case may be) for all our needs, right? Why even bother with anything bi-specific?

How the second came about is still something of a mystery to me, but it sure seems suspicious that a bi culture was beginning to emerge in the early 1990s... and the "trans"/"queer" stuff at right around the same time. Then it was like the TQ sucked up all the oxygen. So there was none left for us, and we shrank back to where we'd been before, while they continued to grow... indeed, at an out-of-control, kudzu-esque rate. I can't help but feel as though their success came at our expense somehow. Does it look that way to anyone else?

The only way I think we can "claim" it(if that is the right word) is to create our content and spread the word!

Peach, you're a one-woman content-creating dynamo! :) Hope that my far-more lethargic ass can at least help ya out a little bit! And that we might inspire other people to pitch in, too. Which brings me to...

Maybe...this is just me but I notice some strange commonalities when finding out someone is bisexual. For the bisexual men I meet, they're typically musical/artsy/creative types. Go with the flow, easy going, not scared of femininity. I think this might...be a (good?) stereotype to incorporate into bisexual culture---that bisexual (men) are creative and easy going. Idk. As for bisexual women...They may be more of a "femme tomboy" (once again stereotype,not sure if detrimental or..good?) or gender non-conforming.

Or perhaps bisexuals have a good balance/mix of feminine and masculine energy. We're not afraid of either side and own it. Maybe we have "bi cycles" with how masculine or feminine we decide to appear(I know I have! Decided I like being more on the androgynous side instead of extreme both) and bi cycles with what was mentioned earlier about our attraction. I think that would be good components to bi culture.

I'm sorta of two minds about this, Peach. On the one hand, it really appeals to me personally-- this view of bi men, and bisexuals in general as having transcended gender-role straitjackets. This is what I'd like to think that bisexuality means, yanno? But on the other hand... since most bi people either aren't out, or don't even recognize their own bisexuality, could this be a skewed impression based on the type who's likely to openly self-identify as bi? In the face of messages that it doesn't exist, and means that you're an unstable, unreliable, pretentious, ultra-open-minded, slutty weirdo? I suspect that more conventional-- much less conservative or even reactionary-- bi people don't declare it, or (in many cases) even realize it. Could there be a lot of "invisible bis" like that? Can't say for sure, of course, but it wouldn't surprise me. Typically-masculine guys (macho ones, even!) and girly-girl women! Who knows how many of 'em are covertly-bi? And just unable to relate to bisexuality's artsy, androgynous image?

Which is one of the reasons why I think we need to emphasize that bisexuality is, first and foremost, a sexual orientation. Not a personality; not "open-mindedness"; not a fad, fashion statement, or phase; not being automatically into anyone & everyone. Just the capacity for attraction to both sexes. Nothing more; nothing less. And maybe we can build a culture from there. With that as the foundation. What do you think?

And having blabbed on at such length, I'll spare you my thoughts re: bi history for the time being! :)

Bi culture: possible? desirable? what should it look like? by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So interesting! This is, as that GIF with Phoebe from Friends put it, "brand-new information!" (At least to me-- never heard of "bi-cycling" tracking with menstrual cycling before!) Particularly because it's one of those phenomena that's bi-specific; the whole cycling/fluctuation in our attraction to the sexes really has no parallel among monosexuals, I don't think (they can experience increased or diminished desire, of course, but only ever for one sex, which seems like quite a different matter to me). And I feel that the ways in which we are clearly "our own thing" (rather than the popular misunderstanding of us as "half-and-half") are especially important to emphasize.

Bi culture: possible? desirable? what should it look like? by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Guess I forgot my own rule (that I'm forever reminding everyone else of), huh?: "define your terms!" :) As in what I MEANT by "bisexual culture" in the first place!

Cuz, yeah, as you point out, there IS bisexual culture... of a sort. In various forms, in various places.

But there's really nothing comparable to GAY culture, you know? What homosexuals (both male and female) have. Something that encompasses the intellectual, political/advocacy, the arts/media, businesses, services, places/ways to socialize, events... the whole enchilada. Reflecting all the aspects of bi-ness, all the ways that it can manifest. So there's something for every kind of person. An expression of everything we are: one that's comprehensive.

Like, "bi film" should be a recognized thing: movies centering on/made for (and usually by) us. There ought to be academics and theorists who specialize in bisexuality as a subject. Historians studying it. Fun forms of community. So we don't need to TRY to create "bi things", a la lemon bars/finger guns-- if we had our own little world, dealing with The Bi Experience from a variety of angles, such stuff would emerge naturally. From our movies, TV shows, books, music, web sites, prominent members, etc. The way it has for gay men and lesbians.

I guess I see the bi-cultures that you mentioned-- Reddit, FEB, etc.-- as a start, but still pretty... embryonic. Of course, people have to work with what they've got; there really IS nothing larger to draw from/bounce off of, so they seem to be trying to invent a culture for us out of whole cloth. And maybe there has to be at least SOME of that, at this point. To jump-start the process. Was it like this at the beginning for gay/lesbian people, I wonder? Simple, lemon-bars-type stuff? Is that enough to get the ball rolling?

Maybe I'm just asking too much, wanting something so substantial. And am too impatient. Does my vision appeal to anyone else? Or are ya all like, "nah, we're good?" :)

If you do end up looking into bi history, Peach, please let me know what you find!

"A Transphobe Made A Video About Me!" – Lux responds to Vanessa Vokey's video, sicking his massive audience on her in the process by SnowAssMan in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"I think this bitch is mad a trans woman stole her man"

Lux, the only man that you could "steal" is a creepy fetishist (for whom "woman" = biological blow-up doll) and/or gay/bi closet case. And by "steal" I mean "do some poor woman a GREAT BIG FAVOR PLEASEANDTHANKYOU!"

"She's mad I'm prettier than her"

If you're so, "pretty", bro... why do ya need more makeup than Tammy Faye Baker and a SHIT-TON OF PLASTIC SURGERY???

And you know what you "I'm a LAY-DEE" dudes always look like when you're not SUPER-young anymore, right? i.e., once you stop being anything even close to a boy and reach inarguable manhood? Hint: google "Milton Berle in drag".

Something about glass houses and stones springs to mind...

Planning underway for the trans Holocaust by Chunkeeguy in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 50 insightful - 12 fun50 insightful - 11 fun51 insightful - 12 fun -  (0 children)

If cis women stop wearing make-up, I will never pass.

Oh, don't worry-- you wouldn't anyway! :)

Also: hear THAT, liberal/progressive/feminist trans-shills? THIS is what you're demanding: women MUST wear makeup CUZ THINK OF TEH MENZ!!!

So progressive! Much feminist!

Bi culture: possible? desirable? what should it look like? by PenseePansy in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Re: bi-cycling-- I've wanted to write a post on this too, actually! Curious about people's experience with it. Would you mind sharing yours? It's connected to your menstrual cycle, then?

I am a Mother to My Stillborn Son, Not a "Birthing Parent" by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

So we can't say motherfucker? Just parentfucker eh?

LOL! I guess that'd make it... "pafo" then? Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, does it?

These nitwits are even ruining our PROFANITY now! Is nothing sacred???

Graham Norton says trans people ‘need to be protected, rather than feared’ by [deleted] in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Protected from WHAT, exactly? Reality? Cuz they can't cope with their sex, the fact that it's painfully-obvious to everyone else, or that it's the ultimate turnoff to those whom they desire? Well, the rest of us shouldn't be forcibly conscripted into service as their "protectors". If they can't, or won't, learn to live in the real world, then that's THEIR problem, not ours.

Ugh, Graham, not you, too... well, he better be willing to put his money where his mouth is, then. Would Mr. Norton date a transman? "Pre-everything"? And enthusiastically service that "boipussy"? Cuz until he's done THAT... this newly-minted genderist-shill can just shut the fuck up.

And we'll stop fearing trans people just as soon as they stop with the behavior-- nonstop demands, hostility, stalking, abuse, predatory shit-- that's so damn FRIGHTENING.

Dating as a bisexual male is a paradox by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

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

"Bisexuals are lucky, they have double the options!"

... aaand double the chances of getting turned down! Plus the potential to get your heart broken by BOTH sexes!

Funny how the it-must-be-a-sexual-cornucopia-for-you-guys gay/straight people never think of these aspects...

Lesbian fashion? (beware, you can't un-see this) by jet199 in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh look, guy-who-gives-androgyny-a-bad-name, you dropped something!:

the /s at the end.

If men could have abortions ... they'd have them just for masturbation fuel by jet199 in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

I wish I could have an abortion, sighhhh.

Well, for MY part, I wish you could BE an abortion!

Found on /r/traa, what the fuck does this even mean? by gendercritfem in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Cuz you're yet another straight guy who's just defective?


Just - gross. Been told to post here by Mermer in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Well, maybe you'll get a two-birds-with-one-stone kinda deal and she'll just bite it off instead?


Users on r/FtM talking about how many of them were straight girls into yaoi (media that fetishizes gay men) before transition by reluctant_commenter in itsafetish

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I was curious about how bisexuality works like (as there are some indications that bisexuality has another etiology than homosexuality, aka probably not a light form of homosexuality) so I made survey for bisexuals with 500 respondents and included questions about AAP/AGP, and it seemed like 60% of the respondents had some form of it.

Bi woman here; not AAP (as far as I know), but also curious about how bisexuality works. Particularly because it seems to receive surprisingly little attention. Very interested to hear that it might have a different etiology than homosexuality; this is, for me-- as that GIF of Phoebe from Friends says-- "brand-new information"! Would you mind telling me more? (I pretty much always have my antennae straining to detect signs of anything bi-related.)

I've been thinking, and writing (mostly here on SaidIt), about the "you don't exist" sexual orientation lately; almost seems like I'm doing original work much of the time, given the dearth of material out there. Would be thrilled to find some bi-stuff that I didn't have to create myself!

Gendering animals (a paper arguing that animals might have gender...) by BiologyIsReal in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

fits naturally with some traditional Indigenous ways of thinking about other animals and their relations with humans.

Riiiight. WHICH "Indigenous ways of thinking"? Some indigenous people considered owning livestock bizarre. These types always seem to assume tribal culture was a monolith across multiple regions.

Yeah, and HOW do those espousing this fail to see that it's not just patently-absurd, but also... BIGOTED? What with all the ignorance, and condescension, and presumptuousness, and using REAL PEOPLE and their REAL CULTURES as... mere vehicles for trendy western bohemianism; politically-correct cartoon characters. They're just (conveniently enough) whatever SJW types want them to be. Oh, yeah-- THAT'S not racist! Isn't this simply the latest iteration of the same tired old "noble savage" stereotype?

Furthermore, where do they get the harebrained idea that "indigenous = WOKE"? Have never understood this. Like, the Comanche (who scared the shit out of pretty much everyone) were just mellow pacifists? Who probably kept track of how far they walked with a FitBit and shopped at Whole Foods? I guess these multi-culti nitwits have gotten so reflexively hostile to the western/white that anyone who ISN'T automatically becomes good, and, indeed, must necessarily side with THEM. Meaning share their values. Which I suspect would come as a GREAT surprise to pretty much every indigenous person ever.

Christ, the STUPID... it burns...

Reddit says: "women have never been oppressed. Women just know they're inferior." by QueenBread in GenderCritical

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

If women's "inferiority" is real and recognized as such by us, why are men always so intent on enforcing it?

TIM Blaire White claims to "no longer have DNA" due to taking androgen-blockers and cross-sex hormones by MarkTwainiac in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 24 insightful - 1 fun24 insightful - 0 fun25 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Blair just got the terminology wrong.

More like Blair got the BIOLOGY wrong. Because transgenderism is at best ignorant of, and at worst outright hostile towards, human biology. That is the ENTIRE FUCKING PROBLEM. Since they demand that the rest of us follow suit. So forgive me if I'm less than sympathetic when this bites one of 'em in the ass.

Blair was not informed that blockers and hormones makes you sterile.

Yeah, taking a long-term wrecking ball to everything related to your reproductive category makes ya... unable to reproduce! WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT.

Look, I get that there are those here who see Blair White as "one of the good ones". I wouldn't go that far: less-odious, maybe... but that's still odious. "Woman" is a pornified costume to him, all about image and appeal to men. And better to be a fake woman than a real gay man. And what's biology anyway? Male and female are just about whether you wear makeup or not, and what kind of plastic surgery you get, duh! It's not as though they have, like, significance for, oh, I dunno, making babies or anything!

"Transwomen" have plenty of spaces (god knows) where we're expected to kowtow to them and their fee-fees; is it too much to ask that THIS not be just one more of 'em? Please?

Brutal in the Bedroom: Normalization of Violence in Sex by WildApples in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Men have eroticized their abuse of us for ages; now WE'RE supposed to eroticize it, too.

This reminds me of what a (female) psychologist who works with convicted sex offenders once wrote about sexual sadists-- the kind that kinkster-PR can't pretty up; for whom "non-consensual" is the entire POINT.

She said that, at its most extreme, sexual sadism no longer even involves acts that are actually sexual in any way. What gives such sadists the greatest pleasure... is pure violence.

Maybe what we're looking at is less a case of violence in sex (frightening enough right there) than... violence AS sex :(

Haunted by a 1984 quote and looking for perspectives from fellow women by Rationalmind in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Mixed answer from me, in that, while women do seem prone to SJW-ism in general and genderism in particular, the reasons for it strike me as the opposite of the Orwell quote.

Winston Smith's perception is that women are enthusiastic supporters of authoritarianism. But of course... this is from a work of fiction, as well as a specific character's perspective (which turns out to be wrong, actually, at least with regard to Julia, who is in fact an undercover rebel). In real life, what I've noticed is that women tend to be ANTI-authoritarian. The ones who don't support "Big Brother". It's men who are much more inclined towards authoritarianism; by contrast, the liberal/progressive contingent is always predominantly female.

But how does that square with women's penchant for SJWism, you ask? Well... I think the answer lies in their perspective: the way that they see themselves, and the cause that they're espousing.

To me, it looks like they're anti-authoritarians-- liberals/progressives-- who've mistaken transgenderism for being on the same "side". Probably because it's presented that way, and they just assume that "men in dresses" = gender-nonconforming/gender-critical (ah, the irony...). Therefore, they think that they're "fighting the good fight" against pink-is-for-girls/blue-is-for-boys, traditionalist, restrictive attitudes, in the name of all that's liberating, open-minded, and egalitarian.

So I think that it's less a case of women having a naturally-authoritarian bent than that, sometimes, anti-authoritarians just have really piss-poor analysis.

"I'm not speculating..." *Entire thread is speculation* by anxietyaccount8 in GenderCritical

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think a LOT, and possibly the vast majority, of 2ndwave feminists are nonbinary AFAB&AMAB people

Well, then, they can no longer just dismiss us out of hand, right? Cuz we're The Sacred TwanzTM ourselves! And therefore know whereof we speak!

Among LGBT Americans, bisexuals stand out when it comes to identity, acceptance by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

  1. Not IRL, largely cuz-- as I feel unworthy of being sexual at all-- THIS sexuality seems like way too much to live up to (i.e., expectation that I'll be the embodiment of uninhibited slutdom). It's absurd, I know, but the sense that I'm just not hawt enough REALLY bothers me. Also the concern that, given how much stigma bisexuals suffer, I'd be bad PR (what with my epic fucked-up-ness). Plus the knowledge that GAY people are no less likely to give me a hard time about it is truly disheartening.
  2. Yes... guess that I can add "hypocrite" to my long list of sins! But I do think that so many of us being closeted is detrimental; perpetuates the all-too-prevalent invisibility, and prevents us from organizing to support each another and further our interests. Also, that invisibility can even be from our own POV-- if this orientation isn't acknowledged by the culture-at-large, we're likely not to recognize it in ourselves, and just identify as gay or straight. Robs us of our true numbers and the chance for so many bi people to know who they really are.
  3. Stigma, and what's at the root of it: the sense that bisexuality isn't legitimate-- doesn't exist; not an actual sexual orientation. Plus the fact that we're generally unwelcome even among GAY people! Which encourages us to be closeted even where they feel free to be out.
  4. Unsurprising: math (most of the people who are attracted to us will be straight); LGs often don't want to date bisexuals; due to self-invisibility many of us assume we're straight; default closetedness tends to mean that we're pseudo-straight, thus spend a lot of time alongside the genuine article (so are apt to pair up with 'em).
  5. From my limited perspective, the latter two: mostly doing nothing for bisexuals (we remain all but invisible in such communities), and-- to the extent that they're focused on pushing the Borg genderist/TQ+ agenda-- actively hurting us.

Is anyone out there/thoughts on biphobia by Constantine in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sure sounds familiar! Here it is BTW:


And yeah, Lizard's response was certainly one of the few bright spots (he always seems to stand up for bi people against LG shittiness). Also appreciated ElectricSheep's thoughtful input (and the fact that this really "introduced" us).

Share your favourite bisexual songs or musicians! by PeakingPeachEater in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're so very welcome! Hope that you'll find some music here that appeals to you.

Of these artists, I'm probably most into Panic! At the Disco & Placebo; my recommendations for their stuff would be:

  • P!ATD "Collar Full"; "Don't Threaten Me with a Good Time"
  • Placebo: "Every You Every Me"; "Running Up That Hill"

But, I've also been listening to these non-bi (at least as far as I know!) artists of late:

  • 30H!3: "STARSTRUKK"
  • Chet Baker: "The Thrill Is Gone"
  • blackbear: "idfc"
  • Bring Me the Horizon: "Ludens"; "Wonderful Life"
  • City of Prague Philharmonic Orchestra: "The Thing" [movie theme by Ennio Morricone]
  • Raul Esparza: "Being Alive" [by Stephen Sondheim]
  • Grey Daze: "B12"
  • Adam Jensen: "I'm a Sucker for a Liar in a Red Dress"
  • Leisure: "Got It Bad"
  • The Pretty Reckless: "Heaven Knows"
  • Sacred Caves "Slomo"
  • Scissor Sisters "I Can't Decide"
  • She Wants Revenge: "Tear You Apart"
  • Soul Coughing: "Super Bon Bon"
  • Tin Sparrow "On and On"
  • Unlike Pluto: "Addict"
  • UPSAHL: "People I Don't Like"
  • Weird Al Yankovic "Party in the CIA" [less bubblegum and more black ops than Miley's!]
  • The White Stripes "Seven Nation Army (Glitch Mob Remix)" [better than the original!]

(and a tip o' the hat to music-guru ElectricSheep for introducing me to many of these!)

How about you, Peach? Have you been listening to anything/anyone lately, music-wise?

Is anyone out there/thoughts on biphobia by Constantine in Bisexuals

[–]PenseePansy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

on the saidit sub I gave you, there's a post relating to health issues and bisexuals.

Hey, was that my post? The LG's dismissive reaction (or should I say NONreaction) to which put me in a funk for DAYS?