all 25 comments

[–]chazzstrong 37 insightful - 6 fun37 insightful - 5 fun38 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

These morons can't even decide on the definition of what a 'woman' is, why should anyone listen to them in regards to anything on the matter?

[–][deleted] 29 insightful - 5 fun29 insightful - 4 fun30 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

I have significant doubts about 34% of women being attracted to other women.

[–]Neo_Shadow_LurkerPronouns: I/Don't/Care 34 insightful - 5 fun34 insightful - 4 fun35 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

34% of women being attracted to other women.

*34% of women larp as lesbian/bissexual in college.

FTFY

I feel so sorry for lesbians.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 27 insightful - 10 fun27 insightful - 9 fun28 insightful - 10 fun -  (1 child)

It seems like same foolishness as lesbians who say they’d consider sleeping with a transwoman. Sure, from very far away and in an abstract sense you can pretend you could be into it to make yourself feel like a nice, progressive person. But, when reality hits, you’re going to nope out of that faster than Usain Bolt.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 13 insightful - 5 fun13 insightful - 4 fun14 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

I'm rpetty ure lots of women consider trying the experience. Doesn't mean they feel real attraction, but they're curios and would try it

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

Bisexuals have an extremely high closet-rate so I wouldn't be surprised. I hear lesbians talk about fake (straight) bisexuals but I have honestly never met one so I don't know how common they are. I have been with a few bi women and things formed organically between us, but I was not out at the time. I think maybe bi-curious gals will target out lesbians because they have less of a risk of being rejected, while I wasn't targeted by those types because I wasn't out. (I'm now partnered, which is why I'm speaking in past tense.) I'd like to see an actual scientific study where the people's orientation is tested instead of just self-reported to see the actual numbers.

[–][deleted] 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ugh. The news is reporting on Lisa Diamond's work again. Stab me.

Nobody should get anywhere close to reporting on this unless they really grok her 2019 paper:

http://www.suarakita.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Who-Counts-as-Sexually-Fluid-Comparing-Four-Different-Types-of-Sexual-Fluidity-in-Women.pdf

Thus, any journalist would run screaming, and I wouldn't have to hear this blanket statement stuff about how "women are more sexually fluid..." without a clue in the world as to what that means or where we are with that idea, scientifically.

Diamond does good work, BTW, but it's not so simple.

[–]LilianH 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've read her book. The only women who were "sexualy fluid" were those who at the start of the study were bisexual (however they identified themselves). Lesbians (there were only 3 in her study) were still lesbian at the end of the study, and straight women were still straight at the end of the study. Those who started attracted to both men and women (i.e. bisexual) moved about a bit depending on their relationships and changed how they identified their sexuality, but remained bisexual at the end of the study.

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 9 insightful - 9 fun9 insightful - 8 fun10 insightful - 9 fun -  (0 children)

Everyone’s attracted to Peter Pan? WTF?

[–]ArthnoldManacatsaman🇬🇧🌳🟦 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

This is from a section of the BBC called 'Worklife' which seems to have sprung up during the pandemic and is, to put it mildly, insufferably woke. I see a lot of people sharing the articles on social media and reading almost all of them makes me want to vomit. It strikes me very much as the BBC giving the young interns an opportunity to play journalist but of course it just turns into activist psychobabble.

A selection of choice nuggets (don't worry about clicking on the links, the BBC is funded by the British taxpayer and does not use advertisements):

Throw in a couple of articles about being 'queer' and you've got a recipe for pure trash.

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 4 fun11 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

Um, aren't the indigenous people of Britain the British?

[–]RedEyedWarriorGay | Male | 🇮🇪 Irish 🇮🇪 | Antineoliberal | Cocks are Compulsory 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The BBC is a joke. British people should get together and refuse to pay the TV licence fee, and pressure the government to scrap it. The TV licence fee is extortion. We have that here in Ireland and it shouldn’t exist because RTÉ shouldn’t exist.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Darren Grimes has been leading a campaign about it for the past few months.

[–]xanditAGAB (Assigned Gay at Birth) 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

links aren't working right now but that indigenous one has me curious as to which mythical brown people inhabited the uk first lol

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I got a 404 page. Have they deleted the article already?

[–][deleted] 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

https://archive.is/m8UCG

It looks like they might actually be having technical issues, since I can still get the page with a little finagling from their site.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Thank you for being a friend.

[–]julesburm1891[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

https://imgur.com/a/UkYLqm6

Here are the screen caps I got from what was still up in my browser. Sorry, it’s not a perfect capture.

But, yeah. Seems like they’ve already pulled it. Wonder what happened.

[–]PatsyStoneMaverique 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Thanks for the screen grabs. What a preachy, confusing article. They never defined what "sexually fluid" means. I'm honestly amazed 35% of college women don't identify as straight. Given how college students try on identities, I don't think that number will hold up over time.

[–]Elvira95Viva la figa 8 insightful - 5 fun8 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 5 fun -  (2 children)

It means they are curios about the idea of sleeping with women

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

Sexual fluidity?

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

Women being bi was also a fad when I was in highschool and college. All of my female friends claimed to be bi, I don't think any of them actually were. I don't imagine that fad has died down with all the gender identity nonsense these days.

[–]strawberrycake 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Additionally, Turning notes that language has evolved to recognise women as sexually non-binary. For example, Turning says her lesbian partner had a “Gay Straight Alliance” at her high school, around 2007. That phrasing encouraged a binary – members were either gay or straight, with no real options for those who might have identified somewhere in between – and no word that specifically embodied female sexuality, the ‘L’ left conspicuously out of the GSA acronym.

We’re never getting back gay/lesbian-focused groups, are we?

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

I think people are starting to get sick of the whole postmodern TRA, words mean what makes my feelings happy/pp hard charade. Laurel Hubbard has really pissed some people off.

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

Why can't they take female sexuality seriously?