AGB - never was a white knight to enamoured of his own voice or so unheard by anyone who gives a shit

submitted by ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah from (reddit.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Datachost 12 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 0 fun13 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

For a group that go on about being your authentic self so much, these people sure do love tying themselves up in linguistic and logistical knots to avoid being their authentic selves. Just accept you're bi with a preference for masculine looking people, there's nothing wrong with that. Seems a hell of a lot easier than changing the accepted definition of the word gay.

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

And thus we come to the inevitable wall that language creates. It's interesting that this fundamentally human technology is so useful for sharing experience and coordinating activity, most of the time, but eventually breaks down at boundaries and does the opposite.

It really doesn't matter how he defines himself. Bi? Gay? Who cares. But if he wants to call himself a gay man, given the fact that he is standing where most people would perceive a linguistic boundary, he should be OK with others adhering to slightly different definitions that happen to exclude his partner.

You do you. But don't expect me to bow down to the T just because you do.

[–]yousaythosethingsFind and Replace "gatekeeping" with "having boundaries" 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I love how you articulated this. Just another reminder of the high caliber of the discourse that often comes out of this sub.

I’m reminded that although I identify as gay and have only ever been attracted to women, I have had one long term relationship with a guy who I used to be married to and I came out later than most. I know a lot of lesbians aren’t capable of that and may see me as something that is fundamentally different from what they are. I think a lot of people must also assume I’m bisexual because I don’t go around IRL announcing the contours of my sexual orientation to most people though it’s public knowledge that I had that past relationship and now date women. Nor do I open up to most people about the unique circumstances that led me down that path. Yet I don’t lose any sleep at night over how other women think of my sexual orientation. I do feel like I’m at the boundaries of lesbian and bisexual. And because of that past relationship there are some things that I can relate more to some bi women about than other lesbians. If someone assumes I’m bisexual it has no bearing on my sense of self. Nor will I suddenly be attracted to men or trying to date them.

Also, while I’m not saying that it’s ideal that someone who is technically bisexual but overwhelmingly oriented toward the same sex and who can only ever see themselves being with members of the same sex saying that they’re exclusively attracted to the same sex and therefore gay. But that’s still way different and a million times more understandable than someone who is loudly redefining gay as something other than exclusive same sex-attraction for the sole purpose of including himself in it. If you’re going to wax poetic about facts that clearly indicate you’re not gay, stop trying to force yourself into the label and stop denying the reality of people who are actually homosexual. Proud dick-preferring “lesbians” of r/actuallesbians, take note.

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

Thank you for your detailed response. It's funny, I once posted a comment here about maybe being OK with having sex with a F2M [no longer true, now that I know more about the phenomenon both psychologically and medically] and people jumped all over me about being "bi" not "gay". Whatever: practically speaking it doesn't mean anything either way because I'm legally and monogamously married to another man and thus sexually available to exactly one person in the world. If I should outlive my spouse and have an opportunity to date a woman, would I? Perhaps. But it would likely be a celibate relationship, more or less. While I still do have sex, I don't need it the way I did when I was younger, and I assume a decade from now it will recede even further into the background. That could open up other possibilities. All this is to say that identity categories are fuzzy and not even necessarily stable over the life course.