you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jay-dayGold Star Gay Woman 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They seem to be able to tell the difference. That's why they say their sexuality is bi but politics are lesbian. I don't believe that the bi women that were close to the lesbian community were unable to understand the differences to what lesbians say (not being attracted to men yada yada) and their own (being attracted to both). Unless they either didn't listen, or weren't that involved in the lesbian community.

I get the reason why the LGB doesn't want to hear about bisexuals opposite-sex attraction. We want to center same-sex attraction, opposite attraction there isn't much to talk about as it's accepted everywhere. I don't believe gay men or lesbians want bisexuals to "pretend" to be gay, just focus on SSA in conversations in the LGB. I guess it's also because there are more bisexuals than gays and lesbians, and most bisexuals are in opposite sex relationships, so we don't want OSA relationships dominating the one community we have. It's similar to alot of criticisms that I hear from bi women on bisexual groups- that the bisexual spaces are too het centered.

[–]PenseePansyBio-Sex or Bust 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't mean that they can't tell the difference (at least by this point); it's that the difference goes beyond what you yourself spell out-- the difference of sexual orientation itself. There's also the difference between a defined, established culture/identity (albeit one currently under siege by the forces of TQ+) vs a largely undefined, yet-to-be-established culture/identity. That's where the "sexuality is bi, politics is lesbian" comes in. To a great degree, all we bisexuals HAVE is our sexuality. There's no organization, no movement, no community to speak of; the basic conceptual/philosophical work has never been done-- probably because the rise of TQ+ strangled it in its cradle. So we tend to see our culture, our politics, in terms of... someone else's identity. Especially given that our own is still all too nebulous. What with the whole "well, you're REALLY either gay or straight anyway!" thing and all.

And I certainly agree that LGB shouldn't focus on opposite-sex attraction; that's not what bi people need. Like gay people, what we need to address are those things which stigmatize us in society's eyes: the elements of homophobia on the one hand, and biphobia on the other. As best I can tell, these boil down to two each. The first-- stigmatization of same-sex attraction-- we both share. The second-- stigmatization of lacking opposite-sex attraction (for homosexuals), and stigmatization of lacking monosexuality (for bisexuals)-- we do not. So while it is, of course, natural and fitting that LGB should focus on what we have in common, that can't be to the exclusion of what affects us each specifically.

For instance, look at what I myself do here. In addition to talking about bi issues, I also spend a lot of time defending the right to be EXCLUSIVELY same-sex attracted. That's not something which is ever gonna affect ME, by definition. That's for YOU guys. Because gay people are under attack; because homosexuality itself is under attack. And I have your back. Just like I want you to have mine.

So what does this mean in practice? Well, for example, not making bi people feel unwelcome for having opposite-sex significant others. Who may even be straight. And bringing them to certain LGB spaces. Yes, I realize that this is not without its challenges-- some inherent, some due to current circumstances (specifically the invasion of all things LGB by TQ+ colonizers). But I think that we can negotiate this together. And should, if we want to be the LGB, and not simply the LGb... or even just the LG.