On Topic Discussion What do you think about bisexuals?

[otters]

I think that they are a myth.

Uhm, see next comment:

This got me thinking about it quite a bit...

I think I'd be lucky and honoured to be with a a man who was bisexual.
Because it makes you think that of all the people he would want to be with... he would choose to be with you, either just sexually or in a relationship.

So my apologies to all our bisexual friends and neighbours on here.

Accepted

Are you bi? I can't tell.

Well, when I remember correctly, according to a former Prime Minister of France, Madame Édith Cresson, 25% of British me are gay, but all British men are bi. ^^

 

[sokker]

This is how it was explained to me by some gay gays...Because being gay is not just about who you love, for some it's a whole political thing, like being a part of a club. What's the fun in being in a club who accepts everyone, so they have to exclude others. It makes their 'property' more valuable. Even some gays get excluded from the club too. Overweight, short, coloured, blue collar, older, you name it. Just look around on here and see all the threads.

Or it might have to do with the fact that bisexuals (now talking about men and women) can use straight privilege to their advantage. That makes it seem like they're not part of the same struggle as gays and lesbians. Bisexuals can always choose the hetero side if they want. They have an option. If they want to fit in with the heterosexuals, they can. I think that's why many, especially politically influenced gay and lesbians, get annoyed with bisexuals and want to shut them out.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

real world vs real world
-unless ya ins real world-
we buggad tens
_ha_

anyway

thankyou

 

[luckynumbah7]

They have an option. If they want to fit in with the heterosexuals, they can. I think that's why many, especially politically influenced gay and lesbians, get annoyed with bisexuals and want to shut them out.

No, I'm pretty sure most gays and lesbians do that because they're either misinformed, they're dicks, or both. Shutting out people Not Like You makes a group feel more solid, because if there's an Us there must be a Them. That's part and parcel of considering yourself part of a group.

For the record, gays also experience straight-passing privilege because most people are presumed straight upon meeting and straight people love to pretend gay people who aren't kissing their own gender in front of them are straight.

Nor do all bisexuals (let alone gay people) have straight-passing privilege.

Not incidentally, I'm 31 and have been doing various bits of lgbt political discussion and activism since I was sixteen. There's quite a few lesbian and gay activists who have issues with bisexuality but your reasoning isn't why most of them get pissy.

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

No, I'm pretty sure such gays and lesbians do that because they're either misinformed, they're dicks, or both. Shutting out people Not Like You makes a group feel more solid, because if there's an Us there must be a Them. That's part and parcel of considering yourself part of a group.

For the record, gays also experience straight-passing privilege because most people are presumed straight upon meeting and straight people love to pretend gay people who aren't kissing their own gender in front of them are straight.

Nor do all bisexuals (let alone gay people) have straight-passing privilege.

so world lands no plan fa new labulls tens? or hope humanity no meltdown ans sumthang turn up
_amazin thread_
innit

thankyou

 

[luckynumbah7]

Not incidentally, I'm 31 and have been doing various bits of lgbt political discussion and activism since I was sixteen. There's quite a few lesbian and gay activists who have issues with bisexuality but your reasoning isn't why most of them get pissy.

In other words, when lgbt political activist conversations devolve and bisexuals are involved (no matter the original topic), at least 8 out of 10 instances the bottom line is "Bisexuals are untrustworthy, so they're sorta in the group, but we still don't like 'em". There's no part of life where they're not considered untrustworthy based on the possibilities of who they could like.

And oh my, don't people love to pretend they can never receive a particular privilege despite not being in that privileged category.

Passing ~ It's A Thing.

 

[luckynumbah7]

so world lands no plan fa new labulls tens? or hope humanity no meltdown ans sumthang turn up
_amazin thread_
innit

thankyou

Eh, the problem with language is it's always going to be imprecise. New labels usually don't do a goddamn thing since most of them aren't actually new. Nor do all those 'new' labels help someone in life to parse concepts of identity, because at that point the language is processed so fine that it could've gone through a blender. The more something is parsed the more distinctive the definition is and the more definitions that are needed because now there's all these other things that used to be covered by a word and now....isn't.

New words for a new concept, great!

Parsing current concepts until someone cobbles together a new word for each of the hundreds of variations on behavior that anyone can make and blaming it on an identity? Stupidity.

 

[ElmosToe]

I think it's safe to say the overwhelming majority of people's expectation in the dating scene is that it's two single people who are looking for the prospects of finding someone to build a relationship with.

Call that really old-fashioned if you like, but yes, it would strike me as more than a little treacherous to be "dating" someone and have them suddenly reveal that a boyfriend, husband, wife, girlfriend or whatever else are back at home in the wings.

.

^that is a warped view...

If you are in a committed relationship with a gf, bf, wife or hubby back home and then you start dating, that is called cheating and is disturbing. However, the actual old fashioned view on dating going back decades or even centuries is "dating" is a way to get to know someone, so it was and still is very common to date multiple people at once until you've met the right person you click with and want to pursue an exclusive, committed relationship with that one person. That is what is meant to be exclusive and committed. Means all the other people you were involved with on the dating scene are no longer going to be part of your life because you want to pursue a relationship with one person as you may feel you are falling in love with that person or developing feelings.

What is confusing to me that I encounter is the concept that by the second or third date, people expect to be considered your significant other within the context of a relationship.

That is bizarre. It is bizarre to expect that someone is dating only you and not realize that dating is not being in an exclusive, committed relationship.

Had one girl get really pissed and hurt after only knowing her for less than a month. We weren't even fucking, let alone dating. She expected me to let her call me her bf. I was hoping to get to know her better and was contemplating dating her but she expected to be in a relationship with me before even the dating phase...I've encountered that mentality with both dudes and chicks many times and it is bizarre and unhealthy.

 

[ElmosToe]

Or it might have to do with the fact that bisexuals (now talking about men and women) can use straight privilege to their advantage. That makes it seem like they're not part of the same struggle as gays and lesbians. Bisexuals can always choose the hetero side if they want. They have an option. If they want to fit in with the heterosexuals, they can. I think that's why many, especially politically influenced gay and lesbians, get annoyed with bisexuals and want to shut them out.

^this is what annoys me and why I have an issue with labels.

People treat orientation as an identity and the label then starts controlling their way of thinking and that label becomes who they are as a person. A sexual orientation label is meant to merely describe the type of sex you like to have and with what type of person you like to have that sex with. It is not meant so be a sociopolitical philosophy to dictate your personality and make you conform to a set of rules, expectations and standards mandated by our society's stereotypes. What I see happen frequently, even with straight people, is falling prey to conforming to a label and allowing that label become who you are as a person.

There should not be such a thing as "straight privilege" if we are using these labels in the appropriate manner of merely identifying sex acts and types of relationships, not as a personal identity.

 

[luckynumbah7]

Receiving straight privilege from others has nothing to do with someone's actual orientation, unless you're considering that the 'straight people are better' meme is internalized. Regarding receiving straight privilege, most people are casual acquaintances or complete strangers to others. You say hello, you nod when passing on the street, perhaps some conversation about the weather or a shitty bus system. Most people don't discuss their sexuality with strangers, and most people aren't seen as queer because most people conform to cues that aren't stereotyped as gay for their gender. Straight privilege isn't a label based on identity or orientation - it's based on assumed or confirmed sexuality. Anyone can get that particular privilege so long as they're not seen as gay.

 

[eastofeden]

Have you ever been in a relationship with a bi guy, or are you right now? Is it true bisexuals are "greedy" and untrustworthy? Have you ever thought that he might leave you for a woman?

All of this crossed my mind while watching a gay couple where one is gay and one is bi. Like.. how do they even make it work? What if the bi guy suddenly craves you know..? I just don't get it. I'm sorry, I know I'm bisexual myself, but it's different with bi women.

Sorry this got long. This is just my experience, and what I've read from people who have been through it. I just wanted to know what you think?

In my life and experience...I have heard more lesbians claim to have been raped emotionally by bi women who used them as an experiment before they went back to men than I have heard gay men complain about bi men.

Just sayin'

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

Eh, the problem with language is it's always going to be imprecise. New labels usually don't do a goddamn thing since most of them aren't actually new. Nor do all those 'new' labels help someone in life to parse concepts of identity, because at that point the language is processed so fine that it could've gone through a blender. The more something is parsed the more distinctive the definition is and the more definitions that are needed because now there's all these other things that used to be covered by a word and now....isn't.

New words for a new concept, great!

Parsing current concepts until someone cobbles together a new word for each of the hundreds of variations on behavior that anyone can make and blaming it on an identity? Stupidity.

vary of kind ya reply moist kind

is noses ans no wanna sya nothin
but sumthang no got languge need or fancy concept
anyay a towerin eons a civlized lands soup a day gon figa all thang by yesterday but world ova ans great intenret 2 is say Not in all thang

so guess UN is say enjoy da day cause buggarad nose wot a doins

thankyou

_on wit da show_
%2 sheep ans 1 chicken?%
" 2sheep 3 chicken ans ma wife "
! let see him again !
_twirlllllls_

ha

 

[mikey3000]

Or it might have to do with the fact that bisexuals (now talking about men and women) can use straight privilege to their advantage. That makes it seem like they're not part of the same struggle as gays and lesbians. Bisexuals can always choose the hetero side if they want. They have an option. If they want to fit in with the heterosexuals, they can. I think that's why many, especially politically influenced gay and lesbians, get annoyed with bisexuals and want to shut them out.

Yes, that is the part I purposefully left out, the part that us bisexuals didn't, "fight the good fight." We're not 'brothers in arms'. Straight privilege. Hmmm... funny term, that.

But you bringing up that point just confirmed to me your true prejudice and your true gender. Well played but I still call BS.

 

[mikemizanin729]

Are you bi? I can't tell.

Yes and reading this bashing is frustrating, especially from a gay community.

 

[sokker]

Yes, that is the part I purposefully left out, the part that us bisexuals didn't, "fight the good fight." We're not 'brothers in arms'. Straight privilege. Hmmm... funny term, that.

But you bringing up that point just confirmed to me your true prejudice and your true gender. Well played but I still call BS.

 

[Kulindahr]

By the way, when are you going to betray us all by marrying a Doris Day prototype and denouncing JUB as a hotbed of homosexual sinfulness?

Not before Halley's Comet comes around again, almost certainly.

 

[Kulindahr]

There's so much rubbish in this thread from the OP that I can't be bothered to correct it.

Some twisted thoughts are so tangled that trying to examine them tangles one's own thoughts, huh?

 

[palbert]

I long ago lost sense of the topic or issue in this thread.

 

[xbuzzerx]

However, the actual old fashioned view on dating going back decades or even centuries is "dating" is a way to get to know someone, so it was and still is very common to date multiple people at once until you've met the right person you click with and want to pursue an exclusive, committed relationship with that one person.

What is confusing to me that I encounter is the concept that by the second or third date, people expect to be considered your significant other within the context of a relationship.

That is bizarre. It is bizarre to expect that someone is dating only you and not realize that dating is not being in an exclusive, committed relationship.

I don't know how you date. I noticed the examples you used were people that you either were not dating or people you were not having sex with. Sure, yeah, if you're not even dating someone and they expect you to call yourself their boyfriend, that is bizarre and strange. But something just doesn't really make sense about this complaint and then the examples you gave. I don't think months of seeing multiple people with no sex involved and no decisions made about how to go forward is either the norm (does it even happen today outside of dating reality shows?), nor what people think is going on if you tell them that you are seeing a lot of people today. That's not bizarre, unhealthy, or possessive... it's just realistic.

If you find yourself frequently defending things you do to unhappy partners with "I didn't make a commitment to you", then maybe you need to consider the problem might not entirely be everyone else but that you have a set of expectations of how others should view things which is not realistic.... or, at the very least, that you aren't communicating your expectations and intentions very well or up front and they're feeling hit out of left field.

 

[Kulindahr]

Bisexuals can always choose the hetero side if they want. They have an option.

You really think it's possible to choose who you fall in love with? or are you suggesting that bis are somehow more callous towards themselves and will ignore love as a reason for a relationship?