This delicious after-Thanksgiving gem comes to us via Huffpost's Gay Voices section. National Organization for Marriage is a kooky bunch. Basically, this woman from NOM made a video as a message for college students to see over the Thanksgiving break, telling them that they should tell their families if there were any "gay events" or if there were "gay RAs" at whatever school they dorm at. She went on to theorize that young people are being pressured to "accept" gays because they have gay peers.
You like your friends. You want them to be protected under the same laws you are, so they can find jobs and have health coverage appropriate for them? Well now...PEER PRESSURE! Or not. Could just be realizing that discrimination is totally jacked, regardless of religion, color, creed, or whatever? Who was this really directed at, students from "Straight-Protestant-Men Rule The Roost-White-SmallTown, USA?
Hold on...we are talking about NOM. It never ends.
Bisexual turkey, anyone?
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Something Really Good is Going On.
It has been a really long time since I've kept up on this blog. My apologies. Good news though, I do see coming back here and writing more often again!
I have a very cool thing to talk about today. The main campus of Philadelphia's Community College, which serves thousands of students from all over the city, officially has an activist Gay-Straight Alliance. The GSA was formed both as a "safe space" and as a center for resources and student rights for our LGBT and ally staff and students. We have some very high hopes for this group. We already have almost one hundred standing members, a full executive board, and full support from the staff GSA and allies.
I see some very cool things happening with this group. We've already reached out and made contact with the HRC, the GSA National Network, and You Can Play. It's getting very big, very fast. I am happy to be a part of the executive board of the first ever official LGBT campus group with a focus on real change as well as social interaction.
As can be expected, we've already started facing opposition from others. It's not clear whether or not it was something organized or individually motivated, but not even a week after it was set up, our office was littered with religious groups' material. People have objections that we are even on campus. Personally, I expected this kind of ignorance. Look at everything the LGBT community has faced over time, just like this. The fact that such ignorance is on display does nothing to me other than prove that this group and safe space NEED to be at CCP. I am irked that our office was vandalized, that is a clear violation of our students' rights. But whatever- we aren't here for people who use God as an excuse to be ignorant and hateful. We are here to promote tolerance and unity for our student body, gay or not. We will get through this, and whatever other b/s we get handed. It just proves our point!
I am also very happy to be an out bisexual on such a group's board. Anybody who's read this blog with any regularity knows that it really pisses me off when bi and trans-identified people get marginalized within the community. Everyone always says that the B and the T aren't really part of the fight, and they couldn't be more wrong. You know who was at Stonewall? Drag Queens, T-girls, gay guys, and bi men! We all have a reason to be here, fighting for our safety and civil rights. And I am PROUD to be putting the B in LGBT.
Happy Thanksgiving, Everybody!
I have a very cool thing to talk about today. The main campus of Philadelphia's Community College, which serves thousands of students from all over the city, officially has an activist Gay-Straight Alliance. The GSA was formed both as a "safe space" and as a center for resources and student rights for our LGBT and ally staff and students. We have some very high hopes for this group. We already have almost one hundred standing members, a full executive board, and full support from the staff GSA and allies.
I see some very cool things happening with this group. We've already reached out and made contact with the HRC, the GSA National Network, and You Can Play. It's getting very big, very fast. I am happy to be a part of the executive board of the first ever official LGBT campus group with a focus on real change as well as social interaction.
As can be expected, we've already started facing opposition from others. It's not clear whether or not it was something organized or individually motivated, but not even a week after it was set up, our office was littered with religious groups' material. People have objections that we are even on campus. Personally, I expected this kind of ignorance. Look at everything the LGBT community has faced over time, just like this. The fact that such ignorance is on display does nothing to me other than prove that this group and safe space NEED to be at CCP. I am irked that our office was vandalized, that is a clear violation of our students' rights. But whatever- we aren't here for people who use God as an excuse to be ignorant and hateful. We are here to promote tolerance and unity for our student body, gay or not. We will get through this, and whatever other b/s we get handed. It just proves our point!
I am also very happy to be an out bisexual on such a group's board. Anybody who's read this blog with any regularity knows that it really pisses me off when bi and trans-identified people get marginalized within the community. Everyone always says that the B and the T aren't really part of the fight, and they couldn't be more wrong. You know who was at Stonewall? Drag Queens, T-girls, gay guys, and bi men! We all have a reason to be here, fighting for our safety and civil rights. And I am PROUD to be putting the B in LGBT.
Happy Thanksgiving, Everybody!
Friday, September 28, 2012
Outing Myself in World Cultures
So it has been some time since I last posted. It's been really crazy lately. I just started a new job that has pretty much swallowed up my life outside of school, and my laptop is still totally wrecked, so blogging hasn't really been high up on my to-do list.
Speaking of school, one of the classes I'm taking this semester is a humanities course that focuses on ancient cultures. Basically, this class uses time-relevant literature as a measuring stick and discussion point for the study of ancient societies. Last week we opened up the discussion on the ancient Greeks. Anybody who has knowledge of that era and culture knows that in those days, bisexuality was not only socially acceptable, but people were very open about those tendencies. It just wasn't really "anything" back in their time. One of my classmates, on hearing that, loudly crops up with "and that's why they BURNED". Nobody said a WORD. I just sat there staring at her, trying hard not to flip out and trying to observe the reaction of my classmates.
I was furious. I live in a country that is supposedly free, so I accept that not everyone here is going to understand or respect people in my situation. What really irked me wasn't the kernel of bi bashing I'd just had to deal with, it was that nobody said a thing about it at all. If we would have been discussing gays or lesbians, it's safe to assume that there would have been a lot more of a reaction to what was said. At the very least, some teeth would have been clicked, or somebody would have muttered something about 'bigotry' or 'ignorance'. Somebody most likely would have responded even just to save face- not being homophobic is almost straddling the line of political correctness now, it looks bad socially to be anti-gay.
But biphobic? The message that was sent with that room full of silence was crystal clear: saying hateful things about gays is wrong, but bisexuals...by all means! Not one person in that room, hetero or homo, stood up. Not to save face, not to look good, not to legitimately care. This was a subtle, but loud, reaffirmation that switch hitters don't get accepted as straight and don't get accepted as gay. They are somewhere in between, leaving many people to wonder why the "anti-hate measures" don't seem to include them. Yet again. And yet again- I say BIPHOBIA is HOMOPHOBIA in disguise.
So a week after that debacle, we were dissecting the poetry of Sappho. There were a lot of cracks about Sappho and the Isle of Lesbos. (hardy har...get some new material, geeze...), and for whatever reason many people in the class were convinced that Sappho was a man. When asked about what I thought about the poetry, I was honest in saying that the way Sappho wrote sounded like lesbian communication. When I was asked why I thought that, I pretty much couldn't get around saying that it sounded familiar and from my own experience. The looks on the classmates' faces were priceless. I got a lot of the disapproving looks from older Protestant women and gross, seedy responses from the males in earshot.
Needless to say, I'm not loving this class at ALL. It saddens me, because this is something totally up my alley. I should love this course. But in all honesty, it's immensely uncomfortable for me and I am counting down the days until finals.
Speaking of school, one of the classes I'm taking this semester is a humanities course that focuses on ancient cultures. Basically, this class uses time-relevant literature as a measuring stick and discussion point for the study of ancient societies. Last week we opened up the discussion on the ancient Greeks. Anybody who has knowledge of that era and culture knows that in those days, bisexuality was not only socially acceptable, but people were very open about those tendencies. It just wasn't really "anything" back in their time. One of my classmates, on hearing that, loudly crops up with "and that's why they BURNED". Nobody said a WORD. I just sat there staring at her, trying hard not to flip out and trying to observe the reaction of my classmates.
I was furious. I live in a country that is supposedly free, so I accept that not everyone here is going to understand or respect people in my situation. What really irked me wasn't the kernel of bi bashing I'd just had to deal with, it was that nobody said a thing about it at all. If we would have been discussing gays or lesbians, it's safe to assume that there would have been a lot more of a reaction to what was said. At the very least, some teeth would have been clicked, or somebody would have muttered something about 'bigotry' or 'ignorance'. Somebody most likely would have responded even just to save face- not being homophobic is almost straddling the line of political correctness now, it looks bad socially to be anti-gay.
But biphobic? The message that was sent with that room full of silence was crystal clear: saying hateful things about gays is wrong, but bisexuals...by all means! Not one person in that room, hetero or homo, stood up. Not to save face, not to look good, not to legitimately care. This was a subtle, but loud, reaffirmation that switch hitters don't get accepted as straight and don't get accepted as gay. They are somewhere in between, leaving many people to wonder why the "anti-hate measures" don't seem to include them. Yet again. And yet again- I say BIPHOBIA is HOMOPHOBIA in disguise.
So a week after that debacle, we were dissecting the poetry of Sappho. There were a lot of cracks about Sappho and the Isle of Lesbos. (hardy har...get some new material, geeze...), and for whatever reason many people in the class were convinced that Sappho was a man. When asked about what I thought about the poetry, I was honest in saying that the way Sappho wrote sounded like lesbian communication. When I was asked why I thought that, I pretty much couldn't get around saying that it sounded familiar and from my own experience. The looks on the classmates' faces were priceless. I got a lot of the disapproving looks from older Protestant women and gross, seedy responses from the males in earshot.
Needless to say, I'm not loving this class at ALL. It saddens me, because this is something totally up my alley. I should love this course. But in all honesty, it's immensely uncomfortable for me and I am counting down the days until finals.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Party Politics Under the Rainbow
In one way, I think I'm finally getting tired of all of the political chatter that has been front and center in our society lately. The ultra negative campaigning done on behalf of both major contenders in the presidential race are both annoying and, at times, infuriating.
In a lot of other ways, I can't help but be interested in hearing the thousands of other political perspectives out there. It seems like there are as many political wavelengths as there are religious or cultural, and people take all of the above extremely seriously. In reading through what felt like a trillion op-ed pieces today, I came across this gem: Why Are We So Afraid of Gay Republicans?
The gay community has very often been noted as a wealthy contingent in buying power and in political backing. This idea has been challenged, but somehow the view of the "pink dollar" still holds some weight. It is a safe assumption that workplace/hiring equality, marriage laws, and adoption policies are at the forefront of LGBT political issues. I read in a compilation book a few months ago an essay arguing the point of American LGBT people as being "the ultimate conservatives because they are fighting for the rights to marry and have family-centered lives, as well as the right to serve openly in the US military".
I think that's a pretty interesting concept, considering people tend to view the Republican party the same way: Either it's the illusion (or actual presence) of plenty of income OR it's about "traditional"/family-centered values with a heavy nod to the armed forces. That in mind, I don't think the idea of a gay Republican is too far fetched. I would go so far as to say that the presence of such right wingers is perplexing mainly due to the media slant from the Left. (I don't doubt that there are networks that have a liberal bias to mirror the much-lamented bias of FOX.)
I wonder what this concept would mean for voters that identify as bisexual. Like everything else, studies and polls don't seem to include solely that very fluid group of people. For the record, THIS one doesn't really like the idea of running a country by party politics. It seems childish and counterproductive to me.
On a somewhat lighter note, At least Google doesn't immediately associate the word 'bisexual' with porn anymore.
In a lot of other ways, I can't help but be interested in hearing the thousands of other political perspectives out there. It seems like there are as many political wavelengths as there are religious or cultural, and people take all of the above extremely seriously. In reading through what felt like a trillion op-ed pieces today, I came across this gem: Why Are We So Afraid of Gay Republicans?
The gay community has very often been noted as a wealthy contingent in buying power and in political backing. This idea has been challenged, but somehow the view of the "pink dollar" still holds some weight. It is a safe assumption that workplace/hiring equality, marriage laws, and adoption policies are at the forefront of LGBT political issues. I read in a compilation book a few months ago an essay arguing the point of American LGBT people as being "the ultimate conservatives because they are fighting for the rights to marry and have family-centered lives, as well as the right to serve openly in the US military".
I think that's a pretty interesting concept, considering people tend to view the Republican party the same way: Either it's the illusion (or actual presence) of plenty of income OR it's about "traditional"/family-centered values with a heavy nod to the armed forces. That in mind, I don't think the idea of a gay Republican is too far fetched. I would go so far as to say that the presence of such right wingers is perplexing mainly due to the media slant from the Left. (I don't doubt that there are networks that have a liberal bias to mirror the much-lamented bias of FOX.)
I wonder what this concept would mean for voters that identify as bisexual. Like everything else, studies and polls don't seem to include solely that very fluid group of people. For the record, THIS one doesn't really like the idea of running a country by party politics. It seems childish and counterproductive to me.
On a somewhat lighter note, At least Google doesn't immediately associate the word 'bisexual' with porn anymore.
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Well, I guess I'm going to have to weigh in now that this is blowing up....
Chik Fil A. Yes, I am talking about chicken sandwiches, waffle fries, Constitutional Amendments, and Christianity.
The big thing with this company is that the CEO of Chik Fil A made some pretty strong comments about how his company supports heterosexual marriage only because of their religious beliefs. You know what? I don't have a problem with that statement in the least. This is supposed to be a free country, where all private citizens are entitled to their beliefs and opinions. It's not really a secret that Chik Fil A was founded by, and is run by, a very strict Christian family. In the grand scheme of things, I agree with Cathy that his operation is family owned and (for the most part) family run, at least on the corporate level. That's like a super-large scale version of a family store/eatery in my eyes, so he's free to blab about whatever he wants to. It's not only his business, it's his right as a citizen to do such things, even if I think he's hypocritical.
My beef (ha) with Chik Fil A has always been that they use direct customer profits to fund not only the WinShape foundation camps...but also groups like NOM and Focus on the Family. These groups are extremist and badly sourced, they're pretty much the PETA of gay rights. That set aside, I have always felt that if a person wants to use his or her private money to support their beliefs and politics...go ham. It's your money, I have no right to tell you not to do things with it. For every right wing nutcase who donates to NOM, there are plenty of others who do the same thing for the opposite view organizations. I know I won't support Chik Fil A so long as the dime from my purchase goes to corporations who would rather see a Hollywood divorce than a successful gay marriage. When the direct profit funding stops, if Cathy wants to back the NOM mobile for the next sixty years...if it's his own money off of his direct earnings, he can do whatever he wants. Business and beliefs can merge to a certain degree, but in my opinion they're best left separate to avoid things just like this.
The big thing with this company is that the CEO of Chik Fil A made some pretty strong comments about how his company supports heterosexual marriage only because of their religious beliefs. You know what? I don't have a problem with that statement in the least. This is supposed to be a free country, where all private citizens are entitled to their beliefs and opinions. It's not really a secret that Chik Fil A was founded by, and is run by, a very strict Christian family. In the grand scheme of things, I agree with Cathy that his operation is family owned and (for the most part) family run, at least on the corporate level. That's like a super-large scale version of a family store/eatery in my eyes, so he's free to blab about whatever he wants to. It's not only his business, it's his right as a citizen to do such things, even if I think he's hypocritical.
My beef (ha) with Chik Fil A has always been that they use direct customer profits to fund not only the WinShape foundation camps...but also groups like NOM and Focus on the Family. These groups are extremist and badly sourced, they're pretty much the PETA of gay rights. That set aside, I have always felt that if a person wants to use his or her private money to support their beliefs and politics...go ham. It's your money, I have no right to tell you not to do things with it. For every right wing nutcase who donates to NOM, there are plenty of others who do the same thing for the opposite view organizations. I know I won't support Chik Fil A so long as the dime from my purchase goes to corporations who would rather see a Hollywood divorce than a successful gay marriage. When the direct profit funding stops, if Cathy wants to back the NOM mobile for the next sixty years...if it's his own money off of his direct earnings, he can do whatever he wants. Business and beliefs can merge to a certain degree, but in my opinion they're best left separate to avoid things just like this.
Tuesday, July 31, 2012
A Sad Loss for Minds and Queers, And Mindful Queers too.
"There is no such thing as a homosexual or a
heterosexual person. There are only homo- or heterosexual acts. Most
people are a mixture of impulses if not practices.""Now you have people in Washington who have no
interest in the country at all. They're interested in their companies,
their corporations grabbing Caspian oil."
Just two of my favorite quotes from the recently departed Gore Vidal.
Just two of my favorite quotes from the recently departed Gore Vidal.
Monday, July 9, 2012
Creepster Brewer.
Good morning people!
I am back up on my soapbox for a moment. The governor of Arizona is pushing to have employers not cover domestic partners in benefits packages, and that just about burns my bum like a three foot flame. It is my belief that when it comes to employment-related things of this nature, an employee is an employee regardless of orientation. Therefore, gay employees should be covered under the same family benefits as straight ones are. It is not your employer's business who you go home to. It doesn't cost more to cover a gay person's insurance costs. (Wow can you believe that, we're not all AIDS liabilities after all!)
Things like this drive me up a wall. In a country where it's hard enough to find decent work, let alone decent work with good benefits, this type of issue should really be a nonpoint. What you do for a living has no connection to what your orientation is. Unless of course, you're gay for pay. Then...well, that's a different story.
I am back up on my soapbox for a moment. The governor of Arizona is pushing to have employers not cover domestic partners in benefits packages, and that just about burns my bum like a three foot flame. It is my belief that when it comes to employment-related things of this nature, an employee is an employee regardless of orientation. Therefore, gay employees should be covered under the same family benefits as straight ones are. It is not your employer's business who you go home to. It doesn't cost more to cover a gay person's insurance costs. (Wow can you believe that, we're not all AIDS liabilities after all!)
Things like this drive me up a wall. In a country where it's hard enough to find decent work, let alone decent work with good benefits, this type of issue should really be a nonpoint. What you do for a living has no connection to what your orientation is. Unless of course, you're gay for pay. Then...well, that's a different story.
Monday, July 2, 2012
Yay, Nay, and a Whale of a Tale!
On a Yay! Note:
"Let bygones be bygones, and bi-girls be bi-girls" made me just about squee with joy at True Blood this weekend.
On a Nay! Note:
Looking at pictures from this weekend made me cry. What the FUCK is that redheaded whale doing in my bathing suit?! :'(
"Let bygones be bygones, and bi-girls be bi-girls" made me just about squee with joy at True Blood this weekend.
On a Nay! Note:
Looking at pictures from this weekend made me cry. What the FUCK is that redheaded whale doing in my bathing suit?! :'(
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Obama and The Rainbow Paint.
Hey, so I know it's been a while. Things have been a little bit nuts for the last couple weeks, and I'm in sore need of a vacation. Which I'm taking tomorrow, so I figured I'd get this post in before I left for the weekend.
I want to chip my two cents in on a topic that's been really buzzing in both the political and gay circles for a while now. Barack Obama's reelection/marketing is working serious overtime for a second term. His campaign is now including merchandise and targeted messages for the women, Latino, Black, and gay votes. Obama Pride has been catching a lot of attention. The campaign was giving out free rainbow "Out for Obama" stickers and merchandise at all pride events this year. The White House even had a pride event for the first time in history this June.
On one hand, I am happy to see the Obama administration actually trying to make progress with LGBT issues, like the repeal of the extremely unnecessary and stupid DADT for the US military. On the other, I'm actually a little bit insulted at the flamboyance of all this "rainbow washing". It sort of reminds me of a Family Guy skit where Lois was running for office and was told that undecided voters will pretty much go for anything that hits a chord with them. Insulting.
It's so transparent that this is a tactic for the HRC's backing and the gay vote. That vote is a pretty big deal to the reelection because traditionally the gays have the money to fund politicians that serve their cause. (I guess the hetero half of me keeps me broke, because I don't see ANY financial benefits to being a switch hitter. BOOO!)
I really hate how the gay-friendly wash on Obama is supposed to drag the entire LGBT community to his re-election. There are other issues that have effects on this community besides bullying and marriage, believe it or not. How can we even get into workplace discrimination if our labor situation and economy suck? How can we talk about LGBT health conferences when Americans of every possible creed and orientation can't afford basic health care? We're worried about bullying...when our national drop out rate is rising every year and our education situation is getting more hopeless for all students every day?
Granted, I don't believe that Mitt Romney is good for gays (or America at this time, for that matter) but is the fake spectacle that is "Obama Pride" really necessary?
I want to chip my two cents in on a topic that's been really buzzing in both the political and gay circles for a while now. Barack Obama's reelection/marketing is working serious overtime for a second term. His campaign is now including merchandise and targeted messages for the women, Latino, Black, and gay votes. Obama Pride has been catching a lot of attention. The campaign was giving out free rainbow "Out for Obama" stickers and merchandise at all pride events this year. The White House even had a pride event for the first time in history this June.
On one hand, I am happy to see the Obama administration actually trying to make progress with LGBT issues, like the repeal of the extremely unnecessary and stupid DADT for the US military. On the other, I'm actually a little bit insulted at the flamboyance of all this "rainbow washing". It sort of reminds me of a Family Guy skit where Lois was running for office and was told that undecided voters will pretty much go for anything that hits a chord with them. Insulting.
It's so transparent that this is a tactic for the HRC's backing and the gay vote. That vote is a pretty big deal to the reelection because traditionally the gays have the money to fund politicians that serve their cause. (I guess the hetero half of me keeps me broke, because I don't see ANY financial benefits to being a switch hitter. BOOO!)
I really hate how the gay-friendly wash on Obama is supposed to drag the entire LGBT community to his re-election. There are other issues that have effects on this community besides bullying and marriage, believe it or not. How can we even get into workplace discrimination if our labor situation and economy suck? How can we talk about LGBT health conferences when Americans of every possible creed and orientation can't afford basic health care? We're worried about bullying...when our national drop out rate is rising every year and our education situation is getting more hopeless for all students every day?
Granted, I don't believe that Mitt Romney is good for gays (or America at this time, for that matter) but is the fake spectacle that is "Obama Pride" really necessary?
Sunday, June 17, 2012
On the Brink of Being Totally Off Topic. Almost...
" you can live a lie until you die, but one thing you can't hide is when you're crippled inside..."
One of the things that was really hard for me in figuring out what was going on with my orientation was dealing with what everyone else considered "normal". Growing up, I saw very little representation of gay life and even less of the grey area called bisexuality. When I was really young, before anything really starting coming together, all I knew was that something was different than what everyone else seemed to be. That feeling that you're not "normal" for whatever reason is one of the things that keeps people in the closet, and generally leads to people being very frustrated in their lives. A lot of people go through the motions of what's "supposed to be" in their lives at various points, and completely deny everything that they want or feel normal about internally to fit into other peoples pretty little boxes of expectations. People who are gay or bisexual will sometimes go through their entire lives the way an "average, red-blooded heterosexual" would do it...and this almost always ends in complete failure.
Maybe it's the shrink in me, but I'm fascinated by this entire idea.
Ultimately, everyone involved in these weird situations gets completely fucked in the head. (Sorry but really, it's the only way to totally capture the effect.) All these people who allow other people to run their every move, subconsciously or otherwise, end up in these hollow, miserable circumstances. People get into relationships and sometimes even marry into relationships that they don't even want to please everyone else. People will go into fields of study or careers they can't stand for the same reasons. There's almost always some nagging individual that manages to know exactly how to get into others' minds to manipulate these deeds. At the end of the day, how many people wander around in these fake, elaborate lies? It seems like an absolutely awful way to live, especially when coupled with the idea that these people usually lie to themselves and everyone else to kind of "fake it til they make it" (which is a load of dung if there ever was one).
Then the people who push these expectations and such onto others are really setting themselves up for massive disappointment. Even when their pretty little mice run the maze like they're "supposed to", there's no guarantee that everything works out in these puppet masters' favors. Most of the time, these subjects get to a point where they can't deal with the lie anymore and just crack. Usually in an enormous way that there's no coming back from. Every single shred of the controlling/masochistic relationship goes down the drain for all the involved parties and then everyone is all jacked up.
How in the holy name of God does that sound healthy/appealing? What is it about people that makes it seem like other peoples' opinions are really worth that much? Is it scarring from psychological trauma and bullying, or is it something else entirely?
One of the things that was really hard for me in figuring out what was going on with my orientation was dealing with what everyone else considered "normal". Growing up, I saw very little representation of gay life and even less of the grey area called bisexuality. When I was really young, before anything really starting coming together, all I knew was that something was different than what everyone else seemed to be. That feeling that you're not "normal" for whatever reason is one of the things that keeps people in the closet, and generally leads to people being very frustrated in their lives. A lot of people go through the motions of what's "supposed to be" in their lives at various points, and completely deny everything that they want or feel normal about internally to fit into other peoples pretty little boxes of expectations. People who are gay or bisexual will sometimes go through their entire lives the way an "average, red-blooded heterosexual" would do it...and this almost always ends in complete failure.
Maybe it's the shrink in me, but I'm fascinated by this entire idea.
Ultimately, everyone involved in these weird situations gets completely fucked in the head. (Sorry but really, it's the only way to totally capture the effect.) All these people who allow other people to run their every move, subconsciously or otherwise, end up in these hollow, miserable circumstances. People get into relationships and sometimes even marry into relationships that they don't even want to please everyone else. People will go into fields of study or careers they can't stand for the same reasons. There's almost always some nagging individual that manages to know exactly how to get into others' minds to manipulate these deeds. At the end of the day, how many people wander around in these fake, elaborate lies? It seems like an absolutely awful way to live, especially when coupled with the idea that these people usually lie to themselves and everyone else to kind of "fake it til they make it" (which is a load of dung if there ever was one).
Then the people who push these expectations and such onto others are really setting themselves up for massive disappointment. Even when their pretty little mice run the maze like they're "supposed to", there's no guarantee that everything works out in these puppet masters' favors. Most of the time, these subjects get to a point where they can't deal with the lie anymore and just crack. Usually in an enormous way that there's no coming back from. Every single shred of the controlling/masochistic relationship goes down the drain for all the involved parties and then everyone is all jacked up.
How in the holy name of God does that sound healthy/appealing? What is it about people that makes it seem like other peoples' opinions are really worth that much? Is it scarring from psychological trauma and bullying, or is it something else entirely?
Sunday, June 10, 2012
One of my favorite bisexuals is back tonight!
Muhahahaha! True Blood comes back tonight. I am very excited for this!
(Stereotypical on so many levels, I know.)
One of the main characters is played by Anna Paquin, one of my favorite bisexual actresses. It so rocks to see her decide to be out for a reason, like helping the Give A Damn campaign, where she first publicly came out.
“I’m not someone who endlessly talks about her personal life for no reason, but obviously, as someone who identifies as bisexual, those are issues I really care about.”
I love that. I really think that bisexuals need to make an effort to view "gay issues" in that way, because it DOES have an effect on our lives as much as it does for gays and lesbians. I think some bi bashing comes from the idea that we sometimes blend into hetero society and don't seem very interested in issues like workplace or marriage equality. That's a shame for those that don't bother, and it sucks to be put in that category when you're bisexual and actually DO give a damn!
She also represents well for the bi community in the straight media, which is very hard for bisexuals in straight relationships. It's great to see somebody say what all the people in that situation think everyday, regardless of how people will perceive it.
“I’m someone who believes being bisexual is actually a thing,” she continues. “It’s not made up. It’s not a lack of decision. It’s not being greedy or numerous other ignorant things I’ve heard at this point. … For a bisexual, it’s not about gender. That’s not the deciding factor for who they’re attracted to"
Fang-tastic. (That was bad. Sorry.)
(Stereotypical on so many levels, I know.)
One of the main characters is played by Anna Paquin, one of my favorite bisexual actresses. It so rocks to see her decide to be out for a reason, like helping the Give A Damn campaign, where she first publicly came out.
“I’m not someone who endlessly talks about her personal life for no reason, but obviously, as someone who identifies as bisexual, those are issues I really care about.”
I love that. I really think that bisexuals need to make an effort to view "gay issues" in that way, because it DOES have an effect on our lives as much as it does for gays and lesbians. I think some bi bashing comes from the idea that we sometimes blend into hetero society and don't seem very interested in issues like workplace or marriage equality. That's a shame for those that don't bother, and it sucks to be put in that category when you're bisexual and actually DO give a damn!
She also represents well for the bi community in the straight media, which is very hard for bisexuals in straight relationships. It's great to see somebody say what all the people in that situation think everyday, regardless of how people will perceive it.
“I’m someone who believes being bisexual is actually a thing,” she continues. “It’s not made up. It’s not a lack of decision. It’s not being greedy or numerous other ignorant things I’ve heard at this point. … For a bisexual, it’s not about gender. That’s not the deciding factor for who they’re attracted to"
Fang-tastic. (That was bad. Sorry.)
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Why Bisexuals Can't Win. (With guest appearance...by The L Word!)
So this is something that comes up a LOT when it comes to people who bat for both teams. There seems to be this weird phenomenon in the gay community about bisexuals who are in hetero relationships. Some gay men and lesbians take the stance of "well, they can choose to be straight or hide in hetero relationships, so they don't count as queer".
Obviously, the switch hitters don't like that. Especially when people like Cynthia Nixon (ew) back up that exact sentiment by saying that bisexuals do indeed choose to be gay or not. Things like that stir up a lot of hate, and with that hate comes dating reluctance and alienation. Apparently, there are a lot of lesbians who flat out refuse to date bi women because they have that notion that said women are "gross" or that the lesbian relationship that comes from a mixed orientation couple is probably just some "phase" or "a meaningless trip into alternative lifestyles". Kinda like this:
The crazy thing about that notion....it comes up in some sort of twisted funhouse mirror image in straight relationships too! Kinda like....this!
"Never being without a date on a Saturday night" just doesn't seem worth it, 99.9% of the time.
Obviously, the switch hitters don't like that. Especially when people like Cynthia Nixon (ew) back up that exact sentiment by saying that bisexuals do indeed choose to be gay or not. Things like that stir up a lot of hate, and with that hate comes dating reluctance and alienation. Apparently, there are a lot of lesbians who flat out refuse to date bi women because they have that notion that said women are "gross" or that the lesbian relationship that comes from a mixed orientation couple is probably just some "phase" or "a meaningless trip into alternative lifestyles". Kinda like this:
The crazy thing about that notion....it comes up in some sort of twisted funhouse mirror image in straight relationships too! Kinda like....this!
"Never being without a date on a Saturday night" just doesn't seem worth it, 99.9% of the time.
Friday, June 1, 2012
June is LGBT Pride Month!
Hey people!
So today is June 1st, and it's the start of Pride month. June is the month where all the big national Pride parades and conventions crop up. The one here in Philadelphia is in ten days, and that's always a hoot. I do have plans to go to it, and I will make sure I get some video and pictures to share.
I'm sure the people who've read this before or have been checking out the blog have have noticed that the way it looks is really, really different. One of the big issues that the bisexual community has going on with Pride is that we don't have a lot of presence at gay pride parades. Usually in Philly the only representation we get is Bi Unity . So...I want to put up this bi-inclusive rainbow because the bisexuals are the B in LGBT. We have our own thing, but it's part of something bigger. We're falling under the rainbow too.
This month there are a lot of movies and documentaries about LGBT topics available On Demand and on Netflix. Some pretty cool stuff. The one I'm catching today is called "Outrage", and it focuses on closeted gay politicians that publicly speak against equal rights for the gays. Hypocrisy and self-hate on parade!
So today is June 1st, and it's the start of Pride month. June is the month where all the big national Pride parades and conventions crop up. The one here in Philadelphia is in ten days, and that's always a hoot. I do have plans to go to it, and I will make sure I get some video and pictures to share.
I'm sure the people who've read this before or have been checking out the blog have have noticed that the way it looks is really, really different. One of the big issues that the bisexual community has going on with Pride is that we don't have a lot of presence at gay pride parades. Usually in Philly the only representation we get is Bi Unity . So...I want to put up this bi-inclusive rainbow because the bisexuals are the B in LGBT. We have our own thing, but it's part of something bigger. We're falling under the rainbow too.
This month there are a lot of movies and documentaries about LGBT topics available On Demand and on Netflix. Some pretty cool stuff. The one I'm catching today is called "Outrage", and it focuses on closeted gay politicians that publicly speak against equal rights for the gays. Hypocrisy and self-hate on parade!
Monday, May 28, 2012
An LGBT Perspective on Target and Company Boycotts.
I have a feeling this post is going to ruffle some feathers, but before I start getting the flame emails- hear me out. There seems to be this trend with the gay community about boycotting retailers and companies for not being LGBT-inclusive or for supporting organizations like National Organization for Marriage (NOM). The biggest pusher for this kind of action is usually the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest and most financially affluent organization for gay rights in the United States. The HRC has a serious hard on for digging out corporate inequality, and every year they release a "Where to Work/Where to Shop" pamphlet that rates middle to large scale companies according to the companies' stances on domestic partner benefits and hiring practices.
I'm going to start off by saying that I support that to an extent. My big "gay issue" that I support full heartedly is workplace equality, and the "List" is a good jumping off point, even if it just makes people think about who they shop for.
But on the other part of their spectrum are the boycotts. Even in the last few years, it feels like the community is always boycotting at least five places any given day. Right now the "big fish" seem to be Target, Chik Fil A, and Hershey. I believe that one of these places does deserve to lose gay dollars, but the other two feel like grey areas to me. I am aware that Chik Fil A is marketed as (and in a way) ran as a "Christian/Family operation". They are closed on Sundays for the Christian Sabbath, and they do use a lot of religious references and support a lot of conservative religious groups. They also have a history of financially backing extreme anti-gay groups like NOM. It bothers me because they use direct profits (meaning, coming directly from customer profits) to fuel the donations to these groups. I feel that if I'm going to pay money for a product, the owners and CEOs should not be using literally the dimes from MY pocket to fund hateful organizations. Plus it bothers me as an LGBT Catholic that a massive company would hide behind faith to fuel hatred. That, in my mind, is no better than the Westboro Baptist Idiots. Although the grilled chicken and waffle fries are delicious....I have joined that ship to not give LGBT/Ally money until the funding situation is changed.
Hershey is apparently being boycotted now for funding a school that terminated a student's inclusion in the school because he is HIV-positive. Although I do think that it's ignorant, I don't think that a boycott of the mostly unaffiliated company is going to do much to solve that situation. I think claims such as the one on the back of this week's Philadelphia Gay News stating that "Hershey is UnAmerican" are not only misleading, but not correctly stated. I understand the concept of "putting pressure on the financial backer to make a statement/pull their funding", but I don't think that's the right way to deal with this issue. I will not back this boycott because I feel it's ineffective. This issue should really be a direct issue WITH the school, not using the backer as a way to call attention to the problem.
Then comes the boycott of Target. Ohhh boy, what a grey area this one is. A few years ago, the CEO of Target donated money to an anti-gay group who supported a very bigoted politician , and the HRC had a field day. Keep in mind that as far as domestic partner benefits and hiring practices go, Target had a pretty clean slate for a very long time. Many of the companies and designers that Target works with as partners are LGBT run or Ally companies, too. Since that funding mistake, and I do believe that it was something that wasn't even considered (not that that's good...) the HRC has NEVER let it go. Target's hiring practices, benefits contracts, and corporate partner situations have hardly changed. This year, even after seeing the backlash at Old Navy for releasing similar merchandise, Target has gone full speed ahead and has been unapologetic about manufacturing and selling Pride clothing, where part of the proceeds go to a pro LGBT family organization. Now some people at the HRC and in the community are saying this is a gimmick to reel in some of the lost gay dollars. Maybe. But I will say that in my eyes, years of a solid record of support regarding workplace equality FAR OUTWEIGH one nasty misstep. Let the flaming begin...
Funnily enough, last summer I had an interview at a gay owned-gay run retailer on South Street. (I chose not to disclose my orientation, which I never do in interviews, regardless of WHO I'm interviewing for. It shouldn't matter. Anyway...) The topic of Target came up, and I expressly said that I continued to do business there. Before I could go into my logic, as this was a very casual conversation/interview, I was greeted with a sort of nasty, "shut down" kind of response, and I knew before the chat was over that I'd been passed up for the position. (Side note, when I was at last year's OutFest, I made it a point to stop by the guy's booth, wearing my bracelet and with my tattoo clearly visible. He looked shocked. He had that "oh MAN I feel like an ass" thing going on. Funny how making ASSumptions causes that look, eh?)
But on the other part of their spectrum are the boycotts. Even in the last few years, it feels like the community is always boycotting at least five places any given day. Right now the "big fish" seem to be Target, Chik Fil A, and Hershey. I believe that one of these places does deserve to lose gay dollars, but the other two feel like grey areas to me. I am aware that Chik Fil A is marketed as (and in a way) ran as a "Christian/Family operation". They are closed on Sundays for the Christian Sabbath, and they do use a lot of religious references and support a lot of conservative religious groups. They also have a history of financially backing extreme anti-gay groups like NOM. It bothers me because they use direct profits (meaning, coming directly from customer profits) to fuel the donations to these groups. I feel that if I'm going to pay money for a product, the owners and CEOs should not be using literally the dimes from MY pocket to fund hateful organizations. Plus it bothers me as an LGBT Catholic that a massive company would hide behind faith to fuel hatred. That, in my mind, is no better than the Westboro Baptist Idiots. Although the grilled chicken and waffle fries are delicious....I have joined that ship to not give LGBT/Ally money until the funding situation is changed.
Hershey is apparently being boycotted now for funding a school that terminated a student's inclusion in the school because he is HIV-positive. Although I do think that it's ignorant, I don't think that a boycott of the mostly unaffiliated company is going to do much to solve that situation. I think claims such as the one on the back of this week's Philadelphia Gay News stating that "Hershey is UnAmerican" are not only misleading, but not correctly stated. I understand the concept of "putting pressure on the financial backer to make a statement/pull their funding", but I don't think that's the right way to deal with this issue. I will not back this boycott because I feel it's ineffective. This issue should really be a direct issue WITH the school, not using the backer as a way to call attention to the problem.
Then comes the boycott of Target. Ohhh boy, what a grey area this one is. A few years ago, the CEO of Target donated money to an anti-gay group who supported a very bigoted politician , and the HRC had a field day. Keep in mind that as far as domestic partner benefits and hiring practices go, Target had a pretty clean slate for a very long time. Many of the companies and designers that Target works with as partners are LGBT run or Ally companies, too. Since that funding mistake, and I do believe that it was something that wasn't even considered (not that that's good...) the HRC has NEVER let it go. Target's hiring practices, benefits contracts, and corporate partner situations have hardly changed. This year, even after seeing the backlash at Old Navy for releasing similar merchandise, Target has gone full speed ahead and has been unapologetic about manufacturing and selling Pride clothing, where part of the proceeds go to a pro LGBT family organization. Now some people at the HRC and in the community are saying this is a gimmick to reel in some of the lost gay dollars. Maybe. But I will say that in my eyes, years of a solid record of support regarding workplace equality FAR OUTWEIGH one nasty misstep. Let the flaming begin...
Funnily enough, last summer I had an interview at a gay owned-gay run retailer on South Street. (I chose not to disclose my orientation, which I never do in interviews, regardless of WHO I'm interviewing for. It shouldn't matter. Anyway...) The topic of Target came up, and I expressly said that I continued to do business there. Before I could go into my logic, as this was a very casual conversation/interview, I was greeted with a sort of nasty, "shut down" kind of response, and I knew before the chat was over that I'd been passed up for the position. (Side note, when I was at last year's OutFest, I made it a point to stop by the guy's booth, wearing my bracelet and with my tattoo clearly visible. He looked shocked. He had that "oh MAN I feel like an ass" thing going on. Funny how making ASSumptions causes that look, eh?)
Monday, May 21, 2012
DC Is Outing One of It's Characters!
Oh Mah Gawd!
DC Comics just announced that one of it's existing major characters is getting a rainbow re-write! They have a couple of them already, my favorite being Batwoman, but now the gay geek universe is buzzing about who it's going to be.
I'm going to hope it's one of the characters from my favorite comic in the whole wide world- Batman! My guesses are going to be Nightwing/Robin, Harley Quinn, Poision Ivy, or maybe even the Joker. I could sort of see Alfred too.
Can't wait!
But in the meantime....here's a tidbit from the wonderful world of youtube!
(And this is in Arkham City, a special voicemail left for Batsy! awww)
Okay...I think I'm done now...
(And this is in Arkham City, a special voicemail left for Batsy! awww)
Okay...I think I'm done now...
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Disco Queens are Weeping.
So I'm going to start this post with a little bit of a nod to a much-disputed gay icon who's recently passed away. Donna Summer was part of the disco culture, which was a safe haven for so many in the gay community back in the 1970s. She was also an inspiration for many drag queens, past and present, with her big hair and flamboyant outfits. She even made the switch hitters of the time with a certain line in one of her hits, haha.
Donna alleged made some not so fabulous comments about the gays and AIDS that some people still hold her to. Others claim it never happened. But even if she did make one of those 'God is punishing you' comments, her impact on the drag community and disco queens is undeniable.
I have a personal story somewhat sort of connected here too, crazy enough. (Apart from my mom and uncle being into disco during that scene.)A little over a year ago I was working in the gayest produce department in a grocery store ever...and THIS jam constantly blared through the speakers in the meat room. It was a big, meaty, gay hell. Complete with homophobic pineapples.
I have a personal story somewhat sort of connected here too, crazy enough. (Apart from my mom and uncle being into disco during that scene.)A little over a year ago I was working in the gayest produce department in a grocery store ever...and THIS jam constantly blared through the speakers in the meat room. It was a big, meaty, gay hell. Complete with homophobic pineapples.
Saturday, May 12, 2012
Futch and the Swimsuit from Hell
I love certain things about summer. The sun being out, Pride events, funnel cakes, and especially beach trips. But there's one thing that I dread- swimsuit shopping.
I don't think the majority of women like swimsuit shopping. Things can look really great on a model or on the rack (no pun intended), and they when a chick tries something on it gives her the urge to slap on a mumu and dig into a huge bowl of brownie batter because it's so depressing. No matter how femme-y and hot a girl is she is guaranteed to go through this hell at least once a year. It sucks.
When you're a girl who's not so in your face feminine, the problem gets even more frustrating. Not everyone with a uterus wants to look like a Victoria's Secret model, believe it or not. This article delves into the conundrum of shopping for this hell piece when chicks are butch, but then there's the interesting type who's neither here nor there. What if ruffled bikinis make you want to barf, but the idea of a granny suit under swim trunks isn't any better?
Blah.
Where's that brownie batter?
I don't think the majority of women like swimsuit shopping. Things can look really great on a model or on the rack (no pun intended), and they when a chick tries something on it gives her the urge to slap on a mumu and dig into a huge bowl of brownie batter because it's so depressing. No matter how femme-y and hot a girl is she is guaranteed to go through this hell at least once a year. It sucks.
When you're a girl who's not so in your face feminine, the problem gets even more frustrating. Not everyone with a uterus wants to look like a Victoria's Secret model, believe it or not. This article delves into the conundrum of shopping for this hell piece when chicks are butch, but then there's the interesting type who's neither here nor there. What if ruffled bikinis make you want to barf, but the idea of a granny suit under swim trunks isn't any better?
Blah.
Where's that brownie batter?
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Barack Obama is the First President to Back Gay Marriage
For some reason I'm not as happy about this as I was about Biden's support. I think it's because Biden's comments really did seem a lot more genuine than what the POTUS said. I don't think this was an "election year" statement, because by saying he supports same-sex marriage he runs the risk of losing as many votes as he'll gain. I think this was more "Well Joe said something, I've been skirting the issue, it's going to look bad if I don't say anything at all".
Either way, for the LGBT Americans who wish to be married, and the allies who take this up as a flagship issue, this is probably good news.
Either way, for the LGBT Americans who wish to be married, and the allies who take this up as a flagship issue, this is probably good news.
Monday, May 7, 2012
It's been a while, but I'm back with some surprising news!
I know it's been a while, but life had me on my toes for the last couple of weeks. I finally got that ridiculously hard paper finished, and God only knows if I passed my other course. Work was a little wild last month too, so that didn't leave a lot of room in my day to check in here. Things have gotten a little bit more controllable now, so I'll probably be back for a while.
There have been a lot of crazy events in the land of the switchhitters lately. The first thing I want on the agenda is really not something I'm happy to hear. The site that launched the "I Am Visible" campaign is shutting down. "I Am Visible" was a great initiative to fight biphobia and erasure, it just never really took off as well as say, The Trevor Project did. The site was an incredible resource for the bisexual community and I truly am sad to see it go. You can still check it out at: Bi Social Network...signing off :(
Speaking of campaigns with great messages that I'd love to see take off, You Can Play seems to be going somewhere! This awesome interview appeared in Philly Gay News not too long ago, and I actually got the chance to chat with Patrick Burke, You Can Play founder and scout for the Flyers, about a possible YCP appearance at June's PhillyPride or possibly Outfest! in October. Burke was at Equality Forum over the weekend, so hopefully the schedule will allow for some YCP at our pride events! The online shop that carries merch to raise awareness of the initiative should be open right in time for Pride month, around June first.
And one more piece before I sign off for the day, Vice-President Joe Biden has come out in support of gay unions! I ran across this on CatholicsForEquality's Twitter feed, but now his comments have gone viral and can be found all over the place.
"I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties,and quite frankly, I don't see much of a distinction beyond that. The good news is that as more and more Americans become to understand what this is all about is a simple proposition," he said. "Who do you love? Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that's what people are finding out is what -- what all marriages, at their root, are about." -Joe Biden on Meet The Press, April 6th 2012
This is actually pretty great news for the LGBT Catholic/Episcopalian community, because Biden is the highest ranking Catholic in the United States political system. This is a great merging of faith and morality that's so, so positive for progress on civil unions/gay marriage in this country. It may be words but they're strong words. Stronger even than President Barack Obama has ever offered on the issue. A huge step forward with just a few sentences.
There have been a lot of crazy events in the land of the switchhitters lately. The first thing I want on the agenda is really not something I'm happy to hear. The site that launched the "I Am Visible" campaign is shutting down. "I Am Visible" was a great initiative to fight biphobia and erasure, it just never really took off as well as say, The Trevor Project did. The site was an incredible resource for the bisexual community and I truly am sad to see it go. You can still check it out at: Bi Social Network...signing off :(
Speaking of campaigns with great messages that I'd love to see take off, You Can Play seems to be going somewhere! This awesome interview appeared in Philly Gay News not too long ago, and I actually got the chance to chat with Patrick Burke, You Can Play founder and scout for the Flyers, about a possible YCP appearance at June's PhillyPride or possibly Outfest! in October. Burke was at Equality Forum over the weekend, so hopefully the schedule will allow for some YCP at our pride events! The online shop that carries merch to raise awareness of the initiative should be open right in time for Pride month, around June first.
And one more piece before I sign off for the day, Vice-President Joe Biden has come out in support of gay unions! I ran across this on CatholicsForEquality's Twitter feed, but now his comments have gone viral and can be found all over the place.
"I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties,and quite frankly, I don't see much of a distinction beyond that. The good news is that as more and more Americans become to understand what this is all about is a simple proposition," he said. "Who do you love? Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that's what people are finding out is what -- what all marriages, at their root, are about." -Joe Biden on Meet The Press, April 6th 2012
This is actually pretty great news for the LGBT Catholic/Episcopalian community, because Biden is the highest ranking Catholic in the United States political system. This is a great merging of faith and morality that's so, so positive for progress on civil unions/gay marriage in this country. It may be words but they're strong words. Stronger even than President Barack Obama has ever offered on the issue. A huge step forward with just a few sentences.
Monday, April 16, 2012
How Do You Mix Being Bisexual and Butch Without Getting Rejected?
Good (freakishly early in my book) morning, people!
Before I even get started on today's bisexual rant, I have to get this out of the way. OH MY GOD, FLYERS. That...in my expert opinion, was an ass whoopin'! Fluery looked like he was going to cry when the Pens took him out of the net. Watching like four line fights bust out was awesome, especially when Claude Giroux went and fought Cindy Crosby. That was beautiful. Hartnell's "you pulled my hair, bitch!" was legendary. I love the NHL. Okay, sorry. I had to butch out there because I'm still elated from yesterday.
Speaking of butching out, I read this great one shot this morning about being bisexual and presenting as what's called a "soft butch". For my het friends that read this, let me explain what that means. In the gay community, but especially when you're talking about bisexual and lesbian women, there are a trillion labels and "types" of gay. Now some people are of the variety that disregard those terms completely, but I'm not one of them. A "soft butch" is pretty much a gay girl who physically or in her mannerisms come off as a little masculne. Someone like the chick who wrote this article, even someone like Kat von D from LA Ink (if she turned out to be gay ...wish) could be included in the "soft butch" spectrum in their own ways.
In reading this piece that I'm talking about, I got to thinking a lot about how twisted up some people would get about a bisexual woman who presented as more on the butch side. The author makes a really interesting point towards the end of her piece about how bisexual women have turned her down before, because they didn't "see the point" of a butch fencesitter. I understand that completely, and I've had the same thought, even though I'm rather "futch" myself. Guilty as charged.
(Not really butch, but not really frilly little femme either. Probably a chapstick lesbian somewhere in there, haha!)
In her case, I can't help but wonder if that experience would be different if she were a lesbian. It doesn't seem like bisexuals get a fair shake at being anything than "hetero passive" these days. Looking like you could pass for straight is pretty much accepted (and hated) when it comes to bisexuals. Deviating from that exterior usually causes some stir, at least from what I've witnessed.
The other thing that kind of clicked in my head when I read this was how drastically different some bi people can be when they're in opposite-sex and same-sex relationships. I know at least for me, I do a total 180 in my behavior depending on who I'm with. When I'm with another chick, I'm usually the more butch of the pair. The dominant part of my personality comes out, and even the way I talk has more of a masculine ring to it. But if I'm in a hetero relationship, the exact opposite happens. I don't think about it, it just sort of does it on its own. It's almost like a subconscious shift.
As far as rejection based on those behaviors or "butch traits" goes, I think I've really gotten that more from men than I have from women. I don't know if it's intimidating, or if some of the guys I've run across swear that one day I'm going to say I'm gay and that's it (hey biphobia, how ya doin...) or what. I wonder if it's a subconscious thing relating to sexuality and perception in the public sometimes, you know, like "she's so masculine, I wonder if he's really gay and in denial". It would be narrow minded, but I could see that thought process.
I know there's that old crack on bisexuals never being alone on a Saturday night, or that we double our chances. But in reality, the game of rejection and attraction gets so much more complicated once you start batting for both teams.
Before I even get started on today's bisexual rant, I have to get this out of the way. OH MY GOD, FLYERS. That...in my expert opinion, was an ass whoopin'! Fluery looked like he was going to cry when the Pens took him out of the net. Watching like four line fights bust out was awesome, especially when Claude Giroux went and fought Cindy Crosby. That was beautiful. Hartnell's "you pulled my hair, bitch!" was legendary. I love the NHL. Okay, sorry. I had to butch out there because I'm still elated from yesterday.
Speaking of butching out, I read this great one shot this morning about being bisexual and presenting as what's called a "soft butch". For my het friends that read this, let me explain what that means. In the gay community, but especially when you're talking about bisexual and lesbian women, there are a trillion labels and "types" of gay. Now some people are of the variety that disregard those terms completely, but I'm not one of them. A "soft butch" is pretty much a gay girl who physically or in her mannerisms come off as a little masculne. Someone like the chick who wrote this article, even someone like Kat von D from LA Ink (if she turned out to be gay ...wish) could be included in the "soft butch" spectrum in their own ways.
In reading this piece that I'm talking about, I got to thinking a lot about how twisted up some people would get about a bisexual woman who presented as more on the butch side. The author makes a really interesting point towards the end of her piece about how bisexual women have turned her down before, because they didn't "see the point" of a butch fencesitter. I understand that completely, and I've had the same thought, even though I'm rather "futch" myself. Guilty as charged.
(Not really butch, but not really frilly little femme either. Probably a chapstick lesbian somewhere in there, haha!)
In her case, I can't help but wonder if that experience would be different if she were a lesbian. It doesn't seem like bisexuals get a fair shake at being anything than "hetero passive" these days. Looking like you could pass for straight is pretty much accepted (and hated) when it comes to bisexuals. Deviating from that exterior usually causes some stir, at least from what I've witnessed.
The other thing that kind of clicked in my head when I read this was how drastically different some bi people can be when they're in opposite-sex and same-sex relationships. I know at least for me, I do a total 180 in my behavior depending on who I'm with. When I'm with another chick, I'm usually the more butch of the pair. The dominant part of my personality comes out, and even the way I talk has more of a masculine ring to it. But if I'm in a hetero relationship, the exact opposite happens. I don't think about it, it just sort of does it on its own. It's almost like a subconscious shift.
As far as rejection based on those behaviors or "butch traits" goes, I think I've really gotten that more from men than I have from women. I don't know if it's intimidating, or if some of the guys I've run across swear that one day I'm going to say I'm gay and that's it (hey biphobia, how ya doin...) or what. I wonder if it's a subconscious thing relating to sexuality and perception in the public sometimes, you know, like "she's so masculine, I wonder if he's really gay and in denial". It would be narrow minded, but I could see that thought process.
I know there's that old crack on bisexuals never being alone on a Saturday night, or that we double our chances. But in reality, the game of rejection and attraction gets so much more complicated once you start batting for both teams.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)