|
stone cold posted:Does it solve people thinking we don't exist? And this is a problem from a political or rights based perspective why? That's the social stigma aspect I spoke of earlier. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any political rights or issues. No one is refusing to serve someone because they're bisexual. The issue there is people in same sex relationships. There is no discrete political issue unique to anyone bisexual.
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Bi folk deal with increased substance abuse compared to vanilla G and L folk, probably brought on through self medication behaviour. Mental health is a political issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 07:27
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:And this is a problem from a political or rights based perspective why? That's the social stigma aspect I spoke of earlier. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any political rights or issues. No one is refusing to serve someone because they're bisexual. The issue there is people in same sex relationships. There is no discrete political issue unique to anyone bisexual. That's not what the experiences of actual bisexuals in the US indicates quite the opposite in fact.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
An interesting if depressing read. Kind of makes me wonder how I classify myself. I always kind of thought that everyone had some wiggle room on where they fell on the Kinsey scale. Like for myself I have always had an overwhelmingly strong preference for women, such that the very few guys I have been attracted to (honestly really just one person I could see myself in a relationship with) feel very much like exceptions, so I tend to say I'm lesbian.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
The Dark One posted:Bi folk deal with increased substance abuse compared to vanilla G and L folk, probably brought on through self medication behaviour. Mental health is a political issue. why would that be tho, like doesn't this indicate its separate from sexuality?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
Maybe the problem isn't the individuals but the fact that larger society sees deviation from rigid norms as satanic and hosed up because Trump etc. It's not our fault, it's theirs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:That's not what the experiences of actual bisexuals in the US indicates quite the opposite in fact. The only thing the article really talks about is erasure as the source of bi problems and that seems to mirror the complaints here in the thread. All that does is support my assertion that there isn't a political issue that is exclusive to bi people. Like the only thing that we have to bitch about is acceptance Like they show higher incidences of poverty and bad health in their sample. The poverty and bad health though aren't linked to being bi by more than correlation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The only thing the article really talks about is erasure as the source of bi problems and that seems to mirror the complaints here in the thread. All that does is support my assertion that there isn't a political issue that is exclusive to bi people. Like the only thing that we have to bitch about is acceptance No it isn't, it brings up explicit anti BI discrimination, in addition to the data it even has an anecdote that directly contradicts your earlier assertions, so either you didn't pay attention or are just doubling down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
There's also a ton of social stigma for being openly bi. Gay folks are coming around to the point where there's some borderline of acceptance in a fair proportion of people, but bi folks get all the "make up your mind" and accusations of cheating. I can't remember where I read it, but I'm sure I read something about how bi people face greater rates of partner abuse than any other orientation. Those aren't nothing. That's pretty hosed, and it's all because we have transitioned from "there is only one normal and it is man/lady" to "okay, you can get with someone like you... but once you pick one, that's it, no takebacks" instead of "it doesn't loving matter, just be excellent to each other". edit: I think this is it, it seems to be just about women, but bi women have significantly higher rates of abuse and rape. http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_SOfindings.pdf Vindicator fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
For me, being bisexual means never fitting in. You can't choose one side or the other because you aren't one or the other. While you can date someone that makes you outwardly look hetero or homo, it doesn't change who you actually are; it doesn't change who find attractive. You are assumed to be hetero or homo based on who you are dating. No matter what you do, someone is always trying to erase half of your identity because, if they can't see it, it doesn't exist to them. Only you know your mind and your feeling. Maybe bisexual people should wear a purple armband or something so everybody knows "I'm with a dude, but I also find woman attractive; please do not make assumptions about me." When you are bisexual and you are dating someone of the opposite gender, how welcome are you at LGBT events? You are seen as an ally or a hanger-on, not someone intimately impacted by the struggle. Date someone of the same gender, suddenly you are on the team again. Yet, who you are never changed. It was just what everybody else saw when they looked at you. Edit: in my case, my weird sexual feelings being born in the deep south, I was seen as a dude and dated like 4 women before I met my future wife. I also dated 1 dude, but nobody else ever knew about it because I was scared. I made out with another dude on a couple of occasions, but like I said, we never told anybody else. So, I was obviously a male who was heterosexual. When I married my wife, it was the perfect Christian coupling, exactly what was expected of me. Suddenly, I'm transgender and I start transitioning. Now I'm seen as a woman in a same sex relationship. Now I belong to LGBT. Even though I always did, but nobody knew. The stigma kept me in the closet and quiet. The politics of identity are complicated and intricate and also so very full of poo poo. But we all make assumptions based on appearance. We do that because that is what human beings do; we can't turn it off. But maybe we can tune it a bit. Aleph Null fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Those are all bi issues, yes, but they're not political issues which is all Mr. Nice is trying to say. All they were trying to point out is that the outstanding legal rights that bi people have not attained are the same legal rights other queer people have not obtained, and so for political purposes it makes sense that the bi community is part of the greater lgbtq community. Like, their whole point was that people spent the last two pages discussing how really there's barely anything tying the LGBTQ community together and he's pointing out that, no, actually the political stuff we all need is basically the same (with some extra stuff specific to trans people) and so the real splintering is in social issues and not political ones.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
I don't get the incessant "we need to split the t from lgbt, THEY'RE NOT LIKE US" thing. Oh, wait, yes I do. Transphobia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
But that applies to everyone who's lgbt? Why are the Bs different?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Vindicator posted:I don't get the incessant "we need to split the t from lgbt, THEY'RE NOT LIKE US" thing. I'm transgender. I get it, I just don't agree with it. Sexuality and gender identity are two completely different things. We understand that. The people who irrationally hate us do not understand that, so it is imperative that we stick together. Edit: the other thing, there are no uniquely bisexual political issues. I concur. But the way it's being presented is that "bisexual issues do not matter". They do, but they are also homosexual political issues. Aleph Null fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Dec 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
T folk need something better than being lumped in with the LGB. We get thrown under the bus on a regular basis, most queer cis folks I've met seem too be smug about supporting T, ect. Unfortunately splitting away would pretty much lose what political power we have, so I gotta hang around and hope I get treated right by the other queers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Aleph Null posted:
Again, the study put out by actual bisexuals into the conditions of Bisexuals doesn't agree, so unless you have better evidence y'all are just talking out of your rear ends .
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:Again, the study put out by actual bisexuals into the conditions of Bisexuals doesn't agree, so unless you have better evidence y'all are just talking out of your rear ends . In what ways does it not agree?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Yeah the T part of LGBT is all too easy to sell down the river. It's pretty disheartening and why we need to keep stressing the need to stay together to while pointing out when shitiness pop up. E: those studies still indicate that there is a problem and bisexuals people's needs are not being addressed. Those numbers are stark.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
Baka-nin posted:No it isn't, it brings up explicit anti BI discrimination, in addition to the data it even has an anecdote that directly contradicts your earlier assertions, so either you didn't pay attention or are just doubling down. It mentions plenty of social issues, and I agree with that, but no unique political issues. I mean, I finally understand the original point that made me rant. Bisexuals face unique social issues and unique problems with self-identification, issues of trust and appearances. But political issues? No. Bisexuals are not uniquely targeted politically because they are shuffled into hetero or homo based on who they are currently dating; they are erased. Edit: I mean, I was suicidal when I was trying to convince myself I wasn't gay back in the day. I wasn't. But I didn't even know "bisexual" was a choice at the time. I didn't even fully understand what "homosexual" meant. That was a dark time, but it wasn't a political issue.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
How is that really any different from any other baby queer that doesn't know what's up? When I was under the impression that bisexuals are just confused, a stepping stone to being gay, all that other crap, I also had to deal with trans phobic crap put out by mainstream society. It strikes me more as a need to educate people on queer identities to begin with....
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:How is that really any different from any other baby queer that doesn't know what's up? I agree. And, thanks to the Internet, that's actually possible today. poo poo, I didn't even know transgender existed until I was in my early / mid 30s (because I am old and also naive). It wasn't that I was taught being transgender was bad and wrong; it's that I was never taught anything about it. It took things like Chaz motherfuckin' Bono to really drive it home that this poo poo was real and possible, not just the stuff of movies and cartoons. Now we've got Laverne Cox, Transparent, that Jasmine kid, Janet Mock, Caitlyn Jenner, Chelsea Manning, all kinds of stuff. All I had was a stereotypically gay hairdresser who lived next door taking care of his elderly mom and the Bible. Also movies that treated drag queen, transgender, transvestite, and homosexual as interchangeable. Yes. We need education. I'm just trying to say that these are not political issues. It's not the fault of the law or politicians that bisexual people have unique issues. It's is a societal problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
I don't think they're really political issues, either, except in the sense that everything is political.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
I too can really say is thank Al Gore for the internet. Even if it took me a while to find out you could be trans and that was okay. And it was from a very unlikely source.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
What is a political issue if not a societal problem though? All things are societal problems and we use politics to solve them because the apparatus of the state is the strongest single force over society. A systemic lack of education would appear to be a manifestly political issue because the state has great control over systemic education.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Aleph Null posted:I agree. And, thanks to the Internet, that's actually possible today. poo poo, I didn't even know transgender existed until I was in my early / mid 30s (because I am old and also naive). It wasn't that I was taught being transgender was bad and wrong; it's that I was never taught anything about it. It took things like Chaz motherfuckin' Bono to really drive it home that this poo poo was real and possible, not just the stuff of movies and cartoons. Now we've got Laverne Cox, Transparent, that Jasmine kid, Janet Mock, Caitlyn Jenner, Chelsea Manning, all kinds of stuff. Really? So if we had full, comprehensive sex-ed in schools that covered bisexuals along with other queer identities and issues you don't think it would have a big effect on people understanding and accepting bisexuality within themselves and others? 'Political' doesn't just mean the legal code. It's anything the government has it's hands in and that includes education.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Really? So if we had full, comprehensive sex-ed in schools that covered bisexuals along with other queer identities and issues you don't think it would have a big effect on people understanding and accepting bisexuality within themselves and others? 'Political' doesn't just mean the legal code. It's anything the government has it's hands in and that includes education. That's a good point. My sex ed was terrible (pictures of diseased genitals and "just, uh, don't have sex") and I didn't even think of working to improve it as a way to legitimize queer identities. That would definitely be a political issue even though it shouldn't be. Religion is so political that they can't be separated, regardless of what the First Amendment implies. Comprehensive, scientifically accurate, socially aware sex ed would work toward resolving so many other things: teen pregnancy, STDs, birth control myths, abortion, early shame at "sinful" desires, getting married just so you can have guilt-free sex. It would benefit everyone, not just queer folk. It would take a cultural shift for it to be possible. Trump winning the election (among other things) shows that the country isn't ready for that type of shift, yet. Edit: but we should never stop pushing toward that goal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/12/14/polish-journalist-says-he-risks-being-deported-from-usa-for-being-bisexual-and-not-gay/ Okay, here's an example of someone bi being discriminated against and running into legal issues.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/12/14/polish-journalist-says-he-risks-being-deported-from-usa-for-being-bisexual-and-not-gay/ Wow. Out of the darkness and into the light. Maybe we'll see more of this sort of thing in the short term. Does this mean a court may have to define what "bisexual" means?
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Really? So if we had full, comprehensive sex-ed in schools that covered bisexuals along with other queer identities and issues you don't think it would have a big effect on people understanding and accepting bisexuality within themselves and others? 'Political' doesn't just mean the legal code. It's anything the government has it's hands in and that includes education. Just saying but we had great sex ed at my school that did cover all of that and a bunch of my fellow classmates still post things on facebook et al like how they think bisexuals aren't really real.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/12/14/polish-journalist-says-he-risks-being-deported-from-usa-for-being-bisexual-and-not-gay/ I dug further into it out of curiosity. He is being targetted not because he is bi, but rather because he ruffled a bunch of feathers exposing corruption and other bullshit going down at the polish consulate. Additionally marriages that are between a citizen and someone that is not and is attempting to get citizenship are heavily scrutinized. The fact that the two of them are bi does not preclude the relationship from being a sham. The government will have the burden i presume of demonstrating this in court. If their marriage is indeed legitimate, they'll easily be able to prove it in court. They aren't being scrutinized because they're bi. They're under the microscope because he is a political dissident in his home country and may be lying about his relationship as a roundabout way of achieving permanent asylum.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:why would that be tho, like doesn't this indicate its separate from sexuality? Might have something to do with not being straight enough for the straights, and getting a ton of 'oh, you're just in denial, come back when you're all the way out of the closet' from the other side.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:I dug further into it out of curiosity. He is being targetted not because he is bi, but rather because he ruffled a bunch of feathers exposing corruption and other bullshit going down at the polish consulate. Maybe. It's still some bullshit, tho, because, like, he's having his bisexuality used against him
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:What is a political issue if not a societal problem though? All things are societal problems and we use politics to solve them because the apparatus of the state is the strongest single force over society. To put it bluntly as a political issue, we need to make evidence-based sexual education mandatory on a national level both for public health reasons as it is necessary that teenagers actually be taught prevention for STDs and unwanted pregnancies, but also because there needs to be an acknowledgement that there are more sexual identities possible than one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
fishmech posted:Just saying but we had great sex ed at my school that did cover all of that and a bunch of my fellow classmates still post things on facebook et al like how they think bisexuals aren't really real. Are you one of them? Because unless the whole class are a bunch of assholes, you can't say it was useless. No one is saying it's a cure-all, but it takes constant debunking of the old poo poo and repetition of your own message for the culture as a whole to shift. Sex-ed is just one avenue out of many, but it's a really good one because it targets kids and does so multiple times over their education. Also, while you can't really point to a broad prejudice in the law that exclusively affects bisexuals, biphobia is cause for invalidating people's relationships and that does have legal repercussions.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Are you one of them? Because unless the whole class are a bunch of assholes, you can't say it was useless. You're the one claiming that just education is going to cause people to stop having dumb opinions. Frankly if that was true you'd at least have some states with significantly less dumb opinions, because they have the better schools. That's clearly not the case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Maybe. He's not. The issue the state is going to push is that he's not actually bisexual and his wife isn't either. They're a lesbian and a gay man married together for convenience and as a way to subvert the standard visa process. It has nothing to do with him being bi. Any marriage where significant extra-marital sexual/romantic activity occurs is going to be by default suspicious regardless of whether it is opposite or same-sex activities. Infidelity has been historically one of the few ways to actually have cause to dissolve a marriage before no fault divorce actually existed. I don't know all the facts, but it seems like their extra-marital relationships are exclusively same-sex. This is a situation where a political dissident has been using his marriage to stay in the country after the expiration of his work visa. Both spouses have had long term significant same-sex relationships outside of their marriage. It's pretty obvious why this would raise flags at the immigration department because facially it looks like a sham marriage. The story of "oh no we're both actually bi" seems like an afterthought more than a lifestyle. I'm not saying that he's gay, straight, or anything. I'm just explaining why his marriage is considered suspect. With that in mind, the government will have to prove to some evidentiary standard (I'm honestly not sure what level it is but it's probably higher than preponderance but lower than reasonable doubt) that the marriage is a sham. The couple will have their opportunity to rebut. If their marriage is indeed legitimate, it shouldn't be difficult to sort out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Well... Aren't you just denying their identities now? What are you gonna do, show him pics of women and see if he pops a boner? Let him be. Immigration laws in this country and screwed, anyways
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
That honestly sounds really similar to trans gate keeping. Dude says he's bi, just go with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Thalantos posted:Well... Aren't you just denying their identities now? What are you gonna do, show him pics of women and see if he pops a boner? It's not about denying their identities. Its the standard process for investigating into the legitimacy of any marriage. This particular marriage has all of the classic signs of an illegitimate one and will get additional scrutiny as a result. That isn't to say that the couple is lying or anything. Thalantos posted:That honestly sounds really similar to trans gate keeping. That's probably what will happen in court unless there is enough evidence that the marriage is actually a sham and the bi story is just an excuse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:43 |
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:It's not about denying their identities. Its the standard process for investigating into the legitimacy of any marriage. This particular marriage has all of the classic signs of an illegitimate one and will get additional scrutiny as a result. That isn't to say that the couple is lying or anything. They shouldn't need to prove their marriage regardless
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2016 23:39
|
|