Category: labels

alarajrogers:

chronicallyinvisible:

yeah it’s not always good to label people and ‘put them into boxes’, but also sometimes people like discovering boxes and placing themselves inside because they’re cosy and comfortable and they fit just right. words like fat and black and disabled and gay and trans aren’t bad, and people are allowed to put themselves into boxes if it helps them establish their identity

People are like cats. They don’t like being forced into a box, but give them a box that’s comfy and feels right to them, and they will crawl right into it and have a sit.

nooffswitch:

“No labels” rhetoric isolates people from their community, history and culture. It keeps people from being able to articulate themselves and ask for what they need.It promotes a false sense of unity that only serves to further the dominant classes in society. It is a lazy way of getting out of understanding and digesting complex issues.I dislike this rhetoric and approach.

miles-thebi:
If you define bisexuality as “an attraction to men and women”, then define pansexuality…

Be bisexual+ your way.  No one should judge how you express your bisexuality, including yourself. 

Image: a soft focus colour photo background of a high mountain landscape in early autumn with mountain meadows and fir trees, looking into the distance are other mountains blending into hazy sky. Written across it in white, in a variety of fonts are the words, “You are allowed to have a preference, both romantically and sexually, and still be bisexual.  Your bisexuality isn’t lessened by your current partner nor your past experience(s).  It’s your life – you and only you are in charge of your label.”

miles-thebi:

If you define bisexuality as “an attraction to men and women”, then define pansexuality a “an attraction to men, women, and transgender individuals”, you are using transphobia to support a biphobic idea of bisexuality.

Simple as that.

The transphobia should be obvious; making the distinction between men, women, and transgender individuals invalidates trans men and trans women as ACTUAL men and women. It also places all transgender individuals in this “other” category. Not man, not women, no matter how they identify their gender. Trans women are actual women, not an “other” kind of woman. Trans men are actual men, not an “other” kind of men. Nonbinary people can identify under the terms “men” and “women” if they choose to, and they will still be just as valid as men and women as another individual.

The biphobia may be a little less obvious, however. Bisexuality is not defined as an attraction to cis men and cis women (saying so actually invalidates many bisexual people and aids in the invalidation of actual trans/nonbinary bisexuals), it is defined by the majority of the community as a “attraction to two or more genders or same and different genders”. The act of claiming otherwise (on a community level, not a personal definition level) is erasive and contributes to biphobia within the LGTBQ++ community.

Your argument that “bisexuals are attracted to cis men and cis women” not only invalidates trans men and trans women, and nobinary/trans bisexuals, it results in two very dangerous dynamics in the LGTBQ++ community.

Firstly, it creates tension between the bisexual and transgender/nonbinary communities. Historically, this is a fairly recent tension, as trans activists and bisexual activists often worked hand in hand during the first trans rights movement. This dynamic shreds apart two of some of the closet knit communities, and forces transgender people to identify as labels other than bisexual, else they face a wave of biphobia from their fellow transgender community. Despite this (thankfully), a large amount of transgender individuals identify as bisexual, and have begun doing what they can to end the faulty idea that bisexual is binary.

The second dynamic is constant fighting between the bisexual and pansexual community. Opinions about umbrella term usage aside, these communities have an enormous amount of overlap that requires them to work together to fight ideas of monosexism; a social system that operates on the belief that single gender attraction is the standard, and enforces this by rewarding SGA and punishing MGA. Gay/Lesbian monosexism operates in a different environment than hetero monosexism, but both cause strife towards the MGA communities.

These dynamics are reinforced daily by all members of the LGBTQ++ that continue to allow the bisexual definition of “attraction to cis men and cis women” to spread and be taken as the real definition. Until the rest of the LGBTQ++ gets on board and begins to allow bisexuals to define their community, and their individual forms of attraction, we will not be able to heal the fracturing relationships between BT and P.

miles-thebi:

If you define bisexuality as “an attraction to men and women”, then define pansexuality a “an attraction to men, women, and transgender individuals”, you are using transphobia to support a biphobic idea of bisexuality.

Simple as that.

The transphobia should be obvious; making the distinction between men, women, and transgender individuals invalidates trans men and trans women as ACTUAL men and women. It also places all transgender individuals in this “other” category. Not man, not women, no matter how they identify their gender. Trans women are actual women, not an “other” kind of woman. Trans men are actual men, not an “other” kind of men. Nonbinary people can identify under the terms “men” and “women” if they choose to, and they will still be just as valid as men and women as another individual.

The biphobia may be a little less obvious, however. Bisexuality is not defined as an attraction to cis men and cis women (saying so actually invalidates many bisexual people and aids in the invalidation of actual trans/nonbinary bisexuals), it is defined by the majority of the community as a “attraction to two or more genders or same and different genders”. The act of claiming otherwise (on a community level, not a personal definition level) is erasive and contributes to biphobia within the LGTBQ++ community.

Your argument that “bisexuals are attracted to cis men and cis women” not only invalidates trans men and trans women, and nobinary/trans bisexuals, it results in two very dangerous dynamics in the LGTBQ++ community.

Firstly, it creates tension between the bisexual and transgender/nonbinary communities. Historically, this is a fairly recent tension, as trans activists and bisexual activists often worked hand in hand during the first trans rights movement. This dynamic shreds apart two of some of the closet knit communities, and forces transgender people to identify as labels other than bisexual, else they face a wave of biphobia from their fellow transgender community. Despite this (thankfully), a large amount of transgender individuals identify as bisexual, and have begun doing what they can to end the faulty idea that bisexual is binary.

The second dynamic is constant fighting between the bisexual and pansexual community. Opinions about umbrella term usage aside, these communities have an enormous amount of overlap that requires them to work together to fight ideas of monosexism; a social system that operates on the belief that single gender attraction is the standard, and enforces this by rewarding SGA and punishing MGA. Gay/Lesbian monosexism operates in a different environment than hetero monosexism, but both cause strife towards the MGA communities.

These dynamics are reinforced daily by all members of the LGBTQ++ that continue to allow the bisexual definition of “attraction to cis men and cis women” to spread and be taken as the real definition. Until the rest of the LGBTQ++ gets on board and begins to allow bisexuals to define their community, and their individual forms of attraction, we will not be able to heal the fracturing relationships between BT and P.

When I was 12 I was told I couldn’t be bisexual because homosexuality in any form was a sin.So…

a-polite-melody:
Something that will always make me very angry is when people misdefine an…

koricomics:

A little sketch comic about how bisexuality is totally cool and good and not bad.

The format is

cliché!  I know.  But it makes it easy to talk about things I want to talk about.  Thanks for reading!

(I shouldn’t have to say this, but since a lot of people wanted to educate me on twitter: The words listed in panel seven [yes even in the parentheticals!] are just examples of how often acceptable language around gender and sexuality changes.  They are not lists of synonymous words, and many of them are now considered unacceptable.  That’s why they’re on the list. That’s what the list IS. I know.)

koricomics:

A little sketch comic about how bisexuality is totally cool and good and not bad.

The format is

cliché!  I know.  But it makes it easy to talk about things I want to talk about.  Thanks for reading!

(I shouldn’t have to say this, but since a lot of people wanted to educate me on twitter: The words listed in panel seven [yes even in the parentheticals!] are just examples of how often acceptable language around gender and sexuality changes.  They are not lists of synonymous words, and many of them are now considered unacceptable.  That’s why they’re on the list. That’s what the list IS. I know.)