#Multisexual discourse

[spoon-the-raccoon]

"We need more weird queers!" You can't handle actual queerness. The only queerness you can handle is heteronormative queerness of top and bottom same sex couples, strict binary trans people and Non-binary folks as a third gender. Don't even get me started how you can't handle anything above monogender, monosexual or monogamous. You can't handle arospec and acespec and any mixture of the two, especially aroallos. You can't handle intersex people just existing to be honest. Anything that challenges your shallow worldview of how things work is 'made up' or 'trying to win the oppression Olympics'.

You can't handle real queer people in the real queer world. If you said any of your shitty takes in real queer spaces nobody would trust you.

To you, being queer is just cishet+

[moonlightsapphic]

Reasons why someone may identify as bi lesbian (a valid identity!):

a bi woman who experiences rare attraction to men but never enough to date one.

a bi woman who was attracted to a man only once in her life, so he is like an exception.

a woman who is bisexual but monoromantic towards women, or biromantic but monosexual towards women.

a bi woman who is only attracted to non-men and occasionally fem men.

a bi woman who doesn’t date men and doesn’t intend to ever do so.

a lesbian who formerly was bisexual and now her identity has shifted, and she wants her label to reflect both.

a late-in-life lesbian who is married to a man but is comfortable staying with her husband because of their unique love/companionship.

a poly lesbian whose partner’s partners (whom they may rendezvous with) may rarely include men.

a lesbian who does not identify as “monosexual” or “monoromatic” despite only being attracted to non-men, since she feels that she is attracted to multiple non-men genders.

a lesbian in a relationship with a trans man.

a “straight” trans man who formerly identified as a masc lesbian and remains in a relationship with a lesbian.

a bi transmasc who prefers to date other transmascs as well as women.

a transfem bi woman who strongly identifies with centering her life around womanhood and wlw love.

a genderfluid lesbian.

a bisexual woman using the pre-separatism meaning of “lesbian”, back when it was an umbrella term for all sapphics.

… and many more!

*I use “woman” and “she/her” in these examples but this may apply to any genderqueer sapphics as well!

Yes, many of these experiences can be described by using one of “bi” or “lesbian”, rather than both in combination. Lesbianism includes many non-men genders and trans women! Bisexuality includes all genders including trans folks! Lesbianism is considered monosexual identity, but also in some ways multisexual, and “bi lesbian” is often used by those who strongly identify with being mspec. Labels are for our comfort in identifying ourselves and our lived experiences, as well as to accurately communicate our identities to others. We shouldn’t police them! Queer people are deviant and complex by nature! Rigid rules are for the patriarchy, not us. Labeling conventions are fully arbitrary and we should prioritise what will maximise queer folks’ happiness.

Folks spend a lot of (misplaced) energy hating on the label “bi lesbian” and want to eradicate it by claiming it is TERF propaganda—however that’s not very nuanced. There are queer elders who use this term—should we really have the audacity to tell them how to live? Ironically it’s gender essentialist in and of itself to try to put people in a box. We should remember that bisexuals and lesbians originally were all just “lesbians” (ie in the same way we use “sapphic” as an umbrella term today), and it was TERF rhetoric in second-wave feminism that resulted in lesbian separatism. A simple label used by a tiny minority can’t cause all kinds of scary lesbophobia, biphobia, and transphobia (as it is, endosex allocishetero people can barely tell bisexuality from lesbianism anyway and don’t know a thing about trans people either ;n;)—If it is a possibility, that’s our job as a community to fight back misinformation. :)

[fnafs-ex-boyfriend]

Fandom bitches be like “we love lgbtq!!” until:

- Gay ships dare to be femme for femme/masc for masc

- Someone headcanons a popular character as transgender

- Aspecs ask for basic respect in fandom spaces

- God forbid m/f ships exist (never mind the fact that they could be bi for bi or maybe even STRAIGHT? WHAT?)

[sagegreenyaps]

Asexuality and aromanticism being a spectrum make them even less queer. “What if a cishet didn’t feel romantic attraction as often as other cishets” well then I simply wouldn’t care

Do you realize how garbage it is to base What Is Queer & What Isn't off of that logic?

Many multisexual people have spectrums of attraction. Like, some are more attracted to transgender people than cisgender people, are more attracted to feminine genders than masculine genders, or have different standards of attraction for different genders.

Would you look at that, another queer spectrum?

And, while we're at it: queer has many definitions, absolutely, and one of them is "anything that goes against societal norms of gender and sexuality" (how do you be "less queer" with that as a definition, by the way?)

Also, not every culture prioritizes putting a word to every feeling, but neither to have nor to not have is a bad thing. Labels are very individualistic, and can be adopted by anybody who feels seen by them, even if they are cisgender and/or heterosexual. In fact, we need more cishet people to feel comfortable being non-conforming. Fuck "Us Versus Them."

Y'know, anon, I think you should really commit to the "simply wouldn't care" bit. I think that would do you some good. If you agree with Joanne K. Rowling that asexuals and aromantics are fake, then... go? away? 👋

Because you know what you sound like?

Hey guys, I simply do not care for bananas! I don't understand why they are a fruit when they are so gross, and to me, a fruit is tasty!

[radioactive-yuri]

btw if any cute bisexuals who are also sick of discourse wanna meet up and take a pic where we're kissing and i'm holding the pan flag and you're holding the bi flag. this is a service im willing to provide

[bimdraws]

Something that bothers me about m-spec gay/lesbian discourse is that, from where I'm standing, m-spec gays and lesbians are a very clear minority within a minority. I see arguments saying lesbian/gay identity is being erased, as if most people had any idea what any of these words meant.

Straight men going after lesbians isn't m-spec lesbians' fault, it's the fault of whoever is ignoring that you aren't into them. Placing the blame on other women/feminine-aligned/female-aligned people is really strange. I can promise you the fuckboy who is going after women who clearly aren't into him isn't on Tumblr reading this post.

Another reason against this label is "m-spec gays/lesbians can leave you for a person of the opposite sex", and I have 3 issues with that:

1. Exclusive gays/lesbians can leave you for another man/woman, too.

2. Being m-spec doesn't make you a cheater, this sounds like recycled biphobia.

3. Even if you do enter a relationship with an m-spec gay/lesbian and they do leave for someone of the other sex, how is this worse than being cheated on with someone of the same gender?

I've been with bi men and straight men who rarely go for other men, so I get how it feels when they do go after women right after me, but how is that different from any time a gay man has done the same but with another guy instead? I don't think these questions can be answered without some prejudice against m-spec people overall, but I am open to read other ideas. Please be nice! We are not enemies.

[ra1i1nbow]

it's so funny when people who know nothing about queer history try to define bisexuality. "attraction to two or more genders" do we have a gender warden that tallies up and sorts the genders now? Do you have a checklist of which non binary genders you will and won't date? Another important issue is that this definition seems to imply that non binary is a "third gender" which may be true for some nonbinary people but saying that applies to everyone defeats the whole purpose of the identity! not belonging in the binary system doesn't mean just making it into a ternary!! away with that shit!! what the hell even is a gender anyways.

Disclaimer I have nothing against labels such as omnisexual, polysexual, pansexual etc. It's YOUR sexuality, and you don't actually owe anyone an acceptable or understandable definition of it. My issue is when people try to redefine terms such as bisexual, considering the history behind gaining acceptance for multisexuality and fighting stereotypes and such. If bisexual doesn't feel right, and you don't wish to be called bisexual, that's completely valid. I just don't fw rewriting history

[midnight-fox-boy]

I made a post about labels being as useful/important as you make them and I want to branch off of that to specifically talk about the m-spec umbrella.

A lot of discourse exists over this but aside from that, I know a lot of people have struggled with not knowing exactly where they sit on that spectrum, when they have imposter syndrome with the label(s) they have chosen, dealing with being invalidated, etc. so heres some validation:

You're not inherently transphobic/enbyphobic for identifying as bisexual. Maybe it's just the term that's felt comfortable for so long and that's chill. Maybe you like it because it's a bit more vague than some other labels, maybe you use one of the lesser "known" definitions of bi even if it's a long standing one (i.e. attraction to the same gender as yourself and other genders), or maybe it's just the label you vibe with and the specific reason doesn't really matter!

Pansexuality doesn't mean you can't occasionally crave interactions (romantic/sexual/sensual) with people of specific genders! If your version of pansexuality is attraction regardless of gender, that doesn't mean that occasional drifts from your norm/usual magically means you have to change your label.

Omnisexuality isn't the exact same as pansexual and I know a lot of y'all are tired of hearing that it is. Overlap certainly exists and many people could identify as one or the other, but that's true for so many labels on different spectrums.

To my polysexuals, I too am frustrated with the constant correlation to polyamory (people think they're the same thing). I don't even identify as polysexual and I feel that pain.

You're still homo/heteroflexible even if you're dating one of your exceptions/rare cases of attraction to someone of that gender. You don't have to drop this label if it makes you happy and brings you comfort. Your sexuality is not invalidated by the person(s) you are dating.

M-spec gays/lesbians are so valid and boiling sexuality down to 100% strict AF labels is harmful. There's so many reasons one may identify as such, and regardless of your reasons, it's not any stranger's business.

Abrosexuals (who consider themselves/their label mspec) aren't confused. You're not doing anything wrong by acknowledging your sexuality is fluid and embracing that.

The multisexual umbrella is such a diverse and expensive spectrum that trying to reduce people down to one strict definition of being attracted to multiple genders is silly. Sexuality as a whole is a very complicated thing and can be experienced in so many ways. Sometimes something is just too vague for you personally, or even too specific, and that's chill. Whatever label or lackthereof makes you happy is the right choice.

[catgoesboom]

Very much a "This is a discussion exclusive to things happening INSIDE the community, so don't pull the 'but outside in the world' crap": The problem with sapphic women bastardizing the term comphet to express their struggles to accept their attraction to men is very much a reflection of how a lot of lgbt+ spaces are bi/multiphobic, not "bi girl stealing our label to feel special" (in fact sentiments like this only further the problem). Monosexuals keep expressing the idea that bisexual people (specially bisexual women) are just "het lite" and not worthy of being considered queer or be in lgbt+ spaces, or at best they're treated with contempt cause it's perceived as a "stepping stone" in a possible transition from one monosexuality to another, this ironically brings to lgbt+ spaces some of the same effects of homophobia but twisted, the idea of being attracted to the opposite gender is wrong and scary and to be fully accepted you have to be exclusivelly attracted to the same gender. Now imagine you being a sapphic with a lot of similar struggles as a lot of other sapphics. You experience misoginy and homophobia in society just like them, you feel and express attraction to women/fem people the same way they do. You built your whole community and support network around these people that you love and share your life with cause they understand the living experience of being queer and a woman in an homophobic and misoginistic world. But you know that the moment you expressed any attraction to the opposite gender, they'd either stop seeing you as part of the community, as a "faker" who still holds some "priviledge" from the heterosexual world, or have this attraction be patronized as "just a phase" until your full monosexdom to "their side". You built your whole sense of self from making part of this community and your same sex attraction. This is your safe space from a society that already tries to punish you as a person and also wants you to deny this part of your attraction, but now is a catch 22 cause this safe space also wants you to deny an aspect of your attraction, just the other way round. But the defining factor that solves this paradigm is very simple: this space welcomes you as a woman. This space treats you with respect and don't objectify or belittles you as a woman as "the other side" does and at least the same sex part of your attraction is also respected. Of course, there's still issues inside it, but the overall sentiment is that is still way better than what you have to deal with outside. Now instead of the struggles of being both queer and a woman in the world, inside this community you just have the one struggle of possibly maybe also being attracted to men. That's easy to ignore...right?

[moonlightsapphic]

— sapphic allyship handbook —

✨ Sapphics! 🗣️

Contemporary radfem (TERF/TIRF) rhetoric may permeate your 🫵 algorithm! Stop 🛑 and think 🤔 when you see 👀 content such as:

⭐️ Lesbianism is the most politically correct sexuality to combat patriarchy due to its exclusion of men. Therefore, other queer women should not “roll back their queerness” by dating men during the current climate. Who you date should not be made political, and to demand this from an individual for their participation in feminism is authoritarian conversion rhetoric. Sexual orientation (and who you love) is not a choice; it is a morally neutral natural human identity. A queer woman is not less or more queer due to her current partner, and a straight or bi woman in a relationship with a man is not automatically a lesser feminist. “Political lesbianism” during second-wave feminism ultimately invalidated lesbianism as an authentic romantic and sexual orientation, and caused devastating sapphic culture erasure.

⭐️ Lesbians and trans women are minoritised even within the LGBTQ+ community and can therefore never cause tangible harm to bisexual women and trans men respectively. This is because lesbians and trans women do not hold any power over bisexual women and trans men under cisheterosexism. This generalisation does not account for intersectional systems of oppression across race, nationality, class, disability, etc. Privilege (or lack thereof) is not quantitative and depends on context. Additionally, lateral phobias across different minoritised groups can cause harm. A lesbian can be biphobic, or participate in monosexism (a historically enduring system that causes alarmingly high levels of documented life-threatening harm to bisexuals), despite not systematically oppressing bisexuals under cisheterosexism. A trans woman can be transandrophobic/transmisandrist towards a trans man, despite not holding systematic power over trans men. Obviously, bisexuals can exhibit lesbophobia and transmascs can exhibit transmisogyny as well.

⭐️ Queer women who switch away from the lesbian label, and/or choose to date men rather than being loyal to WLW encourage lesbophobia by implying to men that lesbians can be corrected by “tradwife” culture. When formerly lesbian-identified women say they feel “healed” by discovery of their fluid sexuality or by a specific partner who happens to be a man, it actively harms lesbian visibility, validity, and safety. Victim-blaming a bi+ woman for the behaviour of bigots is known as bimisogyny. It buys into the radfem (and patriarchal) belief that men are innately subhuman monsters that only exercise restraint when when women demonstrate puritanical abstinence, rather than acknowledging men are fellow flawed humans taught to be violent under patriarchy. A woman who consensually engages in sexual and romantic relations with men is not responsible for sexual assault culture from men. That would be slut-shaming. Queer folks of any gender/sexuality are allowed to proudly find comfort in their identities and partners, as this is the goal of LGBTQ+ movement.

⭐️ Real lesbians (and who lesbians are really attracted to) are appropriately feminine, must identify as women, use she/her pronouns, and never want to be known as “boyfriends” or “husbands”; otherwise you’re just bisexual. Non-men who present masculine, don’t identify as women, or are attracted to non-feminine non-men genders “invade” lesbian spaces. This is lebophobia, butchphobia, and transandrophia. Butches, mascs, gender non-conforming women, genderqueer folks, and transmascs (including some trans men) identifying as lesbians are not only perfectly valid but also a well-documented historically important part of lesbian community.

⭐️ It is by default unfeminist for a woman to cater to the male gaze and male pleasure, because it will thwart feminism. Even fem(me) lesbians who pass as straight center the “male gaze”. This is once again misogynistic slut-shaming and victim-blaming, and leads to villification of sex work. The patriarchy depends on maintaining authority over women’s sexuality; attempting to oppose that using further suppression is just compliance to and repackaging of patriarchal purity culture. The feminist goal is women’s sexual liberation. Femininity and feminine sexuality are a complex performance done for the self, for other women (the female gaze), and also to contrast/complement/seek admiration of masculine partner (who may also be a non-man). It can be conforming or non-conforming to conventionally patriarchal standards. All of these effects are highly subjective and context-dependent. To imply fem(me) lesbians center men due to their femininity is lesbophobic and ignorant of lesbian culture. A more coherent feminist goal would be to advocate for more women to have agency over their own sexuality under the patriarchy, as actual sex workers are often the most underprivileged women.

⭐️ Formerly lesbian-identified trans men and bi women purposefully chose new identities that conform to and offer more privilege under the patriarchy. Because of their greed and/or brainwashing, exclusive lesbian community is disappearing. Bi women and trans men are hardly “privileged” in the cisheteropatriarchy, and are subject to similar phobias as lesbians since all oppression is linked. An individual’s coming out into their authentic identity is cause for celebration. Queer identity is often in flux; it is normal and healthy to reevaluate identity through multiple LGBTQ+ letters within a lifetime. No one owes their gender and sexual identity to feminism, nor do they have a choice in these identities; to dismiss an individual’s intelligence and demand otherwise is authoritarian bimisogynistic/transandrophobic conversion rhetoric. They will always be part of our community, even if they no longer identify with a certain subcategory. Lesbian community is smaller now because lesbianism by definition used to include more mspecs and genderqueers. Resources such as the “Lesbian Masterdoc” (whose very author now identifies as bi) are useful to some, but may cause others to not identify as lesbian if they face gatekeeping. Lesbian community can be grown by avoiding exclusion of those who are (or are dating) “excessively” mspec, fem, masc, or genderqueer folks.

⭐️ Cis women are biologically fragile and should be separated from everyone else in sports for their own safety and to avoid being dominated by trans women. Trans folks should have their own category. Scientifically, gender is one of the least logical ways to universally divide physical sport categories to maintain “fairness”, but the practice has held strong due to patriarchal stereotypes based on binary beliefs of biological sex (ignoring and invalidating intersex folks completely). Each sport requires a unique set of ideal physical characteristics. Cis women are statistically at least equally as capable as cis men in many sports. Currently, transfems who are allowed to play professionally in women’s sections have to pass strict physical exams that even cis women are not subjected to. Trans women statistically cannot dominate women’s sports. This line of exaggerated transphobia is dangerous as it aims to gatekeep normal human experiences from trans folks, especially trans kids.

⭐️ Gender-neutral bathrooms, and trans people in women’s bathrooms, are dangerous for cis women as this may invite predatory men. Gender-neutral bathrooms are not uncommon in global cultures, and public bathroom hypotheticals are a historical vehicle for bigotry, such as when bathrooms were segregated by race in the US. It is transphobic to misplace blame and police trans peoples’ existence for potential bigoted cis men.

⭐️ Trans sapphics are men in disguise trying to invade lesbian spaces. Trans lesbians encourage the idea that lesbians are also attracted to men. Real lesbians have a genital preference for vulvas, but trans sapphics decieve cis lesbians into dating them anyway. These are transmisogynistic and lesbophobic stereotypes. Trans women are women and are not responsible for the existence of any bigoted men. Transfems with penises are not interested in dating anyone who is not attracted to them; many lesbians also do not have a genital preference, as the definition of lesbianism includes all non-men. While having a “type” is normal, publicly announcing and imposing it with no relevant context is body-shaming, and, in this case, transphobic, regardless of your personal internalised reasons. (You would not keep repeating how you wouldn’t date a fat person and no one else should either, because that would be fatphobic.) A good way to ensure lesbian community growth is to wholeheartedly accept transbians.

⭐️ Lesbians who have never been with men or someone with a penis are more queer and superior to those who have. “Gold-star gay” rhetoric is harmful to all queer and trans folks, and misogynistically implies a woman can be tainted by a penis. This is lesbophobic and transmisogynistic purity culture.

⭐️ Cis bi women with boyfriends are invading lesbian spaces. Bisexuals should create their own communities rather than invading gay and lesbian spaces. Bi women shouldn’t bring their boyfriends to Pride. This is generally a hypothetical issue, as the vast majority of in-person lesbian events and bars depend on attendance numbers to survive, and all sapphics, often along with friends and plus ones, are welcome regardless of their labels. The most important requirement is to be polite and present good allyship. Due to the nature of bisexuality, bisexuals have historically participated in gay and lesbian spaces as well as their own, and it is monosexist to demand their exclusion from a culture they were fully involved in building. Many bisexuals are in bi4bi M/F relationships, and their queer partners belong at Pride. Bisexuals should also bring their straight partners to Pride as LGBTQ+ community is small, and we need dedicated allies to show up for our movements.

⭐️ Bi women inevitably center men because their sexuality is inclusive of men. Bi women cannot love women the way lesbians do since only lesbians have fully decentered men, and it’s valid for lesbians to find it repulsive to date bi women who have been with men. WLW relationships are not by default more queer whenever the participants are exclusively lesbian, as bi women are not “tainted” by men; that would be a bimisogynistic purity culture stereotype again. Just like lesbians, bi women also have to unlearn compulsory heterosexuality, alongside additional monosexist androcentric stereotypes. Bi WLW demonstrate unique devotion by choosing sapphic love despite having other, more convenient options under patriarchy. WLW exist regardless of any alternate attractions, not in spite of them. There are many bi and straight women who happen to have men as partners but are well-involved in women’s and queer coalition, mutual aid and activism. On the other hand, there are lesbians whose activism consists of entirely hypothetical online identity discourse centering the exclusion of men, rather than focusing on building sapphic community.

⭐️ Most bi men are secretly gay and will never be satisfied with a cis girlfriend, it’s valid for women to be repelled by a man who has dated or has attraction towards other men. This is an androcentric biphobic stereotype and another manifestation of patriarchal purity culture. Many bi men identify as gay to avoid poor treatment, so the opposite is actually true. Bi men are not “tainted” by their relations with men, nor are they less masculine simply due to their sexuality.

⭐️ Bisexuality is a stepping stone to being gay and non-binary is a stepping stone to being a binary trans individual. This is based in monosexism, and the opposite is often true—gay men and lesbians often come out as fluid, and trans men and women often come out as non-binary. The creator of the lesbian masterdoc herself now identifies as bisexual.

⭐️ Validity discourse is a redundant non-issue distracting from real LGBTQ+ rights crises. Affirming the queerness and belonging of perceived liminal LGBTQ+ identities such as the bi+, aro/ace, and non-binary spectrums is crucial to preventing well-documented and life-threatening hardships faced by these groups. This is an important part of LGBTQ+ movement.

⭐️ Lesbians are always prioritising les4les because they are biphobic. Women are harder to date than men.* Like trans folks who feel most comfortable and understood in T4T relationships, lesbians are valid for seeking out les4les. Highly marginalised groups prioritising relationships with one another is not automatically a slight against outside identities. While monosexism is a real issue within the LGBTQ+ community, there are many women open to dating any sapphics. Sapphic dating under the patriarchy may be difficult, but it is a misogynystic stereotype to proclaim women are by default “higher maintenance” than men.

⭐️ Most lesbians are biphobic, most bi+ sapphics are lesbophobic, most trans men are transmisogynistic, most trans women are transandrophobic, and so on. Just like all humans, small fractions of LGBTQ+ subcommunities are very loudly phobic on the internet, amplified by algorithms that prefer rage bait. They often unknowingly adopting divisive radfem ideology with limited knowledge of queer history. Internet exclusionists are symptoms of wider issues, but are not representative of the real life vast majority of these groups, who are incredibly kind, empathetic, and inclusive.

⭐️ Everyone is a little bit bisexual.* This generalisation can especially lead to lesbophobic stereotypes. Monosexuals do exist, and this is disrespectful to the severe challenges lesbians withstand to realise their sexuality excludes men under the patriarchy’s compulsory heterosexuality. Self-identified queer folks should be wholeheartedly believed. Expressing suspicion towards an individuals’s identity is violating.

⭐️ Bisexuality is a TERF identity because it implies the existance of binary gender, and doesn’t include trans, genderqueer and non-binary folks. You should use “pansexual” or other terms instead. Bisexuality includes all genders, as the “bi” refers to “two or more genders”. The bi+ or multisexual spectrum contains many MOGAI identities, including pan. Every queer person should choose the term that they personally feel fits best.

⭐️ Kinks do not belong at Pride because no one consented to seeing public sex acts, it is offensive to folks on the asexual spectrum, and children will also be present. Public sex is not being performed at Pride. Some queer folks wear kink-representing outfits that are no more revealing than regular outdoor summer festival wear. Puritanical respectability politics based on exaggerated sexualization is a tool to erase LGBTQ+ folks from public life, by dividing and conquering one “bad” group at a time.

⭐️ Butchfemme culture historically belongs only to lesbians. Other identities should use masc/fem. Femme4femme and butch4butch are less queer than butchfemme. Butchfemme is not by default superior to other sapphic dynamics. Historical lesbian butchfemme identity and spaces were inclusive of all sapphics (including bisexuals) before lesbian separatism. Decades before that, butchfemme originated in ballroom culture that included BIPOC men-aligned queers. Bi+ sapphics can perform lesbian butchfemme, and all other LGBTQ+ identities can also use these terms.

⭐️ “Bi/pan/mspec lesbian” is a recently-invented label for invading lesbian spaces and stoking lesbophobia by validating to men that all lesbians are attracted to them. “Bi lesbians” do not exist. They are lesbian TERFs because they believe lesbians don’t include trans women in their attraction. Or they are bisexuals with internalised biphobia as they don’t believe in bi fluidity. Lesbian identity is exclusive and can never be used by those who are mspec. “Bi sapphic” should be used instead. “Bi lesbian” is one of many valid LGBTQ+ labels that may appear complex, contradictory, or trivial. Statistically, a portion of lesbian-identifying women are mspec; bi lesbians make this part of their own identity explicit but do not intend to establish or imply that all lesbians are mspec, as it is lesbophobic to impose attraction to men on lesbians. However, it also remains bimisogynystic to hold queer women’s identities (such as “bi lesbian”) responsible for the potential bigotry from men. Before the establishment of political lesbianism (by mainly cishet white women), “lesbian”, was a universal umbrella term for all sapphics rather than an exclusive label. It functioned similarly to the word “gay”, which can refer to an exclusively gay man, but can be used by anyone. “Bi lesbian” is a historically significant identity that emerged as resistance to the destructive effects of separatism on lesbian community. Prominent activists identified explicitly as bisexual lesbian to take pride in their bisexuality when purity culture-based bimisogynistic monosexism was rife in the community. There are many valid reasons one may identify as a bi lesbian today, including limited non-actionable attraction to men, affirming trans/genderqueer identity (of the self and/or partner), or intimate connection to lesbian sexuality, gender, community, history, movement and lifestyle. While most contemporary bi+ sapphics choose to no longer identify as lesbians, they are not obligated to surrender lesbian terminology to radfem ideology; mspec sapphics have a right to lay claim to lesbian culture and identity, which they have equally partaken in for all history.

⭐️ Second-wave radical feminism isn’t bad because it actually did include BIPOC. Second-wave feminism was a complex, white-dominated movement that ultimately died due to its divisive and exclusionary ideology. There were many oft-erased marginalized BIPOC second-wave feminist voices, including queer Black women who favored intersectionality/inclusion and wrote excellent texts about it; for example, Bell Hooks critiqued the pervasive harmful rhetoric within the movement.

⭐️ LGBTQ+ identities are meant to be exclusive, with orderly definitions that are essential for meaningfully gaining relevant rights for each subcommunity. We reserve the right to correct or ignore people who misuse labels. Preserving lesbian spaces for monosexual lesbians only will achieve the eradication lesbophobia under patriarchy. LGBTQ+ identities have historically been based in complex shared experiences by multifacted individuals. For example, historical lesbian spaces were comprised of bi+ women, genderqueer and non binary folks, trans women, and trans men alongside exclusive cis lesbians. Imposing a queer person with labels they do not identify with is violating. Labels (and identities) are not definitive categories, and are meant for individual comfort and communication with no assigned “right” and “wrong” usage. The only “misuse” would be by a bigot specifically using a label to harm the subgroup, which is an arbitrary hypothetical. Safe spaces for minoritized groups with similar experiences, backgrounds and identities are important for recuperation and rehabilitation, but overall separatism is to the detriment to LGBTQ+ survival. The community at large is minoritised, and subgroups alone do not have a loud enough voice or visibility within the patriarchy. Historically, surviving queer spaces have welcomed all to even label-specific events.

Queerness is in opposition to patriarchy, which limits individuals in divisive assigned roles and separated classes. Queerness, by definition, is messy, complicated, and a celebration of unique individual agency. Movement cannot be sustainably achieved without intersectional inclusion and coalition—alongside those you do not relate to, and even those you may not agree with on all politics. This may require you to step out of your comfort zone, but that’s okay!

*not necessarily radfem rhetoric but still important!

Questions? Please read my sources! :)

🩷❤️🧡💛💚🩵💙💜

Disclaimer: I am a cis demisexual, bisexual femme WLW of colour. Colonialism has erased historical sapphic cultures in many countries, including my own. As the US has established cultural dominance, my understanding is based off western texts and studies. LGBTQ+ experiences are diverse, but we also reproduce patterns of existence and resistance globally, even without historical context. Unfortunately, this includes our mistakes, like succumbing to divisive rhetoric. Thanks for reading and kind suggestions & corrections are appreciated! :)

[garaks-padded-bra]

i want you to know that this isnt coming from a place of shipping garak/ziyal like you seem to think. not being interested in one young lady doesn't mean he can't possibly be bi/pan/multisexual of some kind. and your response to all this has been really alarming and thoughtless headcanon what you like, cuz yeah a lot of this is based on beta canon + word of god, but you don't gotta be a dick to people who consider him multisexual. it comes across as biphobic, even if that isn't your intention. this whole thing isn't just you, there a lots of other people who INSIST garak MUST be gay and couldn't possibly be multisexual and it's really hurtful to bi people like me. so you've hit a nerve with people (i didnt even know this was in response to you at first, because this keeps happening btw) "being bi isn't more progressive than being gay" okay that you see this situation and come away with that says more about you. most people don't consider characters bi for progressive-ism or out of homophobia, you're putting words in our mouths and im geniuinely angry at you now. the proper response to all this is not to mock people, it's dismissive and mean spirited

I don't think garak is gay because he's not into ziyal? I straight up didn't say that. That's not why I think he's gay.

If you're bisexual and upset when a character without a defined sexuality is interpreted differently please remember that it is not personal because he ISNT bisexual. Or gay!! It is never touched on in the show!

Regarding the "progressive" comment,I was referring to anons from last night, not you. No one was mocked. I'm not insisting on anything or arguing with anyone's headcanons. I just have my own! I appreciate everyone's views. All I did was share a different opinion. You see yourself in Garak as a bi person, and I see myself in him as a gay person. Isn’t it cool we can both connect with the fictional lizard in a pushup bra? It is not serious.

I never meant to be dismissive or mean-spirited. I genuinely didn’t realize how deeply people cared about this. I’m not as involved in online fandom as most assume.

And jokingly disagreeing with Andrew J. Robinson doesn’t mean I’m disrespecting him.

I literally hc almost everyone in ds9 as bi. If I get any more silly discourse in my inbox I will be closing it.

[opossumanon]

K I'm doing the poll, let's see if anyone is gonna get hit by Apollo's dodgeball of prophecy:

(The stuff in parentheses is just my guess on what the dumb discourse would look like I'm not actually calling people names or throwing out accusations)

*This is referring to trans people who aren't binary trans but don't use the nonbinary label either, so it'd be people who are genderfluid, agender, bigender, etc.

**Mspec refers to the multisexual spectrum, or any identity where there's attraction to more than one gender. It's famously used for bi gays and bi lesbians

[what-even-is-thiss]

“i don’t like this discourse” explain how your post WASNT claiming that dykes and fags are bullies lmaooo. u literally started the discourse

If you aren’t among the members of the queer community that try to kick out aro/aces and multisexuals then no part of that post was about you. Plain and simple.

Also I am a fag. Some don’t see me that way because I’m also asexual but I’m still gay nonetheless. If you see an asexual person talking about their shared experience they have with bi people of being rejected by the gay community sometimes and automatically assume that means they think all gay people are bullies, you’ve made a leap in logic. A bit of criticism isn’t the same thing as making a wide claim about every gay person on earth.

You appear to just be looking for fights and I will not indulge you any further after this.

[genicpunk]

"this preformer is multisexual, and does not want to be involved in discourse surrounding multispectrum (mspec)" Userbox

[aretheybisexual]

how do you feel about people saying "I don't think they are bi I think they are pan" or any other multisexual identity?

Each to their own opinion, as long as everyone is being respectful when discussing things and our notifications are not filled with negative discourse.

~Mod Sunflower

[aro-ace-chaos]

People who say that asexuality isn't a spectrum, or that asexual shouldn't be the name of the spectrum because "a- means without" lack a fundamental grasp of what "without" means.

The word "without" is not the same as "completely, 100% without, there's absolutely none at all. Completely, entirely absent", and to imply it does (I think mostly unintentionally) feeds into the idea that asexuals (and in the same way, aromantics) are lacking something that is fundamentally human. Saying "I happen to not have that/ not much of that" is very different from saying "I lack that." We aren't lacking, we just happen to not have (or not have much of) ___ attraction.

You can be without something to an extent.

Maybe a completely unrelated physical example would help. I don't have freckles. As, in, I don't have a plethora of small, roundish brown spots on my skin numbering in the hundreds, in the way that people typically refer to as meaning someone has freckles as a trait, like in the image below.

However, I do have a very few amount of birthmarks/freckles on my arms. Does that mean I'm wrong in saying I don't have freckles, because I have maybe a dozen of them on my entire body? No, of course not!

A person "having freckles" as in the description of their appearance, typically refers to having, like, hundreds of freckles to the point that they are noticeable. The person in the photo below, I would not call freckled, even though technically, there are a few freckles on their skin. They are primarily without freckles.

Now, someone who literally has no birthmarks or freckles on their skin is completely without freckles, but it's still equally accurate to say the image above is a person who isn't really freckled.

Would you insist that the person in the second image is freckled, just like the person in the first image? I would certainly hope not.

Similarly, someone who barely ever experiences sexual attraction, or only does under highly specific conditions, etc, is not allosexual. They aren't even close to it. Acespec IS the umbrella term. Asexual is both the umbrella term and the identity at the far end of the spectrum that experiences absolutely 0 sexual attraction. If you really want a specific label for that far end of the spectrum that experiences absolutely 0 sexual attraction, it exists! Black stripe ace! Now, as with everything, there's always discourse, but as long as you aren't saying black stripe aces are the ONLY real aces, it's not exclusionary, it's just getting specific. Like, just be nice.

The same way identifying as bisexual vs. pansexual vs. multisexual vs. polysexual, etc is getting into more specific identities on the m-spec.

I think overall, it's more helpful and accurate to take the "without" definition of "a-" to mean "not having much of or any."

Asexuality is a spectrum.

(And, btw, ALL of this applies to the other a-specs)

(Not to mention that, although that's the meaning in isolation, prefixes and suffixes do slightly change in certain contexts. -phobia in terms of, say, arachniphobia primarily means fear, but in terms of homophobia, it primarily means hatred. In the end, language is fluid and evolves and is supposed to serve us, not the other way around. It is harmful to limit yourself to the exact definition of the way the word is structured, rather than what it has come to mean.)