#a lot of them are gay and think they can’t be biphobic bc they aren’t saying they hate bi ppl

[chirpsythismorning]

Saying gay Mike would be hated by the ga bc that would mean that he used El all those years, is homophobic, just like saying bi-Mike would be hated by the ga bc that would mean he could have just stayed with El if he is also attracted to girls, is biphobic.

Bylers using either of these as the basis for why their interpretation is most likely to play out in canon, just makes me cringe bc why are we even wasting time giving validation to homophobia/biphobia as having the last word for how the show has to play out?? Is that what it all comes down to then? Appeasing bigots??

Gays aren’t evil or trying to intentionally hurt others, least of all gay kids that are figuring out their sexuality. Let’s not act like being gay wasn’t seen as being broken or needing to to be fixed, meaning that going along with what society views as normal, was and still is seen as the only option for queer people in general. And I say queer people in general bc you don’t necessarily have to even be gay to experience questioning your sexuality and feeling like you have to do things because everyone else is. Arguably we all go through that! But especially gays in the 80’s bc for a lot of people back then, it was a matter of blending in to survive (for many it still is).

Bisexuals aren’t evil or trying to intentionally hurt others for falling out of love, losing feelings, or just merely not being attracted to/compatible with someone of the opposite sex. Straight people are capable of recognizing that they aren’t attracted to or compatible with every person they meet of the opposite sex. Does any of that make them less straight? No. So why is it so hard to understand it’s the same way for bisexuals and even queer people in general? Nobody, bisexual or otherwise should have to stay in relationships with someone they no longer have romantic feelings for, just bc they’re attracted to them or even were just confused and thought they were but it ended up not being enough?? Attraction is important, yes, but feelings are arguably even more so (especially when you have something else to compare it to, causing the dilemma in the first place). I mean look at Stancy/Jancy? Is Nancy viewed as problematic for being attracted to Steve and having deep feelings/being attracted to Jonathan, and having conflicting feelings about that? No! And so why should it be problematic for Mike?

The reality is, homophobes are going to hate Mike if he comes out as queer, regardless of whether he is revealed to be gay, bi or unlabeled.

This is why basing Mike’s sexuality on the backlash of bigoted audiences’ is a moot point to me.

I mean, as it is, most of the general audience already hates Mike as a result of his behavior in s3-4, and this is straight Mike we’re talking about! I’m obviously not referring to milkvans or Redditors, bc they only make up a minority of hardcore fans who hate byler and will defend Mike to the point of demonizing El. I’m talking about viewers that have seen the show once through each time a new season releases and then move on afterwards without being in online spaces. That is the majority. The majority of the general audience, homophobic or otherwise, does not like Mike anyways at this point. So, who the hell cares what they think about queer Mike in the end??? They’re already anticipating going into s5 and continuing to dislike him, so the argument that the show can’t do this or that bc those same people won’t like him?… That ship has already sailed.

If anything I could see the non-homophobic majority accepting queer Mike, regardless of what label he ends up identifying with, bc then at least it will finally give them some clarity about where that resentment they had for him was coming from, ie misunderstanding him completely and now finally getting some answers.

At the end of the day, bigots will do what they do best. They’ll make up any reason they can think of for why queer Mike is wrong. And so why should we base our interpretation of things on what will be more palatable to those that the show was never intended for in the first place?

[mathsbian]

The fact you think you're gay is proof you have no idea what being gay is. Actual gays don't worry about not being perceived as gay while proudly together with their partner bc they're too worried about actual homophobia. Stick to your fucking lane

This is about the comment I made on that comic strip that was wishing oppression on straight people, isn’t it? From like 6 months ago?

Now that were on the same page: I don’t care about being perceived as gay. I care about assholes preaching that we should accept people for who they are (gay or straight or something else entirely) and to not judge people based on stereotypes, meanwhile they’re stereotyping every straight-passing couple as DEFINITELY straight. I don’t give a single fuck if an actual bigot can tell if I’m gay or not. Most of them can’t. What I care about is people who are supposed to be in community together, changing things for the better, are actually just trying to flip the script so they can be the oppressing class. I hate it when TERFs/radfems do it to men, I hate it when cis gays do it to mspec people and trans gays. We aren’t trying to flip oppression, we’re trying to fucking end it.

And on the subject of me clearly not being gay actually, because you think I care about the wrong thing: you literally don’t know me. You know my tumblr account. Just ‘cause I didn’t post pictures of me with my girlfriends doesn’t mean they didn’t exist. Just because I make a big post about something doesn’t mean that thing is the most important thing to me. I’m fucking autistic, I ramble about stuff when I have any level of knowledge or opinion. I could watch one 10-minute YouTube video on a topic and ramble about it when the topic comes up again 3 years later. Just cause I added a sizable paragraph calling out what was basically the equivalent of “I better not see and straight couples at pride” imo doesn’t mean that’s the only thing I care about in regards to my identity. As an arospec, acespec, nonbinary, multi-gender-attracted person I’ve dealt with a lot of shit from cis allo gays and I’m not afraid to point it out. You think I don’t know what homophobia actually looks like, meanwhile you’re over here actually being homophobic. Or biphobic. Or something. Tastes like homophobia the way you said it though.

And I could go on a giant tangent about my romantic and sexual history. I could tell you about the 7 year struggle between my first gay crush to actually identifying as lesbian. The ways my sexuality got complicated by internalized homophobia and sexphobia. The ways it got muddied by first a partner’s gender and then my own. The summer during college that my first ever girlfriend spent terrified my parents would find out about us and send me to a conversion camp despite me being an adult (they are very conservative, very fundamentalist Christian, very politically homophobic, very socially homophobic, and very, VERY manipulative, so my then-girlfriend was correct to be concerned they could get me to go if they discovered us and reacted badly enough). But you don’t actually care. You feel comfortable attacking me because I’m a faceless stranger on the internet so it’s easy for you to forget that I’m a real person with just as many hopes and dreams and fears and memories as you. Since I don’t openly discuss my personal life in great detail, you can pretend that I must never have experienced truly malicious homophobia, because there’s no evidence of that on my blog before now. Just because I can identify more subtle bigotry doesn’t mean I haven’t experienced the worst bigotry has to offer.

[dilf-phoenix-rights]

Seeing someone with their whole chest say “Omg yes! No one talks about how girls fake being gay for male attention!” as if that’s not what wlw (especially bi women) fucking hear all the time when they come out. Your LGBT “activism” is just biphobia please just shut the fuck up.

[criticalrolo]

hey like. just to clarify. that recent post you shared abt misusing the term lesbian is referring to people who genuinely don't ID as lesbian throwing around the term, right? not referring to bi lesbians and similar identities? bc those identities are important to bipoc and, while that's not necessarily common knowledge at this point, it's important for white lesbians to keep that in mind! so i hope i just misunderstood. i love your blog and i hope you're havin a good night ey

ok it’s really late and I’m about to go to bed, so here’s just my brief thoughts: the problem with “bi lesbians” as a term is that they’re sort of mutually exclusive. lesbians don’t experience attraction towards men. bisexual people can experience attraction towards men. neither of these identities is like “better” or “more Actually Gay” than the other! both are full members of the lgbt community and have way more commonalities than they do differences. the problem with terms like “bisexual lesbian” is that it does fundamentally alter the definition of “lesbian” in a way that feeds into a lot of common lesbophobic beliefs - that lesbians can’t really Not be attracted to men at all, that there must be Exceptions to that, that maybe they just haven’t met the right man yet. It waters down the identity in a way that can be harmful to lesbians — like, it can lend credence to the idea that a lesbian Could Be Attracted To A Man so maybe a man should just try harder to get with her.

It’s also biphobic in that it implies bisexuality isn’t a full identity in and of itself, and that the spectrum of identities bisexual people are attracted to isn’t something to be celebrated and supported. There isn’t a “scale” of you Must Be This Gay To Qualify... bisexual people are bi regardless of who they’re attracted to. It’s not like the wlw gay scale goes “Bisexual... Bi Lesbian... Lesbian.” Wlw are all attracted to women that’s just. How it goes. Bisexual people aren’t less valid or whatever for also being attracted to men. Bi women with a preference for women are fantastic and real etc. and that doesn’t change their identity as a bisexual woman.

The other issue is that bi lesbian has been sort of a dog whistle term that terfs use to describe lesbians that consider trans women to be women. There’s a bunch of examples on twitter and tumblr of terfs defining Bi Lesbian as a lesbian who only CALLS herself a lesbian, but because she thinks that trans women are women and she would be attracted to them, they’re not REALLY lesbians and are actually attracted to “men.” So that’s why it gets a little dicey in my opinion. I’m not really aware of how this intersects with specifically the BIPOC experience, so if anyone wants to discuss that further my inbox is open tonight.

Anyway, this is very rambly and I’m going to bed/probably not gonna talk about this much more. Bisexual women are valid, bisexual women with a preference for women are valid, and lesbians are valid. The definitions of the terms are mutually exclusive and that’s not a bad thing, and conflating the two does more harm to a bunch of different groups than good. That’s where i stand on it right now, anyway. Hope you’re doing well and have a good night too :)

[thedreadvampy]

You seem surprised at the reactions your getting, but it's to be expected. Aphobia is usually quiet, insidious and slow to reveal itself, so the moment someone is asked about aspecs and the answer isn't a concise "Yes I accept and support them" type thing, it's a red flag. Why would anyone who wasn't aphobic not feel comfortable saying they support aspecs? it's not uncommon for a blog we admire to turn out to be aphobic and we're pretty antsy about this stuff because it's usually brushed off.

Ok I mean I'm getting to that eventually in the Question List but like. With the best possible will in the world I think some of you have misread the post where someone asked "do you support aspecs," because to my recollection what I said was that I am fundamentally uncomfortable with the idea that I'm in any position to judge whether I support or harm anyone, and I think that the point at which someone says as a point of identity 'I Am An Ally To X Group' or 'I Support X Group' that. makes them substantially less likely to recognise or accept the ways in which they fail.

Also like. I absolutely understand the antsiness. I do. People can be really shitty to and about aspec people. But what I've said before and will say again is that you have to understand that while it's totally understandable that that would put you on edge, it's not inherent proof of ill-intent.

Ok. Here's the thing. I'm thinking of my own experience here. There is a subset of men who really give me The Fear. It's often hard to define why they give me The Fear, but I can identify some signs - they're probably really into video games, they have a specific way of getting into my personal space and a specific way of talking and type of intonation. they talk a lot about how much they like that they can trust me and talk to me like one of the guys. and the vast majority of the time, when I've ignored The Fear I have got hurt. it's entirely reasonable for me to be suspicious of those people based on my experiences, to pull back from them, and to listen out for reports that they have a history of abuse. If somebody says, "you're not like other girls I really feel like I can talk to you" I'm probably going to get up and walk away, or try and get it of the conversation, or try and get out ahead of the way I expect the conversation to go so that he can't lead the conversation.

But it wouldn't be reasonable if, the moment I heard someone say "you're not like the other girls, I really feel like I can talk to you," I grabbed him by the collar and yelled YOU MISOGYNIST DICKHEAD I NEED YOU TO PROVE RIGHT HERE AND NOW THAT YOU'VE NEVER ASSAULTED ANYONE. PROVE IT NOW. HE CAN'T PROVE IT GUYS HE DID IT. THIS MAN ASSAULTS WOMEN. HE SAID THE BAD WORDS.

People have different experiences and different associations with phrases. I very rarely answer a question about my beliefs with a simple yes or no because I don't trust certainty, particularly within myself, I find myself really anxious that we mean different things and that if I'm not specific enough then I'll be lying. So I very rarely say yes or no without explaining what I mean by yes or no.

And also. Just for the record, since apparently there's no means of avoiding pissing people off today. Aphobia can be a serious, genuine problem and also an area where not everyone agrees. I'm not talking about my own opinions here, I'm talking about how many different opinions have come up from ace/aro people just in this conversation. And I think it's really weird how often queer discourse conflates disagreement with minimisation. Like ok we can all, within the bi community, pretty much agreed that biphobia is, to a greater or lesser degree, a problem, and that bisexuality is stigmatised and comes with particular challenges. But that doesn't mean that when two bi people disagree on whether X trope is biphobic, one of them is The Biphobe and one is The Oppressed. like. oppression and social dynamics aren't clean, they're fuzzy-edged, overlapping and interweaving, highly subjective and highly personal but also totally depersonalised, and everybody is going to draw those lines differently. And it's wild to act like treating it as anything but a simple yes/no question is inherently bigoted because nothing is a simple yes/no question. That's not really how any social question works. We're all bringing our own stuff to the table, we're all trying to communicate concepts that we don't have the verbal or emotional language for, and when somebody says "are you against aphobia" like, that contains a lot of questions, primarily "what does that mean?"

like am I against dehumanisation of and aggression towards of ace/aro people? am I against systemic assumptions and incentives and expectations that everyone wants/needs sex/romance/a life partner? do I think it's fucked up the degree to which sex and romance are centred in culture to the degree that people are told and made to feel explicitly broken if they don't feel a draw to it? yeah, obviously, no shit. but I don't feel comfortable saying unilaterally 'are you for or against X,' when X has no clearly boundaried definition and isn't something most people would in good faith say FUCK YEAH I LOVE X. like if you ask any person 'are you against homophobia,' most of them would probably say 'yes,' and some of them would mean 'I think it's unfair and cruel to treat queer and same-gender attracted people differently because of their sexuality, and I will go to the wall to defend them and to fight heteronormativity' and some of them mean 'I don't hate the sinner I hate the sin and they can be gay as long as they do it far away from me and also never have sex or relationships' and like. What does the answer yes actually tell you in that instance? Like if I wanted to know if someone held bigoted beliefs, I wouldn't go up to them and say 'do you hate X' bc like. They're gonna say no. They may very well believe that they don't. If you actually wanted to guage their responses, it would make more sense to ask "what do you think of X issue" or "do you think Y idea is homophobic" bc like. bigotry is a pattern not a clear line in the sand. God this is just pure waffle now, sorry.

[gettin-bi-bi-bi]

Hi, i hope this is okay to ask, but you said a while ago that bisexuals can’t just opt out of being queer by choosing the “straight side”, and that thinking that’s the case is biphobic. I *feel* like you are right, but if I, a bisexual woman, chooses to only seek and date men because it would be far less complicated than dating a woman and being worried about what would people think, and I have a preference for men anyway, and i’m low-key happy to be bi because I can choose to do that, is it wrong?

Yes, I do have internalised biphobia maybe, but what is an objective fact is that I would feel far more comfortable dating a man than dating a woman for the aforementioned reasons, and i’m afraid women will feel like “second best” if they are with me, or that i’d have mental breakdowns with them bc i’m clearly not straight if im dating a woman. No one deserves that, so maybe it would be better if I never date a woman in my life and just live like im straight.

You can choose to date (or not) whoever you want for whatever reason. That’s your prerogative and you’re not doing anything wrong if that choice makes you happy or there is no other option for you. You gotta do what is best for your mental and physical health. 

There’s many bi women who choose to only date men because anything else would not be possible or save in their living situation, because coming out could be dangerous for them for example. But regardless: they are still 100% bisexual. They aren’t “living straight”. They are bisexuals in the closet. Choosing to only date men (either by their own volition or bc outside factors force them to make that choice) does not turn anyone straight. If you make that choice you will never experience your life through the eyes of a heterosexual because you are not a heterosexual. You will still be bi and your bisexuality and queerness (and closetedness if you stay in there) will influence your opinions, decisions, feelings, experiences.... that’s what I mean with you can’t “opt out of queerness”. There’s no switch you can turn off, no matter what dating-choices you make. You say “ bc i’m clearly not straight if im dating a woman”... well, when you’re dating a man you’re also not straight. Maybe you can make the rest of the world believe that but you can’t fool yourself into “being straight” without it having some repercussions on your mental health in the long-run. This is one of the reasons why bisexuals suffer higher rates of depression and anxiety disorders than straight people and gay people btw.

And it’s biphobic to claim that bisexuals can “opt out” because that takes away our queer identity as soon as we are in a m/f relationship. That mindset operates under the assumption that bisexuals are only queer when they are in a same-gender relationship. And that’s text book biphobia!

I get where you are coming from but I think that a lot of what you say, especially in the second paragraph, is a direct result of internalised bi-/queerphobia, and you already mentioned that yourself. However, you speak from a place that makes it sound like you don’t believe you could ever work through that internalised biphobia, to which I’d say that you can definitely get better and learn to accept yourself. It takes time and patience and kindness with yourself. But it doesn’t always have to be like that. You say you think you’ll have a mental breakdown when dating a woman and I assume that’s because you can’t handle the prospect of coming out? I don’t know your circumstances but it’s possible that this can change when you work towards more self-acceptance.

Maddie

[femmedionysus]

okay so this is broadly applicable to real life stuff as well as media stuff, this post is mostly gonna be about the magnus archives fandom because well. 1) i’ve hyperfixated on it pretty hard, 2) i do like it a lot actually and have met some really cool friends & mutuals through it, and 3) i have seen some pretty wild stuff in this fandom lately. this is not vaguing at anyone in particular, cause it’s about a few things, but mostly it boils down to:

if you are not [a marginalized identity], and someone else is, they are the expert in that specific area, and you are not. that doesn’t mean that they’re 100% right about everything all the time forever! it means that you can’t, don’t, and will never have the experience or authority to correct them about their own lived experiences.

like, okay. i’m bisexual. there is plenty of biphobic content in this fandom (and in like, the world at large) that makes me rage like

tim stoker being relegated to “the slutty bisexual” and people extrapolating that to portray him in fan content as having no sexual boundaries

-georgie barker? who’s that? never heard of her

-jon sims being only referred to as ace representation when he’s canonically bi and ace and both things are important for fucks sake

and i have strong opinions on a lot of it!

there are other bisexual people in the fandom that might have very different, equally strong opinions! and we might never agree on some things! because any community or identity group is still made up of people, who are gonna have different opinions and disagree and that’s just how people are.

that still wouldn’t make it appropriate for someone who’s not bi to jump into a conversation between bi people about what is or isn’t biphobic. again, if you don’t have the knowledge that comes from lived experience, don’t talk over people who do.

however: i’m trans. specifically, i’m nonbinary, but transmisogyny-exempt. if i see another tme person creating fan content that i think is transmisogynistic, it would be fine (and good!) for me to tell them it’s transmisogynistic! bc i want to make sure that spaces i’m in, online and irl, are safe for trans women.

on the other hand, if i see a trans woman or transfem nonbinary person creating fan content that i think is transmisogynistic, it would be pretty wildly inappropriate for me to rock up & say “hey i think you’re representing your own identity wrong.” my intentions could still be good! but bc they have way more knowledge and lived experience dealing with transmisogyny than i ever will, it’s absolutely not my place to debate them on that!

which is not to say that you HAVE to agree with someone just bc they’re the expert in that area. there’s a pretty popular tma fan-headcanon i’ve seen around that like...idk i just do not vibe with it. it rubs me the wrong way and i find it really annoying. and a large percentage of the people who i’ve seen creating fan content for that particular thing? are transmasc mlm, creating content about a specific character being a gay trans man. i still hate this thing! it gets on my nerves! so i say yikes, block stuff so i don’t encounter it, and move on with my life.

i’ve also seen other transmasc mlm criticizing this same thing, and ykw? they have every right to! but that’s a debate that i don’t really have the range to participate in.

again, i think the intention behind a lot of these things is good-hearted! it’s good to keep an eye on the people in your spaces, online and irl, and call out bigoted stuff when you see it! it’s also good to recognize when you really don’t have the range to call someone out on something that makes you uncomfortable.

not that you aren’t allowed to be uncomfortable with it. just that sometimes, it’s not your call to make how someone of a marginalized identity that you don’t share makes jokes or content about that identity.

(e.g., if you’re not a butch or femme (or a wlw at all) and you see someone (who is also not a wlw) making uncomfortable comments about why they think daisy tonner is butch? absolutely appropriate to confront them about it!

if you’re bi and you see someone who isn’t making content in which jon is actually just gay & not bi? get their ass

if you’re not a mlm and you see someone (who is a mlm) making jokes calling elias bouchard a twink in a derogatory manner? not so appropriate to call them out on it.)

and like, of course there’s going to be some overlap in this stuff, because humans are complicated and identities share some overlap in some issues. but y’all, for your own mental health as well as everyone else’s:

if it’s a conversation that doesn’t apply to you, and isn’t materially harming someone*, please learn how to say yikes and move on.

*if it’s materially harmful to others it’s different. do not come on this post talking about how writing rape porn is your coping mechanism, you’re not affiliated with me, get therapy.

[websthetics]

I was feeling like trash yesterday and wanted to watch a garbage tv show so I ended up watching love is blind, a reality tv show abt ppl falling in love without seeing each other, and I cannot stop thinking about it

for all that this show is extremely heterosexual (there’s a “girls side” and a “boys side” and they date each other by going into pods and talking to each) it’s actually also incredibly gay?? Hear me out. It’s about people talking to each other, forming relationships on personality instead of sexual attraction. A lot of contemporary “straightness” comes with compulsory physical attraction (allonormativity) and this attempts to circumnavigate that to build a relationship in a different way (i.e. the way a demisexual/ace person would)

but also every time they call it an experiment i have to laugh. where is your control group? where’s your background research on this? lmfao there’s one guy who’s a “scientist” and he’s like “i have to see this experiment out”. at best this is a “case study” but let’s be fucking real it’s reality tv and the drama! is! manufactured!

but also when it comes to queer rep there is one guy who is bisexual (but is only named as such by his partner on the show #yikes) and like as much as I want my man carlton to find love, that relationship ends up falling apart but at least one gets to see a relationship ruined by internalized biphobia? #representation idk it’s not a great scene... like it’s obviously manufactured! drama! but they have him be misogynistic to his partner bc he’s afraid of her rejecting him for being bi and she’s like “i just wish you had been honest. you misled me blah blah blah” and like? is both biphobic but also i can see her point??? also the whole time the ways they’re mistreating each other feel like black stereotypes?? not a good look @ love is blind

(hoo boy i also binge watched next in fashion which is Great except there is one episode where I was definitely like... this is manufactured drama... and it’s also at the expense of black folks so like #yikes)

(this is television this is scripted You Can’t Fool ME)

But back to this show in general. Also there’s two women who choose not to have sex once they meet their partners irl and they’re never shamed for their choice. one of them is also like “I’m in love with you but not sexually attracted to you.” (my words, not hers) and it’s like idk.. validating. To see people have a diversity of reactions revolving around attraction and love

additionally it’s also like “oh! we’re not falling in love based on physical appearance!” but every one of these individuals is smokin’ hot and i have to laugh (also I am very very bisexual so it’s also delicious eye candy *drools*. (I’m also asexual?? IDK THIS IS FINE WHAT IS SEXUALITY EVEN)) (but I guess it’s bc they can’t have somebody meeting their person and being like “lol actually you’re ugly I can’t love you” bc that would SUCK. i guess that also means no disabled folks. it’s just like. you’re creating this show around a premise that is... not actually real for the situation you’ve manufactured.) (also it’s tv so it must needs have beautiful people *sighs*)

all in all i think it’s a very ace friendly show & I would hazard an aro friendly show for those who aren’t romo repulsed bc it’s not *forced relationships* (aka “where the fuck did that come from?”) but natural connections

Also I desperately want a spin off of this that’s just queer as fuck. like. Only bisexuals/pansexuals/polysexuals etc. There’s trans people and genderqueer people. Idk how to get around the “gendered sides” thing BUT FIGURE IT OUT PEOPLE I WANT A QUEER DATING REALITY TV SHOW (also. imagine. open polyamory???) (also they wouldn’t have to manufacture any drama bc that’s already the way queer ppl treat each other #yolo #yikes don’t hate me I’M RIGHT)

oh yeah that’s the other “queer thing” is that there’s a point where after they’re partnered the couples are hanging out and someone points out “yeah, we all dated each other” and THAT’s QUEER CULTURE BAYBEEE

also i can’t believe this show is being released weekly. This is netflix. don’t be cowards. upload the whole thing and let me bingewatch it. none of this “next week on *this show*” pphhhhhhbbtttttt. who do you think I am? a normal person who can normally be invested in a show on a weekly basis? I watched it. I intend to be obsessed about it for two days and then entirely forget about it. #adhdlyfe

also I must admit that I said when talking abt this to a friend... “I’m like the opposite of a romance repulsed aro...I’m a romance attracted aro.” and that is the most Leo Venus thing I’ve ever said in my life

[oysters-aint-for-me]

this might not make sense but i think the big issue with the whole, like, “i headcanon this character as bi” vs. “i headcanon this character as a lesbian” argument is that sometimes, someone saying “i headcanon this character as bi” might actually be saying it with the implication of “because if you’ve had sex w/ a man, it means you can’t be a lesbian.” 

OR someone who says “i headcanon this character as a lesbian” could be one of those people who believes that bisexuals don’t exist.

however, while some ppl on here are actually, like, biphobic or lesbophobic or whatever, a lot of ppl are really just saying “hey i see this character’s story in this certain way” and truly don’t intend to shut down other sexualities or dismiss them. 

the problem is that when you try to determine a character’s sexuality, it can turn into scorekeeping. like ppl will take characters to Sexuality Court and put them on trial and up evidence. which can feel icky, bc you might worry, “well what if these people also do this same kind of evidence-gathering to real people?” like, if you can use evidence to headcanon a fictional character as a certain sexuality, then it could seem like the next logical conclusion is headcanoning a real person as a certain sexuality. which of course isn’t what you should do to a real person; everyone gets to define their own sexuality. 

BUT THE THING IS: most of the characters that get headcanoned as gay/bi/lesbian/etc. don’t get to self-identify. they’re fictional (duh), and they are very often being written by straight ppl who Don’t Get It. that’s why these characters have to be headcanoned as a certain sexuality in the first place—the character hasn’t identified with anything in canon. and there’s always been so few gay characters in media that gay ppl have had to look for clues to find characters they can identify with in that way. 

anyway, i don’t think there’s a good answer to all this...i just think if u see someone saying they hc a character as a lesbian vs. bi, i understand the worry that comes from hearing that, but maybe don’t automatically assume the worst. or, okay, you can automatically assume the worst at first, but maybe give it a bit of thought before you go on the defensive. idk. chances are they didn’t mean to shut down a whole sexuality by talking about their headcanons. they might have! and i fully understand the fear surrounding that. but i think most of the time ppl on here aren’t doing that. and idk...maybe we should stop demanding so much that others provide like, folders of evidence as to why they believe a character is a certain sexuality, bc while i can understand where the impulse comes from, sometimes it’s just a little too reminiscent of what straight ppl ask us to do in everyday life?? or maybe that’s just me idk...

idk???? these are just late night ramblings lol, just wanted to get them down...maybe there’s something here idk

[sometimesrosy]

(this is coming from someone who's bi herself) the CL fandom sure likes to think of itself as a champion for lgbt rights but they're actually so biphobic?? i personally loved CL and i loved lxa as a character (i'm not spelling out her name bc i don't want you getting hate for this) but god, just bcs clarke may end up with a guy does not make her less bisexual. like, i remember when clarke slept w nylah the whole CL fandom was happy and making posts like "clarke prefers women!!!" like ughhh

thank you nonny. :)

Yeah, it’s pretty frustrating. It’s not just the cl community who turns on their own though. Or I guess, they don’t really consider bi girls as part of their own. Or atleast, not when they behave as bi girls. When they don’t follow along with the CL rules of good representation, when they ship the wrong thing or have the wrong opinions. When the wrong people get together.

They are kicked out of the club.

Sorry you can’t sit with us because you’re not GOOD rep. I get confused because clearly they are looking for wlw representation, which is fair and awesome. But then they expect Bi representation to be only wlw. Which is not what it means to be bisexual. And there are other issues at play for bisexual people, things that lesbians may NOT experience. So to show a bi woman in a relationship with a man, without discounting her bisexuality, is actually representing a huge swath of women who would not be spoken of otherwise. It is representing BISEXUALS. Bisexual women who are not actively in relationships with women are STILL BISEXUAL, whether they’re with men, currently single or on the ace spectrum, because sexuality is who they are regardless of who they are in a relationship with. They are still LGBT and still WLW. And they deserve representation too. 

I tell ya, seeing Clarke as a bisexual lead opens up the conversation for thousands of women who never thought they counted as bisexual because they weren’t gay enough. And I say this because I am one of them. This is part of representation. Representing a fuller spectrum of what LGBT means, other than just lesbian or gay. This is important. Perhaps it isn’t perfect lesbian representation. That’s because it isn’t. It’s bisexual representation. 

But. Sadly, too many don’t seem to consider representation of LGBT who are NOT exactly like them to be important. If it isn’t THEIR story, then it must not count. Despite the multitudes of women who connect with Clarke’s story and bisexuality. 

Perhaps this won’t surprise you, since you’re seeing it here with the CLs, but a lot of the time, when a marginalized community starts getting a voice or some power, they sadly turn around and take their power and wield it against people in their community who they don’t think are good enough. 

You like the wrong things. You think the wrong thoughts. You aren’t enough.  

This happens a lot in marginalized communities. It’s like we learned from the oppressors and decided that when we got the least little bit of power, like within a social circle or on an internet platform, that the BEST thing to do with that power is to INCREASE it by excluding the “wrong” type of people. To treat them as we were treated. 

We don’t have to do that. There is room within marginalized communities for people to have different experiences, different opinions, different identities, and different voices. 

[unloneliest]

hi i don’t think pan ppl are transphobic, just because bi ppl can be attracted to 2+ genders and pan are attracted to all doesn’t mean pan ppl or bi ppl are transphobic. i deal w panphobic things anytime anyone mentions pansexuality and i really thought your blog would be safe from that. i'm pan and don’t use bi bc i recognize i'd be attracted to someone regardless of gender identity as long as i find them attractive (and this has nothing to do w seeing trans ppl as a dif gender), if they're 1/

this is a long post & i want ppl to have the option 2 skip it so i’m putting it under a readmore; above all else i’m so thankful that you sent me these asks and deeply sorry that i rb’d something that made you feel unsafe on my blog. i agree with you; i don’t think bi or pan people are inherently transphobic and i’m really sorry i implied that with that post!

2/ if they ID as demiboy or demigirl, or genderfluid or anything else that isn't binary, then i really don’t care. i'm not saying bi ppl can’t feel the same since i said bi people are attracted to 2+ genders or all, but pan is rooted in the emphasis of all gender identities. yes theres a lot of overlap but just... i'm hurt that you'd rb smth like that, i understand the last line of its root in transphobia but being gay/straight and so many other things have issues that clash w other LGBT+ IDs

3/ if anything, i've dealt with internalized panphobia and homophobia, i just never felt comfortable with saying i was bi, not because it was "boring" or "binary" but bc everyone would just assume i was attracted to guys and women which was never the case and saying i was pan allowed for me to show that i knew that there are more than 2 gender identities and that i was attracted to all of them

hi its the 3 pt ask anon and its like i completely get why bi ppl would be upset w pan ppl but its just so hard when both are oppressed and one of the most common arguments is like: we aren't seen so we have to be seen first before you try to get into this too. i get why biphobia exists but the same biphobia exists for pan ppl. so many ppl say you're just straight bc of a het relationship or you're just bi then. or the whole theres only two genders argument. and its like i'm as open to dating

5?/ anyone. i genuinely do not care about whichever gender they ID as since i just find ppl attractive for being attractive. and bi ppl can be the same. there is a LOT of overlap and i'm not going to dismiss any worries or concerns. all i know is that the pan community i've surrounded myself with to find love in my sexuality and community have constantly explained that theres overlap but it depends to the person and neither sexuality is transphobic so i try to never overstep or invalidate either

but thank you for listening, so many ppl just invalidate pan voices who try to put both bi and pan ppl into view while acknowledging how theres overlap but theres a difference. its hard feeling invalidating when all i (and others) do is be as inclusive as possible and try to never overstep. i listen to others worries like you do and i've learned so much from your blog and your rbs which i appreciate. it was just hard seeing panphobia & biphobia when i've tagged both to filter the words out

8?? sorry i lost count/ ty again for listening

hi and again just. thank you, for sending me these. i’ve privated the post for now, because i don’t want to hurt anybody but i also don’t want to avoid accountability 4 hurtful actions; i’d most like to delete the post but probably only will if you’re ok with that. and if i ever rb something that includes biphobia or panphobia i’ll do my best to always tag them.

and again i’m so sorry to have rb’d a hurtful post especially bc that runs so opposite to what i want to be doing with this blog & i know that when i’ve found something hurtful shared in spaces i viewed as safe it’s somehow hurt a lot worse than when i’ve encountered hurtful attitudes in places i was expecting it. 

in retrospect the phrasing on that post was Not kind, & didn’t convey the nuance i read into it. my baseline assumption of both bi and pan people is that neither group is inherently transphobic; both identities have extremely similar experiences and my perspective on different lgbtq+ identities in general is that our strength is in solidarity and isolating/separating can be really dangerous to the lgbtq+ community’s ability to thrive and work on making the world better and safer for us all. 

i’m really glad that you’ve found love and support within the pan community and i have all the respect and admiration in the world for my bi and pan siblings in the lgbtq+ community! being able to find folks who share your identity and to find pride in yourself together is so healing and important and i’m so glad for the times i’ve experienced that in my life as well. 

you’re right that all communities do have issues with transphobia, and i normally wouldn’t join in on other identity’s in-community conversations; i thought about that when reblogging the post earlier but i do my best to rb posts asking people to examine if their beliefs and identity might be formed on transphobic assumptions when it comes to all labels and that’s why i did originally rb. i do my best to rb a lot of posts asking wlw to examine potentially transphobic ideas they might hold, because i’m an afab nonbinary wlw and so regardless of the fact that i’m not cis, i have a lot more privilege than trans women do in wlw spaces and i know i need to be doing what i can to make wlw spaces safe for trans women & girls.

and the post i rb’d did just have pretty shitty & confrontational wording, which i didn’t think about when rb’ing it. i’m sorry again for that! 

my reasoning in rb’ing that post was the same as when i rb posts asking wlw to examine their views; not that everyone of the groups in question are inherently shitty in some way, but that we all could use reminders to reflect sometimes and that occasionally people will be misinformed or have a shitty view/shitty views - but that that’s not the norm. i also felt more ok rb’ing this post bc i for a very long time id’d as bi, and my attraction as a lesbian still is to women and nonbinary people who don’t feel misgendered by the attraction of a lesbian; some people would call me bi for that, but it’s a common lesbian experience. i really relate to what you said about choosing pan because it really clearly sends the message that you’re attracted to people regardless of gender, bc i chose lesbian as a label bc it sends the message that i’m Not attracted to men! it’s about how i want people to see me.

my reading of the post was connected to experiences i had with some pretty shitty transphobic ex coworkers; they didn’t know i wasn’t cis, but a number of my coworkers at the time were bi. transphobia/biphobia tw for the rest of this paragraph/ the ex coworkers were pan and they adamantly told me/other coworkers that bisexuality was attraction to men and women whereas pansexuality was attraction to men, women, and trans people. my assumption based off of them wasn’t that pan people are transphobic/that pan as an identity is inherently transphobic, but that they as individuals sucked and were transphobic & biphobic?

that experience does touch on what the post was about though, i think. since the bi manifesto written in 1990 “official” definitions of bisexuality have been stating that bi doesn’t just mean attraction to men and women, and that there are more than 2 genders; it’s society’s biphobia that causes people to think that bisexuality isn’t inherently inclusive of more than 2 genders/inherently inclusive of trans people. its clear to me that you know there’s overlap in the communities and that you’re not transphobic and again that’s my baseline assumption of pan or bi people! ik that stinkers are always the exception in communities.

i rb’d the post because i think self reflection on internalized bs is good, and i didn’t realize how confrontational & potentially shitty the post was; i’m really sorry that i rb’d it and made my blog feel unsafe & i’m going to do my best to be more thoughtful in the future. i hope that me sharing why i rb’d it doesn’t come across as an excuse, either; i’m just hoping knowing my intentions might help w/ the experience. 

(if ppl must know, link to the post here )

[dandymeowth]

Various screencaps of REGs telling people they can’t identify as queer and/or that queer is not an identity or isn’t real, all taken from this post. This is provided as part of evidence that, yes, acephobes/discoursers are absolutely saying we can’t be or use queer. Also, hey, check out how many of them are transmisogynistis, radfems, biphobes, transphobes, etc! and use a lot of anti-progressive/anti-sj language (like “identity politics”). It’s almost as if their rhetoric is related...

I have removed the REG usernames in the following captions to avoid their interacting with this post, and to slightly no-platform them. Anyway, they read:

bigballofwibblywobbly: Well you created an argument about something that wasn’t being talked about. I was talking about individuals who don’t identify as anything but queer.

Not saying we should apply it to the whole group. But you’re a terf so it all makes sense.

[REG/radfem 1]: queer isn’t an orientation??? its a reclaimed slur like god i love being a part of the lesbian gay bisexual transgender reclaimed slur for homosexual community. you’re an ace inclusionist ofc you want to reclaim slurs never used against you and think queer is a separate orientation. the lgbt community will never be the queer community or the ‘everyone that doesn’t completely conform to heterosexuality’ community lol

[REG 2]:  Yeah queer isn’t really a coherent identity in and of itself. I see “sapphic” being used in much the same way now. Like I understand that figuring out who you are is difficult and people may want to use words that are sort of? Vague and noncommittal? But queer quite honestly does not mean anything in the sense that as it’s own identity it says nothing really about who you are attracted to or your gender identity. It’s [post cut off at this point]

[REG 3]: That and its fucking vague as fuck? What does it even mean? So many non-LGBT people claimed that they’re LGBT bc they’re “queer”, when they’re just cishet polyamorous people or cishet kinksters or cishet aces or cishet aros or cis aroaces like…. that slur isn’t for u. And people who are LGBT but identify as q*eer are still LGBT? Why do u need a slur in the acronym if you’re either L G B or T? What’s the point? What does it add?

[REG 3]: Then you’d go under the bi umbrella Identity politics are so ridiculous jfc u don’t experience some new form of oppression and therefore need a community based around it just because you are mga but don’t like the label bisexual for urself.

[REG/radfem 4]:  “Queer” could mean that you are a guy who uses nail polish or that you have a turtle pet.What’s the point of this word?What does it represent?What’s your axis of oppression?What experiences do you share in common?What’s the fucking point of identifying as “queer” other than to pretend that you’re special and oppressed?

feminismandmedia: I love how you say that people who are attracted to multiple genders are pretending to be special and oppressed.

Fuck off you twit.

[REG/radfem 4]: Sexual attraction is about sex not gender.There are only 2 sexes so you’re either heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual.It’s not that deep, trying to give a special name to your sexuality doesn’t make you opressed and it’s actually disrespectful to actually opressed people.

[REG/radfem 5]: You shouldn’t be identifying as q*eer freely without consequence because it’s a slur.

[REG/radfem 4]: Why are you oppressed?What’s the base of your oppression?How is society systematically aimed against you?If you’re actually oppressed why do you use such an ambigous and nebulous terminology with no concrete meaning to describe your community?Since it makes it harder to acknowledge you as an oppressed group? “Fam. I like all genders. I like dick and vagina too. I’m queer too” You’re bi, congrats, you may be affected by homophobia(oppression) if you date a same sex partner.“Oppression” is a strong and assertive word, you can’t just throw it around.

bigballofwibblywobbly: My god I hate TERFs. Fall off a bridge. Thanks.

Seriously? Do we now have a quota of oppression to fill? You want every dirty detail? You disgust me.

Also I’m not bisexual thanks.

[REG/radfem 4]: “Do we now have a quota of oppression to fill” Yes it is called being oppressed.I said that the person who said they liked dicks and vaginas is bisexual, not you. You hate us cause we’re right and you know it, I would hate us if I were you too. Just bc someone called you she instead of zir in the supermarked once doesn’t mean you’re oppressed Bethy, get your shit together.

bigballofwibblywobbly: I love how they erase my queerness to fit their argument.

[REG/radfem 4]: What am I erasing? Lmao, what’s “queerness”?You still haven’t answered what it means, bc it means nothing, it is a word made for straight kids feel special, a homobhobic slur actually.

bigballofwibblywobbly: My pal. I already said. I like all genders.

[REG/radfem 4]: …so you’re bisexual therefore only oppressed if you date a same sex partner like I said.

bigballofwibblywobbly: Wow. That’s some nice biphobia you have too. Bisexual people don’t become straight if they are in a relationship with the other gender.I’m not bisexual anyways.

(Also on that last one, calling being nonbinary a white thing? lol)

bigballofwibblywobbly: Well guess I don’t belong in the community. Congrats your gatekeeping has cut out people who like multiple genders. Top notch. Really.

[REG 6]: Aren’t there other words for liking multiple genders other than a slur?

[REG 7]: Um OP polysexual falls under the acronym without using a slur and is an umbrella term for multi-gender attraction….

Bonus under cut.

The following cap is a separate post made by a REG that is capped for no-platforming purposes and to prevent their interaction. It was shoved into the ace positivity tags because discoursers seriously just straight up hate ace people and don’t want them to exist. 

The post is about how “real” LGBT+ people hate the word queer and don’t identify with it except as a comeback, implying anyone who identifies with or uses it regularly is actually not LGBT+ and instead one of “the mogais”. It compares people reclaiming queer to white people using the n-slur and neurotypicals using the r-slur.

The post uses the phrase “cishets in denial” and I honestly think that truly encapsulates exactly how discoursers are seeing being LGBT+. 

It fits right along with that “if you are attracted to the opposite sex you’re not lgbt” post. 

It fits with the idea that more people are identifying as LGBT+ because it’s “trendy” and are actually fakes and liars, an idea spread and supported by cishets, truscum, anti-sj, radfems, etc. This comes as no surprise as MOGAI was coined by a nonbinary person, and that has been the driving force behind the hatred for it.

It also fits with how “sga” is pulled from conversion therapy because that’s literally how the people behind and supportive of the concept of conversion therapy look at being LGBT+: that it’s a phase, you’re just jumping on the bandwagon, you’re in denial, this isn’t the “real” you, etc. 

The post reads:

[REG 8]: Lol, seriously? There is no better way to show that MOGAI is made up of mostly cishets in denial than how heatedly they fight to use the word “qu**r”. If they paid fucking attention, they’d know that actual members of LGBT don’t really want to be called that, that most LGBT folks only use it to fight the balance of power that qu**r causes and that they aren’t going to cast away the history of the slur just because it’s supposedly a trendy umbrella term.

It’s the same way white people whine about their “right” to use “n*gga” when black people say no, or NT people claim “freedom of speech” when calling anyone and everyone “r*tard*d” despite decent human beings explaining why that’s fucked up.It’s so damn annoying…

danni-rants: And this is in ace positivity why again

queerautism: You heard it here first folks. Everyone who fought to reclaim Queer as an act of rebellion and empowerment… was actually cishet all along. Same for neurodivergent people who can’t be more specific than ‘queer’ about their identity. And everyone who keeps trying to turn it into a positive term and build a community around it. Also my nonbinary pan ace ass apparently lol

Simply Amazing.

[alastaircarstairsdefenselawyer]

Okay so I've been seeing a lot of ace discourse on my dash lately (I've actually had to unfollow some blogs bc I just can't deal with it rn but that's a different story) and as an ace lesbian I just want to point out how you saying "no! Only het ace/aros!" hurts us too. Now I don't speak for all lesbian/gay/bi/pan/etc aces but for me, you're separating two significant parts of my identity. I no longer feel comfortable identifying myself as asexual in LGBT safe spaces. Not only does this completely defeat the purpose of a "safe space," but it prevents me from talking about my problems as an asexual. Now, before you start to tell me that it's because my asexual problems don't belong in an LGBT safe space, let me tell you that my problems as an asexual are the same as my problems as a lesbian. They can't be separated. They are one part of me. I am not just asexual. I am not just a lesbian. I am a lesbian ace. Okay, now I know you're not supposed to point out a problem without suggesting a solution so here's my solution: stop targeting the ace community!!! If you see someone you SUSPECT to be a cishet ace being homophobic, first ask yourself: are they really? This is important because an asexual who is uncomfortable seeing a gay couple kiss probably isn't uncomfortable with the 'gay' but instead uncomfortable with the 'kiss'. If that's the case, talk it out and see if there's a compromise that makes everyone happy :)) if they are truly being homophobic, call them out on it. Tell them to stop. Explain how what they're doing is harmful. Tell them if they keep doing that, they will no longer be welcome. I think this is not limited to only aces but anyone in the LGBT community. Some LGBP people being transphobic? Some LG people being biphobic? Etc. Shoving anyone you perceive to be a cishet ace/aro is harmful. Personally, I identified as ace for about two years before I began to identify as a lesbian. Let people occupy LGBT spaces if they feel they belong and aren't hurting anyone.

[gettin-bi-bi-bi]

So I’ve recently come to terms that I might be bi, but I’m struggling with the whole concept of preferences. I’d like to think that I like all genders about the same amount but I’m not really sure about it because I’ve never been in a relationship. That’s why I wanted to know what having a preference exactly means.

Like for example if I say I have a preference for women, does that mean if I end up dating a man that the relationship won’t be as fulfilling as one with a women? Or I wouldn’t be as committed to it as I would with a women? Would I secretly believe that the relationship would just be better if my partner was a woman? Because I’d hate to feel like I’m leading someone on, and feel like I can’t fully love them because they’re not my “preferred gender”. It is also why I struggled to come to terms that I might really be bi and not someone just looking for attention and trying to be ~special~.

I’m gonna be honest with you: I am very dissatisfied with the way that discourse about bisexuality keeps up this narrative about preferences without ever actually talking about what “preference” means. Because it leads exactly to situations like the one you are in right now: people who think that they have to be able to identify what their personal preference is and then also thinking that this preference is holding some very deep meaning that influences their entire love and sex life from then on.

So first of all you should know that there is no universally agreed upon opinion in the bi community what “preference” in the context of bisexuality even means or how one would “measure” that. Which is, to get a bit personal, the reason why to this day I cannot confidently say if I either have no preference or a preference for men. Because it totally depends on how one would define what a “preference” even is. I would say that I am attracted about the same amount to all genders but attraction to men feels more intense most of the time for me and my sexual fantasies are mostly about men. Is that because I “prefer” men or simply bc I have more experience with them so naturally my brain finds it easier to draw from memories to create fantasies? Who knows? Who cares? Not me.

Because at the end of the day, even if there was undoubtable scientific evidence that I had a preference for men - that doesn’t mean I don’t still have the capacity to be attracted to other genders. I still also had crushes on women in the past. I still also have sexual fantasies about women. When I think about potentially finding a new partner in the future I still absolutely do not care what gender they have.

If you have a preference is something that only you can judge for yourself and also what “preference” means for you personally. Does it simply mean that the number of people that you are/have been attracted to is greater for one gender than others? Does it mean your feelings for one gender are more intense than other genders? And either way: how the hell would you even measure that?

Seriously: it’s okay to not care about finding an answer to this question. Bisexual people do not have to overanalyse every miniscule aspect of our sexual and/or romantic orientation and we don’t owe anyone any explanation for why or how we are attracted to certain genders in certain ways. This obsessive need that some bi people have to justify their preference for one gender or to prove how they do not have a preference (and are therefore a Real Bisexual™) comes from internalised biphobia. Monosexual people hardly ever feel the need to justify their preferences to that degree. And I just can’t help but feel like the reason why “preference” is so often mentioned when it comes to bisexuality is because of biphobia. “What’s your preference?” seems to be the watered down version of “so what are you really? gay or straight?”

And I think that’s just a very black and white mentatlity of what the presence of a preference even means. As if saying “I have a preference for x” means you are totally uninterested or even appalled by anything that’s not x. Most people have preferences about potential partners or sex and relationship stuff. Like, I prefer people with dark hair, but my boyfriend is a gingery blonde and I don’t love him any less or are attracted to him any less just because the overwhelming majority of people I have been attracted to in the past had black or brown hair. And I don’t spend any time in this relationship wishing my boyfriend’s hair colour was different.

So what if you have a preference for women but then fall in love with a man or are attracted to one? Then you’re still in love with him or attracted to him. Because of the way he looks or because of his personality - or whatever it is that attracts you to him. And that’s all real and genuine - even if the majority of people you’ve been attracted to so far have been women. Your feelings and attraction to different genders doesn’t have to stand in competition to one another. Being very attracted to one gender doesn’t mean you are automatically less attracted to another gender. This isn’t a zero sum game.

And people who find themselves unfulfilled in a monogamous relationship should probably think about if they might be happier in polyamory - but that goes for every sexual orientation. Bi people are not more or less likely to be polyamorous than non-bi people. And it’s an old biphobic myth that bi people cannot feel happy in a monoganous relationship or that we always need to have partners of different genders so that we feel fulfilled.

I get that it can sometimes be interesting to reflect on stuff like what’s your type or if there’s been any patterns in the people you find yourself drawn to or attracted to. Like realising “huh, a lot of them had curly hair” or “I seem to really like tall people” or “I guess the majority of them were men”. But if it ends in you stressing yourself out and over-thinking everything then it’s not helpful and you are allowed to just not give a fuck about whatever the hell your “preference” is. It can be fun to think about and for some people it’s very easy to answer... but for others it’s not and sometimes it’s not at all productive to keep thinking about this. Especially for people who still struggle a lot with internalised biphobia because it leads to a lot of self-doubt and people end up falling into these traps of biphobic sentiments.

So... long story short: “preference” means different things to different bisexuals and to some it’s a completely irrelevant topic of discussion that they don’t feel the need to apply to their sexual orientation at all. It’s okay if you find that discussion about “preferences” aren’t helpful or relevant to you or the way you personally experience bisexuality.

Maddie