I'm a somewhat regular visitor of speedsolving, but I made a sockpuppet to keep some anonymity because I don't feel comfortable discussing these things while people IRL can connect them to me. So, mods, it'd probably be really easy to connect the dots, but please don't.
I'd like to respond to a couple quotes before I post more.
qqwref said:
If they're actually switching, they're not bisexual by the definition most people use. But I'd say most people who switch between sexual orientations either don't fully understand themselves, or are trying to change themselves to fit some kind of outside expectation.
It is quite possible to be fluid in your sexual orientation without any conscious effort. I'm pansexual, but my Kinsey number changes regularly. I just let it happen. I don't try one way or another. Yeah, you could say that something unconscious is going on due to societal pressure. I can't refute that. But would that explain me occasionally moving towards being attracted to men? (I'm a biological male, so being more attracted to men is against the societal norms) I don't think changing orientation is the result of a choice or not. Thinking that sexuality ought to be unchanging is just as wrong as thinking sexuality is as simple as hetero/homo.
qqwref said:
There's also the related idea of dominance in a relationship, which would be interesting to see people's opinions about. Some people seem to want to have power over their partner ("being the man" in the relationship), and others seem to want to submit. Both of these personalities appear in all genders and sexual orientations.
There are plenty of relationships where there is no "guy" and "girl." That's also just wrong. In the relationship I'm in right now, my partner and I don't hold to any particular gender/role stereotypes. There's no desire by either of us to dominate.
maggot said:
abuse is probably the wrong idea. while they might be oppressed by an ever diminishing group of people, they are readily accepted by another group of people with open arms, and a strong passion for who they are (in most cases, since we're talking in stereotypes). so this 'negative attention' is only in the eye of the beholder and is a diminishing factor.
This is pretty offensive. Despite the fact that homophobia is extremely rampant here...you have privilege. And you don't know you have it. You're probably cis and straight, and you have really no idea what the experiences of non-hetero people are like. Many of us don't readily divulge the details of our treatment by society.
http://www.cs.earlham.edu/~hyrax/personal/files/student_res/straightprivilege.htm
The first privilege you have is not knowing that you have privilege.
My parents insisted that I was straight. Over and over. For years. Now it's just not talked about. I can't talk to my parents about a fundamental aspect of me. It's fine by them for other people to be non-hetero. Just not their child.
Two of my best friends in high school tried to kill me after I came out to them.
Things are a lot worse for us than you'd like to think. But it's easier on your conscience to think we 'only' have to deal with people like the WBC, and not many of them.
You miss the signs, every day, all around you. You don't see all the little and big clues that are left to me by society that reminds me that society thinks I'm an aberration.
And for anyone who's not hetero- or homo-, well, we face discrimination even within the LBGT community. Yes, bisexuals are dismissed as just sex-hungry, or wishy-washy, confused, etc. Asexuals are frequently cast out as freaks just like transgender people are.
Anyway, on to me.
To me, the idea that orientation 'doesn't exist' sounds exactly like the argument that music genres don't exist. Yeah, few people are strictly hetero/homo or 5s on the Kinsey scale. But terms like hetero-,homo-,bi-,pan-,a-, etc. are useful indicators. If someone tells me that they're bisexual, that doesn't tell me exactly how much they're attracted to each person in the world. It still says a lot, though. It gives me useful information about the person. It's not a perfect descriptor, but people are free to label themselves as they please. The need for better accuracy in identifying has led to terms like bisexual, asexual, pansexual, and many others. They generally fall under 'queer.'
An important point here is that people are confusing gender identity with sexuality. Talking about feminine gay guys brings in both issues. Talking about the 'man' and the 'woman' in a relationship is more about gender identity than sexuality.
A quote from someone on the xkcd forums...
Asking who is the 'man' and who is the 'woman' in a gay relationship is like going into a Chinese restaurant and asking which chopstick is the fork.
Sexuality is independent of gender identity. I'm androgynous and pansexual. Some androgynous people are only attracted to one of the binary genders. Or are asexual. We need to be clear as to what we're discussing.
)
