• [A]sexuality,  [Random] Thoughts,  Black[ness],  Gender[queer],  Queer[ness]

    Re: “”Visibility””

    for the longest time it struck me as odd, the way that the LGBT community at large upholds “visibility” as some kind of goal or ideal to be fought for. it wasn’t until recent years that i actually stopped and thought about it enough to realize why reference to and usage of “visibility” in this way bothers me so much. as someone who has always been and will always be hypervisible because of their race, it baffles me when people advocate for visibility as if visibility is what we all want; as if visibility is even a means to getting what we all want. this upholding of visibility as something important for all of us to fight for seems grossly negligent of the fact that some of us are already more visible than others and that that very visibility is part of what has gotten some of us bullied, turned away…

  • [A]sexuality,  Gender[queer],  Q&A,  Queer[ness]

    Q&A: “I have a question about the definition of bisexuality.”

    anonymous said: Hi! I have a question about the definition of bisexuality. I’ve been using a “same + different” -definition and that’s what I’ve seen being used the most. “Two or more” is alright, but if “same gender” is not required, why is it not under heterosexuality? I’m assuming the reason is political, but I want to be sure. hello anon, i’m guessing that this ask is related to this post where i say that i personally find defining bi as attraction to “same and different / other gender(s)” to be problematic. there’s actually nothing “political” about why a person doesn’t have to experience attraction towards people of the “same” or “similar” gender to be bi. that is, unless you consider the feelings and experiences of bi non-binary people to be “political,” which i sincerely hope not. the reason why i personally, as well as many others, find the “same and different / other” definition of bi to…

  • Q&A

    Q&A: “You don’t think allosexual privilege exists?”

    anonymous said: So from what I gathered in your latest responses. You don’t think allosexual privilege exists, but do you think allosexism exists? A lot of what Amber says about the word allosexual also applies to monosexual like grouping people with their oppressors, some gay people being okay w/ the word but not everyone being fine w/ it, ignoring the fact that a lot of gay people hate the word monosexual, “monosexual privilege.” There r so many posts like the 1 blvkandasexual posted except about monosexuals & bisexuals. Would u consider posts like that homobphobic? Amber’s response seems to argue against the use of the word allosexual on some level, but I thought you were okay with the word? That entire thread and everyone’s responses to it (including yours tbh) makes it seem like the word allosexual is inherently homophobic, biphobic, panphobic, etc. like what??? Can you clarify your stance.…

  • Q&A

    Q&A: “Can nonbinary lesbians be monosexist?”

    anonymous said: Can nonbinary lesbians be monosexist? I’m bisexual and I used the term monosexual during a conversation with someone I’ve been seeing and they were not happy about it. They identify as genderqueer and a lesbian and said that the term monosexual limits who can identify as a lesbian and ignores nonbinary folk. I don’t feel like they were being monosexist but were they? I feel the term is useful but they had very valid points. monosexism, in short, is the belief that monosexualities (ie. heterosexuality and homosexuality) are the only “true” or “legit” sexualities. e.g. the belief that non-monosexuals (bisexuals, pansexuals, polysexuals etc) are “really just either straight or gay.” literally anyone of any sexuality or gender could hold such beliefs, so literally anyone could potentially be monosexist. however, your friend taking issue with the term monosexual (as some people do for various reasons) and saying that it limits who can…