Bisexuality. spin-off from coming out in church thread.

[Zerbie]

I figgered we could move the general discussion of bisexuality out of Isacc's coming out thread and over here, if that works for people.

Of course I connect very much with what Sawyer wrote over there, and just last night hubby and I got to talking about gay issues/bisexuality and we remarked again how cut-and-dried sexual orientation ISN'T for a lot of people. Both of us agreeing that we know far more women than men who express a more fluid sexuality, (bisexuality) rather than a more fixed one. But even among men I have observed some fluidity in their sexuality, sexual expressions, and emotional attractions - including two men I met around the same time who I am convinced - certain - are both bisexual, but one insists he's exclusively straight and the other insists he's exclusively gay. And my best guy friend from high school who loves sex with women but only falls in love with men. Or me, who re-defines flip-flop. :p :D

Is bisexuality about the feminine? Was that the question Daniel asked? Couldn't say - let me mull it over for a while. I will say this: it seems to me that the more feminine, female sides of me connect with the lesbian parts of myself, whereas the part that responds to men is the part of me with the more testosterone - I tend to feel more "butch" when engaging with a man and more "femme" when engaging with a woman. I have NO idea what other bisexual individuals experience with regard to that - though this thread is a great place to ask. Hey! All you other bi's out there - do you feel any difference in YOURSELF when you are pursuing males versus females?

Or maybe my internal wiring is just unique. :p

Okay, thread open for discussion - take it away!!! :cool:

[novaseeker]

Both of us agreeing that we know far more women than men who express a more fluid sexuality, (bisexuality) rather than a more fixed one

I think that the reasons why women at this cultural moment appear slightly more comfortable identifying or admitting potentially bisexual feelings are pretty complicated.

One set of reasons, I think, has to do with the impact of the women's movement and the related "sexual revolution" (which in many ways was an affirmation of female sexuality, or at least the beginning of the recognition of a distinct female sexuality). These things put female sexuality "on the table" as it were, and encouraged women to be more open to their own sexual feelings. It also appears to be the case that for some women feminism has been a doorway to exploring same-sex relationships, but on balance I don't think that this has been the main influence. I think the broader influence is the reality that women have been steadily pushing the boundaries of what it means to be "women" in all areas over the past several decades, and this has included the sexual aspects of that. There hasn't really been anything comparable to that on the male side of the ledger.

Another set of reasons has to do with the different degrees of stigmatization of gay male sexuality as compared with lesbian sexuality. There are, of course, many, many straight women who stigmatize lesbians, but having said that, love between women does not appear to be as outrightly loathed as love between men. In part this also stems from my first point above, but in part it's also because gay male sexuality undermines the predominant masculine in this culture in a very direct way, whereas lesbianism only does so indirectly. This is reflected in numerous ways, ranging from the vastly different social mores regarding non-sexual "touching" between women as compared with the much more restrictive mores that apply to such touching among men, to the erotic images consumed by straight men (many of whom apparently find lesbian sex arousing while at the same time finding gay male affection and sexual expression reflexively repulsive), to continuing taboos on male emotional expression and the like. The "walls are up" around the boundaries of the "masculine", whereas the boundaries of the "feminine" have been consistently pushed and expanded in recent decades. This kind of relates to the "threats" thread from last week ... I think that gay men are more of a threat to the dominant masculine, and as a result the stigma is somewhat greater, which itself results in more reluctance among men to admit bisexual or even homosexual feelings. In light of the history of the ancient world, it's hard to imagine that bisexual feelings among today's men are as low as men report them to be ... as a result I think it's these cultural factors that have a significant impact on self-identification.

Finally, there's also a "bi stigma" as well. What I mean by that is that for some people it is easier to accept for themselves a sexuality that is more defined (gay or straight) than one that is more fluid, less easy to define, and less easy to understand or explain. This is exacerbated by expressions that one still comes across in the gay community to the effect that most men who claim to be bisexual are gay men in denial -- again apparently it is threatening to some gay men that other men may actually be bisexual, because this undermines the narratives that some gay men tell of their own journeys of self-discovery. In these contexts, it's easier for people to go with their "primary leaning", and self-identify as straight or gay, rather than own up to a more murky middle ground that may make themselves feel uncomfortable, and which may be less supported in relevant contexts.

Is bisexuality about the feminine?

As for the issue of whether same-sex attraction is more feminine, in general, I have to say I am not sure. For men, I don't think that this is always the case. While there is, in some contexts, more "freedom" for men in gay relationships to take on a broader degree of self-expression (broader than the relatively narrower role often taken by men in many straight relationships), it's not clear that this is "feminine", but it *can* be different from what is conventionally considered "masculine" as well. I can say that in my own relationships with men, it's been a mixture ... sometimes I feel very gender atypical in behavior (and hence having a feeling of drift from the traditional "masculine"), whereas other times it's very gender typical indeed, and feels more or less conventionally masculine (like watching a sporting event or something like that).

[Zerbie]

I think that the reasons why women at this cultural moment appear slightly more comfortable identifying or admitting potentially bisexual feelings are pretty complicated.

One set of reasons, I think, has to do with the impact of the women's movement and the related "sexual revolution" (which in many ways was an affirmation of female sexuality, or at least the beginning of the recognition of a distinct female sexuality). These things put female sexuality "on the table" as it were, and encouraged women to be more open to their own sexual feelings. It also appears to be the case that for some women feminism has been a doorway to exploring same-sex relationships, but on balance I don't think that this has been the main influence. I think the broader influence is the reality that women have been steadily pushing the boundaries of what it means to be "women" in all areas over the past several decades, and this has included the sexual aspects of that. There hasn't really been anything comparable to that on the male side of the ledger.

Yes I think that's possible.

Another set of reasons has to do with the different degrees of stigmatization of gay male sexuality as compared with lesbian sexuality. There are, of course, many, many straight women who stigmatize lesbians, but having said that, love between women does not appear to be as outrightly loathed as love between men. In part this also stems from my first point above, but in part it's also because gay male sexuality undermines the predominant masculine in this culture in a very direct way, whereas lesbianism only does so indirectly.

For a counter argument, check out Terry Castle in "The Apparitional Lesbian." Though I do tend to agree with you. ;)

erotic images consumed by straight men (many of whom apparently find lesbian sex arousing while at the same time finding gay male affection and sexual expression reflexively repulsive),

No kidding! Part of a discussion I had over a paper I recently presented in class dealt with that peculiarity. I've been known to roll my eyes and state "Everybody loves a lesbian, as long as she's femme." Which could bring us to yet another huge topic.


Finally, there's also a "bi stigma" as well.

Again, No Kidding!!

What I mean by that is that for some people it is easier to accept for themselves a sexuality that is more defined (gay or straight) than one that is more fluid, less easy to define, and less easy to understand or explain.

Uhhhh huhhhhhh! Me, for example. You just explained why I originally came out as lesbian. When I developed really strong feelings for a man for the first time, my initial reaction was to slam the door on them so as not to be tossed back into the torment of questioning "what the hell AM I?!" It looked like a path back into pain. (It wasn't.;) ) Only a year after my own second, and real, coming out, I met a man I am sure is bi, who says he's gay, and even said to me once that he just doesn't want to go through that hell again - it was too painful coming out as gay to begin with. I know exactly what he means and I don't blame him. :'( It does look that way at first.

This is exacerbated by expressions that one still comes across in the gay community to the effect that most men who claim to be bisexual are gay men in denial -- again apparently it is threatening to some gay men that other men may actually be bisexual, because this undermines the narratives that some gay men tell of their own journeys of self-discovery. In these contexts, it's easier for people to go with their "primary leaning", and self-identify as straight or gay, rather than own up to a more murky middle ground that may make themselves feel uncomfortable, and which may be less supported in relevant contexts.

Yep. Nova's right, folks, a lot of people do that. Nowadays, I mostly let people assume I'm straight. One thing you didn't mention above though, is that with regard to bisexuality there is often a perception that a bisexual individual is a potential traitor - don't date a bisexual woman, she's just experimenting and will leave you for a man.


hat).

Thanks Nova.

Who's next? :p :D ;)

[Daniel]

Zerbie- you asked me to expand on the concept of the feminine as it relates to bisexuality. Let's see what I can come up with here!

First up: Sophia

http://www.northernway.org/sophia.html

http://reluctant-messenger.com/sophia-of-jesus.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophia_(gnosticism)

In the Nag Hammadi, Sophia is the lowest æon, or anthropic expression of the emanation of the light of God. She is the syzygy of Jesus Christ (ie she forms a unity with Christ, being cojoined with him), and Gnostics believed that she was the Holy Spirit of the Trinity. Sophia is depicted as the creator of the material universe in "On the Origin of the World." Furthermore, the planet Earth and everything on it was indeed created by the Jewish God Yahweh, but he is depicted as fundamentally corrupt. Because Sophia created the material universe and its god (also known as Yaldabaoth, Samael, and Demiurge) either without her syzygy Jesus Christ or, in another tradition, because she tried to breach the barrier between herself and the unknowable Bythos.

This is one way to look at matters feminine, that being, a spiritual dynamic in which all that is created has it's origins in the feminine. Whether this is an actual reality doesn't concern me as much as what this idea says about the thinker thinking it. Or, to put it more accurately, feeling it. We all feel things, that for sure. But women, we are led to believe (venus vs mars), do more of their mental processing via this avenue. As such, men avail themselves of a less circuitous route (no value jugement here you understand). Now many programs have we seen about how find it necessary to get their guy to open up and talk about his feelings?

What I am trying to get at here- from two angles actually- the spiritual as well as the physiological/psychological, is that, the feminine route- i.e. felt vs thought- in all of us may be the one which give us more latitude in matters of sexuality, simply put, because it is wordless. Adam got to name everything in creation after all- putting everything in its place- controlling it- you might say. The feminine, I posit, just lets everything be as it is. And psychologically speaking, sexuality in and of itself is more about being than doing, is it not? More female than male.

One has only to see how a shaman does his work (they are very often gay) to get a handle on this matter. The basis of his 'skill' is intuition, which is considered a feminine dynamic.

What I am not talking about here is gender roles. That's something else entirely. What I'm talking about is an inner to outer perspective. Gender roles are all about an outer to inner perspective.

As such, gay people (men and women) defy gender roles, because their touchstone, spiritually speaking, is from another persepctive. The feminine (sophia) which brings self-knoweldge.

I have the sense that I've drawn rather rough lines here- and could do better with this matter. But this is the best I can do for now.

[Zerbie]

oh. wow. mind. boggles.


OK, I've read that twice and followed a couple links, will read it again.

How is it Daniel that bisexuality brought this to mind? I have my guess but don't wanna put words in your keyboard.

[Daniel]

How is it Daniel that bisexuality brought this to mind? I have my guess but don't wanna put words in your keyboard.

I am tempted to say that Sophie dropped the thought into my head! :lol:

Simply put, the other thread made me think about the 'ground' upon which the discussion was taking place- the backstory' or 'understory'- as it were.

After I posted I realized that I didn't use the word transpersonal as I had in the other thread. That's a good word for addressing what is more than physical. And my perception is that this whole matter of bisexuality may have everything to do with that which is more than physical, be it mental or emotional (we have Freud, Jung and others to thank for this?).

Maybe it was seeing my straight colleagues, who, despite assertions to contrary, out gay the gay guys when they want to. Put a guy in a dress and all hell breaks loose.

All is not as it seems. Or at least, that's how it seems to me.

[Zerbie]

I am tempted to say that Sophie dropped the thought into my head! :lol:

:p :p :p

Simply put, the other thread made me think about the 'ground' upon which the discussion was taking place- the backstory' or 'understory'- as it were.

After I posted I realized that I didn't use the word transpersonal as I had in the other thread. That's a good word for addressing what is more than physical. And my perception is that this whole matter of bisexuality may have everything to do with that which is more than physical, be it mental or emotional

.

More so than mono-sexuality?

[Daniel]

More so than mono-sexuality?

Mono?

I'm a stereo kind of guy! ;)

[Zerbie]

Mono?

I'm a stereo kind of guy! ;)

Oh really? This is new. So ya likey the girls now too? ;) :p

[Daniel]

Oh really? This is new. So ya likey the girls now too? ;) :p

Don't be silly, silly! :D Me likey boys! (head nodding while grinning from ear to ear)

Your concept of mono-sexuality brings to mind all things Platonic: two beings separated and looking for the other half. Perhaps male, perhaps female. Of one being....

[Zerbie]

Don't be silly, silly! :D Me likey boys! (head nodding while grinning from ear to ear)

We all KNOW that. ;)
I was playing. :good:

Your concept of mono-sexuality brings to mind all things Platonic: two beings separated and looking for the other half. Perhaps male, perhaps female. Of one being....

Hadn't thought of that. When you said "stereo" it reminded me of a quote from Wayne Koestenbaum from The Queen's Throat - I don't have time to find it for you now - hubby is about to pick me up and take me to dinner. :D I have to get ready. But Koestenbaum uses an extended analogy between mono versus stereo sound and mono versus "stereo" (bi) sexuality. So when I hear you say "stereo" to me that says, bi.

That's all. That's why I made fun. :)

Bye Bi!
;) :p

[Daniel]

Oh....yes....I remember that book....read it when it came out. :lol:

You know, what we're going towards, perhaps, is, conceptually speaking, something akin to non-dualistic thinking. As if one can contemplate the nature of sexuality without gender being involved! :D

[BronzDragon]

Maybe what bisexuality is really about is- transpersonally speaking- the feminine? I'd like to hear more about that from those who could speak from experience.

I'm not sure I get the bisexuality as transpersonal feminine, Daniel. Could you expound?

» Thom says: ☛ I realize I am not Daniel, but I may have a couple of thoughts on this subject. :)

Natively speaking, most of us are born bisexual: That is, we each have an appreciation of both (or all three) genders, and sometimes that appreciation can drift into intimate thoughts. Psychologically speaking (Jung) we each have an aspect of our psyche that is masculine, and one that is feminine. I expect there is one that is between the two, or even just the grey-scale between them.

“Transpersonal” is the theory of religious psychology where a person recognizes their connexion to the rest of reality (or realities), and so interprets their existence in that light. I interpret transpersonal existentialism as “the philosophical study of Humanity’s search for meaning within our struggle to exist within the context of our environment.”

We have developed our society along absolutes: either/or relationships. We can’t have an intersexual; the child has to be either a boy or a girl; and the doctor is happy to make the adjustments so that appearance fits the ideal. Boys can’t have a friend who is a boy who happens to share intimate secrets, we only allow him to have a boyfriend that he has sex with. So, should two men sleep in the same bed solely to keep warm on a cold night, we brand them as fags, not as humans looking after each other’s survival.

In Doric Greece, they permitted a man to have relationships with other men and with women; and if that relationship drifts into sexual intimacy, they thought of it as cute and acceptable (provided it remained in the privacy of their bed chambers or the fields where others who did not want to watch did not have to). We have so segregated our society that no one wants to share a bench on the bus when there are no other seats available. (He just wants to sit, not have sex with you!)

[NathanATX]

I figgered we could move the general discussion of bisexuality out of Isacc's coming out thread and over here, if that works for people.

Of course I connect very much with what Sawyer wrote over there, and just last night hubby and I got to talking about gay issues/bisexuality and we remarked again how cut-and-dried sexual orientation ISN'T for a lot of people. Both of us agreeing that we know far more women than men who express a more fluid sexuality, (bisexuality) rather than a more fixed one. But even among men I have observed some fluidity in their sexuality, sexual expressions, and emotional attractions - including two men I met around the same time who I am convinced - certain - are both bisexual, but one insists he's exclusively straight and the other insists he's exclusively gay. And my best guy friend from high school who loves sex with women but only falls in love with men. Or me, who re-defines flip-flop. :p :D

Is bisexuality about the feminine? Was that the question Daniel asked? Couldn't say - let me mull it over for a while. I will say this: it seems to me that the more feminine, female sides of me connect with the lesbian parts of myself, whereas the part that responds to men is the part of me with the more testosterone - I tend to feel more "butch" when engaging with a man and more "femme" when engaging with a woman. I have NO idea what other bisexual individuals experience with regard to that - though this thread is a great place to ask. Hey! All you other bi's out there - do you feel any difference in YOURSELF when you are pursuing males versus females?

Or maybe my internal wiring is just unique. :p

Okay, thread open for discussion - take it away!!! :cool:

I think I'm an itsy bitsy bit bi... and it "boggles the mind"... but essentially, I know how (almost)all-consuming my homo-ness is, so I never pursued anything with women.

[If my mom reads this she'll think her prayers have been answered. :lol: :lol: :lol: ]

It's very interesting though... Why would I be hesitant/timid/whatever about expressing that I might have some measure of interest in women?

lol... just writing that freaks me out a little...

[Daniel]

It's very interesting though... Why would I be hesitant/timid/whatever about expressing that I might have some measure of interest in women?


Because you're a gentemen, not a cad. You wouldn't want to give a gal the wrong impression in a world where the fluidity of 'attraction' isn't accepted for what it is. We like our boxes. The dominant thought is that, take the box away, and all hell will break loose. But I hardly think that is going to happen. Human beings are creatures of habit and their wanderings in the land of all matters sexual part ways when matters of romance are concerned.

[Zerbie]

I think I'm an itsy bitsy bit bi... and it "boggles the mind"... but essentially, I know how (almost)all-consuming my homo-ness is, so I never pursued anything with women.

[If my mom reads this she'll think her prayers have been answered. :lol: :lol: :lol: ]

It's very interesting though... Why would I be hesitant/timid/whatever about expressing that I might have some measure of interest in women?

lol... just writing that freaks me out a little...

:agree: It's a threatening concept.

Daniel puts it well, "we like our boxes." ya know, living across boundaries is difficult, because everyone else thinks of you in "boxes," and it is hard to separate your sense of self-perception from those labels. That's why when I'm reading and posting here, I perceive myself as the queer chick, but out in 3D where people see me with my husband I perceive myself as the straight chick. It all applies at some times, and fails to apply at others.

If you adhere to a label that is 99.99999999999% descriptive, admiting to any possibility of fluidity there is, well, scary. And it need not be.
Very very few people are utterly rigidly on one end of the continuum or the other. And if you do become aware of some slight interest outside your usual realm of attraction, it does NOT mean that the descriptor label you live by is wrong. It just means that life is life, and it is always shifting, changing, and too busy being, to bother about our self-definitions. We are more complex than we sometimes believe. The mistake comes with trying to get control over that life force and dictate the way we should feel and for whom.

[NathanATX]

This is a fascinating discussion... and something I need to research. I think there is something revolutionary here.

[Daniel]

There is an interesting article in Out that relates to this discussion.

http://www.out.com/detail.asp?id=21655

Roman sexuality has always been polymorphous and peculiar. In Roman Sex: 100 B.C. to A.D. 250, historian John Clarke explains, “Romans had sex with people of different genders, in different social situations, at various stages of life.” To a freeborn Roman man, almost any sexual activity with almost any partner was morally acceptable—as long as he took the “active” role.

Gibbon noted ruefully that, in the bedroom, only Claudius among the first dozen Caesars was “regular.” His main source for this information was the Roman historian Suetonius, the personal secretary of Hadrian (who deified his teenage lover Antinous after the boy drowned in the Nile and who raised so many monuments to him that, of all the faces of all the human beings who lived in the ancient world, that of Antinous was the most reproduced and survives as the best-preserved). In The Twelve Caesars, Suetonius offers a litany of irregularities that makes contemporary tabloids look positively puritanical. Julius Caesar, he tells us, was publicly derided as a hungry bottom. “He was every woman’s man,” sneered one of his political enemies, “and every man’s woman.”

Suetonius, like the rest of the classical world, assumed that every man was bisexual. Nero, who “gelded” a boy named Sporus and married him, liked to play a sex game where he would dress in furs, pretend he was a wild animal, and “assail with violence the private parts of both men and women.” He believed that all guys liked getting “defiled” sometimes but that “most men concealed that vice, and were cunning enough to keep it secret.”

Or course, we're not the first to mull these matters over. The article, expecially towards the end, gives one much to contemplate.

As an aside, this issue of Out seems to have been done in mind with the beginning of the second season of Rome on HBO. Saw it. Blood and politics. Makes one think that nothing's changed much.

Enjoy the boys! And if you're like me, you're wondering "why the prudery'? An actual evocation of the glories of the ancient world would do without the speedos! Perhaps, that in and of itself, says it all.

The cover of Out- btw- says "Nude Gladiators Wrestling". Not!

[zimnah]

Zerbie, you always come up with the greatest posts!

First of all, though I prefer to believe that we have complete free will, there are some things that simply just happen. Is it chemistry, karma, destiny, basheert?? Who knows? It's comforting for many of us to believe that G-d is directing our lives in some small way that will benefit us in the end. But that view begs the question for those of us who believe we are oriented one way, yet live another. I have slowly come to terms with my attraction to women. I have also become more aware of my absolute numb reaction to men...except my husband. If he had not come into my life, I would absolutely be dating women, no doubt in my mind. But there was something in his eyes, and something in his very soul that touched me.
I often feel guilty that I, in essence, got out of coming out by being in love with him. I don't feel like I'm living a lie, per se, but I do feel like others whom I know and love (many of those people are here on Soulforce!) are fighting the good fight, and I'm simply lurking in the shadows.

What I've never told anyone is that the first girl I was with, when I was about 13 and we were experimenting...well, my mom caught us. Her reaction was brutal, to say the least, and was a large part of the abusive relationships with men that I found myself in thereafter. I have only ever had peace, love, companionship and (most importantly) safety with women until I met Rich. I know exactly what you mean when you said:

Posted by Zerbie:
That's why when I'm reading and posting here, I perceive myself as the queer chick, but out in 3D where people see me with my husband I perceive myself as the straight chick. It all applies at some times, and fails to apply at others.

I will say that my own situation seems to give my marriage some aspect of stability and a deeper sense of trust that I thought it would. Richard knows that it would not even enter my mind to consider having a relationship with another male. It's not just a trust that exists in the face of love...it's simply proven, and is absolute. As for cheating on him with a woman, that requires the normal level of faith-based trust, which is deeper than I think it would be if I were straight.

We (hubby and I) have also observed a higher level of fluidity in women than in men, but I have to wonder if that is not imposed upon men by society...it is a lot more dangerous for a man, wishing to explore that aspect of his sexuality, to risk coming on to another man than it is to a woman, I think. Then again, there is much that I have been insulated against, so I may not have enough insight to know for sure. It has certainly been, and will continue to be, food for thought.

--Dawn :love:

[BenL]

I lived in a marriage for years that, from the outside, was between a man and a woman. That would give me the label straight or heterosexual.

Before that I was a gay man, out dancin' in the clubs. That would give me the label gay or queer or fag or whatever.

When I met my spouse, there was an immediate attraction, not so much to his body, which was female, but to his person. We parented two children. That would give me the label bisexual.

Since my spouse has transitioned to male, I am seen as a gay man again.

In truth, I have never been anyone but me, but gay is the most accurate label I can claim. I was enculturated as gay from an early age, called sissy and fag and fairy. When I was old enough, I claimed those identities -- not the words, but the identities.

So, who am I really?

Just me,

Ben :rainbow:

[Zerbie]

Wow,

That's a really fascinating story, Ben!! I love it!

I rather relate to the labels not making sense. And I love that you went with your response to your partner's soul. It's the relationship from one human being to another that matters and that lasts, not labels and appearances.

Thank you so much for sharing this story.
:love:

[Daniel]

Ben- Your story makes me want to say that this is the way it should be for everyone- that we simply be ourselves- and claim our inheritance in the the land of the loving.

[BenL]

Ben- Your story makes me want to say that this is the way it should be for everyone- that we simply be ourselves- and claim our inheritance in the the land of the loving.

Thanks, guys. It's the reaction I expected, and I'm gratified that it's the one I received. There's so much transphobia in the gay community that one can never be sure. I posted the story mostly because it's my story but partly because I know that there are trans people lurking here. I wanted people to know that strict adherence to labels can be harmful to your health. :lol:

BenL

[BronzDragon]

Thanks, guys. It's the reaction I expected, and I'm gratified that it's the one I received. There's so much transphobia in the gay community that one can never be sure. I posted the story mostly because it's my story but partly because I know that there are trans people lurking here. I wanted people to know that strict adherence to labels can be harmful to your health.


» Thom says: ☛ I think that Transcents are as spooky to us as intersexuals. These people are difficult to classify, rationally, and that makes it hard for us to cope. I am guessing that, though Bisexuality is the norm from which the extremes deviate, it, too, falls into this spooky category.

We are human, and our (genetic or social) natures encourage us to fly or fight what we fear. We are human, and unlike other animals, we are capable of subelementing our instincts in favor of our curiosity. Bisexuals and Transcents are afraid to come out, and the rest of us are afraid to look at them. Funny thing is, many queers blur gender lines: maybe it’s the woman-in-the-bush, or the monster-under-the-table, syndrome. “I’m a good boy, I didn’t spill it! The Devil did it, not me!” he cries with the evidence in his hands.

I know I am struggling to understand it. The shadows are always difficult to see into, even if I were born there.

Ben, I think what you are experiencing here is a higher level of thinking. I would pose that most people who live on this list are spiritual dissidents of some degree. As such, we remember the pain we have felt at being rejected, judged, and violently disposed of. As such, we refuse to extend that violence to others. That SatyaGraha requires that we face the “spooks” out there, and see them for what they really are, our own fear of what is different. Because we face them, they do not fester in our own Shadow (anti-ego, daimonic-ego), and so do not become the terrible monster under the table.

On a personal Note: I think I’ve only met one Transcent (man=woman). I was uncomfortable, not out of fear of whom she was, but because of my own inexperience. It is like telling someone their fly is down. We fear, because of what we think might be going on in them when we say it. I want to understand. I am reading a book on ministering to Transcents. Still, reading a book can only go so far. I live in the San Jacinto Valley of California, and can’t find anything in my neighborhood that would help me broaden my horizons on this issue.

[Zerbie]

Thanks, guys. It's the reaction I expected, and I'm gratified that it's the one I received.

:love: It's an utterly beautiful story. And you're you, regardless of how your loved one manifests physically, male, female, somewhere in between. :love:

There's so much transphobia in the gay community
:'( :( That makes me sad. I suppose it's true - I've run into biphobia myself. What can we do about it?


that one can never be sure. I posted the story mostly because it's my story but partly because I know that there are trans people lurking here. I wanted people to know that strict adherence to labels can be harmful to your health. :lol:

BenL

Good one Ben! I agree that labels, created as a convenience, sometimes become inaccurate and can even pose difficulty.

With regard to the trans issue, I wouldn't say I am transphobic because people are people, and being the way I am, would have been open to dating a trans person when I was single, but I am sometimes afraid of saying something wrong, like using a wrong pronoun, or a wrong term like "transgendered" which I've heard is considered insulting though I haven't been able to figure out quite why. I have heard so from a couple of the trans people I've met.

That I am aware of, I've met 3 trans people, 2 F2M and 1 M2F. I don't know any of them well, but I appreciate that they have been friendly and welcoming to me and ready to explain things that I don't understand. I knew I had come a long way when hubby and I were out of town at a really nice restaurant: I asked the waiter where was the "ladies' room" and he replied, "We have a gender-neutral restroom right over there, but if you prefer a ladies' room there is one downstairs around the corner." And I thought: "Hey! Is this restaurant trans-friendly? Or was that just a coincidence?"

As a side-note, I've never understood why we have gender-segregated bathrooms in the first place. :disagree:

[BenL]

... but I am sometimes afraid of saying something wrong, like using a wrong pronoun, or a wrong term like "transgendered" which I've heard is considered insulting though I haven't been able to figure out quite why. I have heard so from a couple of the trans people I've met.

Best I can tell, the preferred term is "transgender," the idea being that being transgender is not something that was done to someone by an outside agent (as implied by the past participle form), but is a descriptive term for one's gender identity.

Unless, of course, you're transsexual. Transsexual describes a person who has changed sex from birth sex to the appropriate sex to match the brain's concept of identity. The way to remember is: Sex is what's between your legs, gender is what's between your ears. That, of course, is an oversimplification, since few people see what's between a person's legs, so it's the secondary sexual characteristics that convey a person's sex publicly: facial hair, breasts, body shape. Transsexual people are born, I believe, with a disconnect between who they know they are and a birth body that betrays that understanding. There are semantics wars in the trans community constantly. This is my best understanding at the moment.

Transgender is the umbrella term. There is a fluid range of gender identity and expression from all male to all female. Examples of transgender people who are not transsexual include people who identify as third-gender, androgynous people, people who for whatever reason don't transition medically, and crossdressers, including drag kings and drag queens. Whew! I know I've left someone out or missnamed somebody, for which the trans language police will no doubt get me. :confused:

I knew I had come a long way when hubby and I were out of town at a really nice restaurant: I asked the waiter where was the "ladies' room" and he replied, "We have a gender-neutral restroom right over there, but if you prefer a ladies' room there is one downstairs around the corner." And I thought: "Hey! Is this restaurant trans-friendly? Or was that just a coincidence?"
As a side-note, I've never understood why we have gender-segregated bathrooms in the first place. :disagree:

Zerbie, public bathrooms are the BIGGEST hurdle for people in the early stages of transition. Society is SO skittish about mixing the genders in bathrooms and lockerrooms. Women, I understand, feel more vulnerable than men because of the history of rape and violence. But men can react violently to a non-biomale using those facilities. Obviously it doesn't make as much difference with one-person-at-a-time bathrooms. It's the large public facilities that are difficult.

What I've learned since my partner came out as trans is how powerful words can be. They can define people and hurt them, or they can liberate and uphold them. When you get tired of trying to police your language, think of what the words faggot, dyke, the b-word and the n-word have done to put down whole classes of people.

BenL

P.S. Sorry for hijacking the bisexual thread.

[Zerbie]

What I've learned since my partner came out as trans is how powerful words can be. They can define people and hurt them, or they can liberate and uphold them. When you get tired of trying to police your language, think of what the words faggot, dyke, the b-word and the n-word have done to put down whole classes of people.

BenL

P.S. Sorry for hijacking the bisexual thread.

Thread-drift is inevitable in any good online conversation. Tho if we wanna continue this discussion maybe we should make it it's own whole thread, too.

Ben - please don't misunderstand me. I'm not "tired" of policing language - it's that I worry probably too much, about accidentally misusing terms or some such. I want people to feel comfortable around me which, if I run around saying ignorant things, might not be possible. Hopefully all of us in this community are welcoming to our trans friends who might be lurking online - we've had some posters visit once or twice who identified as trans, but as far as I can recall they haven't been posting often. It's just one of those things I sometimes wonder about: Are we as welcoming as we could be? Am I?

On second thought, maybe this thread is the perfect place to discuss it - the Bs and the Ts in LGBT still give me the impression of just being casually tacked on - how much is biphobia and transphobia within the LGBT community a problem?

[BenL]

On second thought, maybe this thread is the perfect place to discuss it - the Bs and the Ts in LGBT still give me the impression of just being casually tacked on - how much is biphobia and transphobia within the LGBT community a problem?

The worst versions of homophobia, biphobia and transphobia are the internalized ones that gay, lesbian, bisexual and trans people have about themselves. I'm still rooting mine out.

And, yes, because of the numbers in the case of the trans community, they do sometimes feel like an afterthought in the LGBT community. And many trans people who identify as straight (remember gender identity does NOT dictate sexual orientation) don't want to be identified with gays and lesbians.

Bisexuals seem to me to be the least well-defined community under the rainbow umbrella. Perhaps that is because some of them blend so well into either the straight or the gay communities that they go unnoticed.

I feel that we all need each other. Civil and human rights are not divisible. Our happy community is united in supporting variations in gender identity, expression and behavior. That's the only positive unifying aspect I see for all four parts of the community. Looked at that way, I think we all affirm each other's right to decide our own identities and the shapes our lives are going to take.

To me, that fits in with the principles of individual freedom on which this country was founded (apologies to non-US members). Throughout our history, different factions have tried to hijack the Constitution. That's why the Founding Fathers tacked on the Bill of Rights. It's our turn now to take back our freedoms from the people who are trying to hold them hostage.

As far as lurkers (trans or otherwise) go, my experience with online groups is that only a small percentage of members participate actively. But over and over again, when lurkers come out of hiding, they say, "I rarely post anything here, but I read all the posts every day." They are silent partners in our conversations.

BenL

[novaseeker]

how much is biphobia and transphobia within the LGBT community a problem?

Oh I think it's still quite a problem on both fronts, but it plays itself out very different between the Gs and Ls.

In my own personal experience, the anti-bi sentiment I have seen from gay men often flows from the idea that bi men (because it's usually an attitude directed towards other men and not bi women) are in reality gay men in denial, and that they should just own up to their gayness and stop claiming that they are bi. The underlying discomfort is that, for a good number of gay men, their own journey of self-discernment included a period in which they may have considered themselves to be bisexual, before they decided that they were either primarily or exclusively same-sex attracted -- and that personal experience gets projected outwards on others in an effort to find commonality of personal narrative, which is, in itself, a way of shoring up one's own self-esteem. As we discussed above, in some people their own idenitification as gay may be subject to some question itself (i.e., may be more "forced" than accurate), and that internalized dissonance can also be directed towards others who have reached a different conclusion about themselves. A related, more political, motivation is that some gay men, believing that bi men are mostly gay men in denial, want to end that denial to make the ranks of openly gay men larger and thereby increase the political influence of gay men. Now the whole idea of adding the Bs to the rainbow was to try to get past these attitudes and instead see bi people as sitting in the same boat --- but alas the older attitudes die out slowly in some generations of gay men.

My own perception of the lesbian community, looking in from the outside, is that it has a somewhat more accepting position towards bi women. I don't know why this is. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that more women openly identify as bi than men, and a resulting greater acceptance of sexual "fluidity" among women than is the case with men. I don't know, to be honest, but from the outside looking in, it certainly appears that the lesbian community doesn't suffer from the same degree of discord on the bisexual issue as the gay male community does.

Now, as for transfolk, interstingly I think there are quite a few similarities in the way they are perceived as well.

In the gay community, in my perception there are really varying views towards T-people. On the one hand, you have people who are very negative, along the lines of "look, I'm gay, but I don't want to have anything to do with a guy in a dress ... why are you lumping me together with a guy in a dress, when that has nothing to do with me, and only makes people think of me in an even more bizzare way than they already do?!?" The discomfort is partly political (i.e., T-inclusiveness in the rainbow will slow down everyone's progress, because it's going to take the public forever to get comfortable with T-people), and partly personal (i.e., there are plenty of gay men who are quite narrow in their own perception of appropriateness, and do not like to associate themselves with drag queens, more "fem" gay men, and certainly not T-people, but who want to be seen as "one of the guys who happens to be gay" ... for folks like that, an institutional association with T-people goes squarely against their own sense of self-identity and is therefore uncomfortable).

Another set of issues is similar to the ideas that some gay men have towards bisexuals -- namely that somehow being transgendered is like being a gay man in denial, because these people just don't want to deal with the fact that they are gay, and it is easier for them to deal with their dissonance if they simply cease to be male. Of course, this attitude, in my opinion, is based on a complete ignorance of what transgendered is, of what the experience is, and how it's not about sexual orientation -- as it is with respect to bisexuals, this kind of attitude is more often a projection of one's own personal experience onto others, without realizing that the actual personal experience of others may be -- and in this case generally is -- radically different. Unfortunately some of these kinds of ideas are being backed up by anti-trans academics like J. Michael Bailey, who basically says that there are two kinds of MTF transsexuals (Bailey doesn't care to deal with FTMs because they don't match his theories): (1) effeminate gay men who find it easier to live as women than as effeminate gay men due to acceptance issues in both the straight and gay communities (he calls these people "homosexual transsexuals" (?!?)) and (2) "autogynephilic" transsexuals, meaning men who are attracted to themselves as women in a type of narcissism. Bailey has been roundly attacked and refuted, but once the ideas are out there, people who are looking for support for their already pre-existing biases against transgendered people grab onto them and use them to harden their own perspectives. Bailey, who pathologizes transsexualism, thinks that category (1) should be encouraged to live as gay men and category (2) are more severely mentally ill and in any case should not be tolerated in acting out on their behaviors. All of this is of course related to the problem that the DSM-IV still includes "gender identity disorder" as a pathology, which undermines the Trans community's efforts for greater acceptance, and legitimizes critiques and "cure proposals" from the likes of Bailey (after all, according to this way of thinking, if it is a pathology, why ought it not be subject to curative therapies other than gender transition).

On the other hand, as more gay men become better informed about the issues, I think more are becoming more tolerant of trans people and less threatened by their inclusion in the rainbow. Hopefully over the course of time this will continue.

Among lesbian women, again from the outside looking in, it again appears that there is slightly more acceptance of the idea of variant gender expression than there is in the gay male community. I don't know why that might be the case, but if it is in fact the case it would make for an interesting comparison and contrast.

[sawyer]

This is a fascinating discussion... and something I need to research. I think there is something revolutionary here.

I agree, this is revolutionary. I'm glad to read all the posts. I've got some mulling over to do yet, before I say anything.

[Zerbie]

Hazarding a guess, perhaps the "revolutionary" thing is that there really is no clearcut "us" or "them" but that we are far more alike than we're taught to believe. That what's been labelled "queer" actually probably describes the MAJORITY of human beings, not a minority.

[tdogg]

I love celebrating all people for who they are. I'm an out of the box type who prefers NOT to keep people in a box, and I HATE labels. Although, I do find myself in the trap of using labels more than I care to. To label someone and stuff them in the box one wishes to see them in is a disservice to both and humanity in the bigger picture.

I really enjoy hearing people's life journey experiences, it expands my mind and continually obliterates the lines some would draw to keep one in a box. (Thanks for sharing Ben!) We are 'our journey' so far - all of our experiences good, bad or indifferent have made us the person we are at this point in our lives. Our individual journies are truly something to celebrate and affect humanity as a whole. It dictates our future actions (or in-actions), and how we relate to others.

Bi-sexuality is something to celebrate - it is a unique and blessed gift. I think Kinsey got it right on this one, most of us are bisexual to a degree - very few are simply and totally straight or gay. I've had relationships with men in the past, including one of nearly 18 years with my ex husband. It was more like friendship than a marriage, I tend to be (like Zerbie) more 'butch' around males, I want to play football, talk sports, lift weights, race cars, etc. I do find myself attracted to males here and there, but it doesn't come with a defined sexual desire. With women, it makes my heart race and my palms get sweaty, and other things... Interestingly, I find myself mostly on the femme side (never too femme in my life) around women including my partner, although on occasion I have to put on my superman cape and be the butch I know I can be (I'm the spider control person at home!).

For those who need a label, I'm a lesbian through and through. But I like Ben's answer best - I'm really just 'me'.

[andrewlittle]

...I'd just like to say that I like all the "me's" on whom I have been eavesdropping. There is so much value in each and every person, and so much to love when stories are shared. Makes you wonder how hate can exist, doesn't it? Anyway, thank you all for sharing so openly in a way that allows those of us who are unaware to listen and learn from you.

May God bless you all.

[belladonnacordial]

Hey all,

I've been self-identitifying as bisexual since I was seven years old when I first discovered the concept. My sex dreams and fantasies have always involved both males and females, as did my early crushes, as well as my first sexual and romantic involvements. I did not meet any other people I recognized as being bisexual until high school.

There are people who will not date interracially for what ever reason. There are people who do not date intersexually again for what ever reason. The attraction still may be there to one degree or another. I have met people I felt were entirely gay and entirely straight. I would say those are in the minority.

As for me, I simply have no partner preference male over female or vice versa. To rule someone out because of their gender just seems ridiculous to me. (I don't say this to offend anyone. This is simply how I view my own sexuality and is not a judgement on the sexuality or preferences of others) But really, for one thing it cuts down on your chances of finding a date by 50 percent! To my way of thinking people are more than the sum of their private parts. Aspects of personality are far greater attractors than any specific physical characteristic.

I've known people who will only date blondes, muscles, hairy guys, thin women, or black men. To me that is reducing a person to a fetish. Again, I'm not trying to offend here. There is simply no way to talk about some of these issues without running the risk of offending someone. These issues need to be talked about.

People are people. Sometimes I connect with them and sometimes I don't. I'm one of those people who don't have a "type." Concurrently no one is 'safe' from me either. I can't be all boys together or all girls together with any group. Even in a group of bisexual women ( or women who identify bisexually ) our wildly varying experiences and inclinations may make us unsafe to each other. Consider the nature of the perceived threat that gay man is supposed to pose within groups of men (locker rooms, sports teams, etc.) Bisexuals break all of the rules and cross all the boundaries. We are dangerous everywhere to everyone.

Because I've been in a heterosexual relationship for a decade, it should be easy for me to consider myself heterosexual I suppose. The fact is that I am attracted to both women and men constantly the same as I was before entering my current relationship. I really don't see that ever changing. I choose not to act on those attractions because my current relationship is a monogamous one (only my second.)

Generally speaking monogamy has not been a factor in the vast majority of my past relationships. I don't seem to have a need for monogamy, though I do see the advantages. Since I can take it or leave it, I leave that up to my partner's needs.

Growing up bisexual was a dirty little secret in very cold very secretive family. Everyone knew I was 'funny' and my cousin was 'queer' but such things were never discussed in the open. Then again nothing of a personal nature ever was discussed. My family kept secrets of and from each other as a matter of course. We never knew my father had cancer until just before the funeral. Talking about things would have made life too real to ignore. So we all turned talking about nothing into art form.

I never got a birds and bees talk either. Sex was a taboo subject completely ignored and a total mystery until I solved all it by myself with library and practicals. I didn't really have a coming out experience as such. In some ways I was never in. In other ways I had no one to come out to.

My cousin did try later in life when he chose a life partner. Apparently his parents and my mother told him that he wasn't gay, he was mistaken. They didn't seem too bothered by the addition to the family though. I never did bother to try to bridge the sexuality issue or non-issue. I became self-supporting as soon as I could and left home when I was sixteen.

Strangely enough heterosexual males and females have tended to be more accepting and supportive of my sexuality and my person in general. Often there is an unhealthy amount of curiosity that I never know how best to deal with. I don't feel like I'm qualified to speak to the issue of bisexuality in general as I only have my own experiences to judge. I doubt there is a typical bisexual life experience. There are far too many variables involved.

As to the more typical aspects, I have encountered a good bit of hostility and suspicion from lesbians especially, who seem to be the group most threatened by what ever my bisexuality represents to them. Not to say that occasionally I have not made good friends of lesbians, I have. My last relationship before my current one (which ended very badly but for mostly unrelated reasons) with a lesbian lasted for just over three years. All but the last couple of months were really good.

I do find the majority of lesbians I meet regard me with a good deal of sexual suspicion as though bisexuality is a scam of some sort. I have been accused of lack of commitment to my sexuality (assuming female bisexuals are just bad lesbian, for example), moral weakness, sluttishness, other assumptions such as prostitution, and thrill-seeking that have no basis in reality but seem more a projection of other peoples fantasies and prejudices.

Many have expressed fear that I will leave them for men therefore they are unwilling to become involved even as aquaintances. (I don't understand why if I left them for a woman it would be any easier.) In other words, I am often shunned because of my sexuality within the GLBT community. This is not all that rare from what I glean from other bisexual women and men with whom I have discussed this.

I'm sorry to say I haven't gotten along very well with the few identifying as bisexual males and females I have met over the years. Obviously there are bisexual men and women in both the hetersexual and gay communities who pass rather than identify. Good for them. I can understand the need to do that. It is not and never has been what I choose for myself.

A lot of gay men on the other hand, simply refuse to admit that bisexuality exists. There are all the jokes. I have heard them all. Though they have been far more friendly on the whole, I still seem to pose a threat to some. Many gay men seem happy enough to view me as sexually confused, just needing to find the right man or right woman so all that nasty old bisexuality can clear right up like a bad rash.

Well, I hope that gives you a bit of insight on my bisexual experience. To finish I paraphrase a chant from a great movie, "Gooble, gobble, gooble, gobble, I accept you I accept you." (or in the film, we accept you.) Has anyone seen it?

[andrewlittle]

Great movie, Freaks, especially considering it was made in the early 30's (I think).

[Zerbie]

Hi BellaDonna,

We have several experiences in common. I encountered that reaction from lesbians sometimes too, like there was a betrayal involved by being attracted to men. There was a movie in the early 90s about a lesbian who fell for a man and her friends had a hard time coping - it was called "Amy" something, wasn't it?

I also run into the concept that bisexuality doesn't exist, most often from gay men. But it really does exist. :agree: I was only confused when I was trying to figure out which "one" I was (gay/straight). Well that and - by the time I learned the word bisexual as an orientation, I was running into swingers and polyamorous types who differed so much from me and everything I"m about I figured I COULDN'T be bi, so went back to trying to force myself into one category or the other for another few years. :rolleyes: The reluctance to accept bisexuality for a valid life-long "orientation" combined with the misinformation about it certainly added at least 5 years to my own coming out experience.

[BruceChris]

That this was Transfiguration Sunday. And to them, the issue, or at least the word is important.

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Lydia]

The movie was called "Chasing Amy."

I'm fighting a cold and am too tired to contribute anything else at the moment. Maybe tomorrow? :)