When I was fairly younger, I was in a relationship with a woman who told me that if she were to learn that I had sex with a man, especially bottoming but also topping (she didn't use those terms, she used bad terms), then she would feel disgusted and betrayed and would never feel attracted to me again or see me as a man again.
I said to her that I was disappointed in her, that she had internalised homophobia and that she was a massive hypocrite. Her self proclaimed best male friend presented to the world as flamingly gay, and she was openly bi herself, not as in "I would totally fuck women cause I like the idea of it", bus as in she had fucked women before and would do it again. Apparently she deserves to be fucked by a real man, which apparently bi men are not.
So...yeah, you can be a loudly proclaimed ally AND a member of the LGBTQ community yourself, and still be a disgusting homophobe right alongside the best of bigots.
When I was in my early 20s I briefly dated a girl who told me she was having feelings for another woman and was being curious, she eventually broke up with me in order to be with her, but we remained good friends after that.
Eventually she came out as a lesbian and when I told her that I was bi she immediately ended our friendship all even yelled some slurs at me.
I know it’s a bit different, but there are cis women out there knowingly dating trans women who’ve likely had sex with men. So common yet, but I think ubiquitous isn’t accurate.
Actually now that I’m thinking about it I knew a girl who hooked up with her gay guy best friend.
I wasn’t commenting on this particular double standard anywhere as much as double standards in general; especially those which are almost exclusively one-way and “acceptable” for only women to hold. That a man trying to employ the same attitudes would be pilloried and castigated to the same degree that women would be lauded and supported.
You've just been all over this thread with your misogynistic hot takes and telling people how "all women" act. You should get off the internet for a while.
You've just been all over this thread with your misogynistic hot takes and telling people how "all women" act. You should get off the internet for a while.
Mmm-hm. Attempts to socially shame me into silence and an ad hominem on top of that, but not a whisper of a viable rebuttal.
That’s the problem with these censure attempts – always feelings over facts, instead of facts over feelings.
Don’t worry, I know you had absolutely nothing to counter with once I saw the ad hominem. That’s the problem with intellectual bankruptcy, after all - nothing to work with except rage and other emotions. No facts, only feelings. So out come the personal attacks like the ad hominems, because rage and shame are the only usable tools left.
Sorry you had to experience this bullshit. I think people like that lack the emotional intelligence to see other people as equals. Instead they only value them as much as whatever personal satisfaction they extract out of them. Intrinsically you've lost nothing of value that day, but I know the sudden betrayal of the friendship you thought you had can be shocking and hurtful.
Maybe calling women lesbians instead of gay allows people to be homophobic while accepting lesbians. After all, the word was invented by men who thought women couldn't be gay the way men can.
I'm curious what the people's opinions are who downvoted you. Do they disagree or are they just angry? If they disagree they should have left a comment explaining why, so I'm assuming they're irrationally upset and voicing their opinion would make them look bad maybe?
Eventually she came out as a lesbian and when I told her that I was bi she immediately ended our friendship
Can't really imagine it. Even stubborn homophobes do not end friendship over someone coming out. A lot of them just become curious and eventually accepting. Am not LGBTQ+ though, so my judgement is kinda not reliable, but still.
The woman you're talking about is exceptionally weird and she can go fuck herself
It's adorable that you think "stubborn homophobes" wouldn't end a friendship over someone coming out. I genuinely wish they did just become curious and eventually accepting, instead of immediately rejecting and intimidating and expressing feelings of disgust and revulsion.
Your experience is valid, as it happened to you and none of us in this thread were there probably anyway.
In my experience, friends don’t end friendships over homophobia. They just suddenly become very busy and they have less and less time to spend with the person who comes out as bi.
‘Bi erasure’ is such a common phenomenon that we invented the term ‘bi erasure’.
Also I come from a different background to the most of those who are here. In Russia, we have this state propaganda that seals homophobia and since nobody is trusting the government propaganda, a lot of people are simply curious what it is to be gay (or bi, trans). And homophobia is not typical to what I hear from my peers in the west: it often has somewhat patronizing form of "don't you know that if you say you're gay, you'll get a lot of trouble". It was literally the thing I said to a lovely gay couple when we went to the bar in Saint Petersburg.
I don't know how common it is, but I've had several past girlfriends express internalised homophobia against gay men, bisexuals or lesbians, and that's too damn high a number since as french leftist, I don't harmonize with conservative women.
When I was younger I was naive or dumb enough to think that we would both grow as people in the relationship and some of my values would rub up on them. Now that would an instant curtain call for me, you can grow up as person in your own time, I have better things to do.
I had a bi girlfriend who wanted me to be bi. I've seen it go every which way. I'm not sure what the overall social trend is, but people are individuals and can defy your hopes and expectations of them in strange ways, for better or for worse.
Honestly, while the exact way your ex handled the situation probably wasn't ideal, this notion is really just an extension of the sexual puritanism that created homophobia in the first place. Imo, we should just accept that people's sexual desires are what they are. If someone is turned off by bi guys, that's fine - she doesn't have to date them. Just like it is perfectly fine to be turned off by people with red hair, or people with annoying laughs, or people who are skinnier or fatter than whatever your personal preference is. Some people aren't interested in shy people. Some people aren't interested in dumb people. Some people aren't interested in poor people. Does it suck when someone you like isn't interested in you because of something you can't control? Yes! But at the same time, people's sexual preferences are also largely outside their control. So why demonize them for them?
Ugh... Thanks for whiteknighting my ex's being biphobic with your moral relativism.
First of all I don't know why you felt the need to inject sexual puritanism into the conversation, it's not really a thing culturally in present day France, especially not in me or my exes mindset or social circles.
Second, don't give me this your mileage may vary bullshit, some things are objectively bad. Having preferences is fine. Being phobic against a group of people is not. It's fine to be more easily attracted to tall people, or short, or green eyed, or mixed raced or whatever physical characteristic, as long as it doesn't turn into a fetish, and I won't get into that whole other subject. But being repulsed or disliking an entire group of people because of a not morally wrong trait, is objectively wrong and textbook definition of being phobic. Being attracted more easily/often to white people with blue eyes and dimples rather than black people is fine, you like what you like. But being repulsed by all black people, or gingers, or Asians, for the sole reason they are black, or ginger, or Asian, is not. And no, nobody said you owe some random person a shag, just because they're from a minority. But questioning why someone is repulsed by the entirety of group of people is legitimate. If there's something universally morally wrong with a group, like fucking Nazis, it's fine being repulsed. If there's a rational reason to reject someone, like not wanting to get a in a relationship with a firefighter cause you don't want a partner who may die in a fire one day, or your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it's fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them. If the only reason you dislike or are repulsed by a group of people is irrational, like they're a different race or different sexual orientation, then it's textbook bigotry/phobia, and that's objectively wrong.
So to go back to the story with my ex; being a bisexual man is not a visual or physical trait. So if you're a woman who likes having sex with men, and you were to reject or feel disgust for a man you otherwise are attracted to and enjoy having sex with, for the only reason that you can't deal with the idea/image of him having sex with other men in the past, that's textbook biphobia and homophobia, and that's objectively wrong. If you feel so disturbed by this hypothetical, you feel the need to ask me, your partner at the time, a self declared straight man you are in a committed relationship with, if I hid sexual experiences with men from you, to assuage your irrational fears, you're being biphobic and that's just wrong. Again, if you're a woman having sex with men, and don't trust bisexual men because you think they will cheat with men, guess what, still biphobic, still wrong. Nobody's demonizing anybody, moral relativism sucks, some things are in fact objectively wrong.
yeah, it's super weird how desperate people are to rationalize this nonsense.
like... being turned off by someone's race. it's just your phobia/racism. it's not a 'preference' like people like to claim. esp if your 'turned off' feelings are a product or assumption about that person's sexuality/race being a crude stereotype or entrenched in outdated nonsense. neither of those things is a choice either.
it's the idea that they are disgusted/turn off by. it's not a part of sexuality at all, it's that they associate negative traits with a certain sexuality. that's messed up. and it's also not really rejecting the person, it's rejecting the category.
But being repulsed by all black people, or gingers, or Asians, for the sole reason they are black, or ginger, or Asian, is not.
So gay men should suck it up and give women a chance?
If the only reason you dislike or are repulsed by a group of people is irrational
Most of attraction/unattraction is not rational. It is emotional. It is a visceral feeling that doesn't care about logic.
I, personally, don't like mint chocolate. When I put it in my mouth, I feel a visceral feeling of disgust, and spit it out. There is no logic behind this - it is just what I like and don't like.
not a visual or physical trait.
I also provided examples of being turned off by people who are shy, dumb, or poor. Again, these are not logical reasonings, but visceral responses to an individual and their traits.
Nobody’s demonizing anybody
You're demonizing all women who like straight guys but are turned off by bi guys by calling them biphobic.
some things are in fact objectively wrong.
Objectivity is when something is true with no observer present. Morality requires an observer to decree what is right and wrong. This is why we have many philosophical schools of ethics, but only one school of physics (except at the very edge of research).
So gay men should suck it up and give women a chance?
...
"If there's a rational reason to reject someone, like [...]or your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it's fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them."
Second paragraph, towards the end. So what else didn't you bother to read / try to understand ?
Are the sexual orientations of gay men and women compatible ? Did I imply that anywhere ?
Most of attraction/unattraction is not rational. It is emotional. It is a visceral feeling that doesn't care about logic.
I, personally, don't like mint chocolate. When I put it in my mouth, I feel a visceral feeling of disgust, and spit it out. There is no logic behind this - it is just what I like and don't like.
We're not talking about food, were talking about people. If they're not harming anyone, they deserve to be treated with respect, as equals. Treating people with respect includes overcoming any prejudice you may have internalised growing up. Also having a visceral reaction, not an excuse. Visceral reactions can be questioned, and their causes deconstructed. It is possible to grow up as a person even as adult. Racism is visceral reaction, and it still wrong. At least in the reality of moral objectivism that I live in.
But I am curious, do some groups of people give you a "visceral feeling of disgust" like mint chocolate gives you ? What groups of people would those be ?
I also provided examples of being turned off by people who are shy, dumb, or poor. Again, these are not logical reasonings, but visceral responses to an individual and their traits.
Yeah, and you can choose whomever you like as a partner, but repulsion for an entire group of people not doing any harm like poor people or shy people, is the realm of irrational hatred or fear, and that's never ok. Or are you saying it's ok or normal being viscerally repulsed by poor or shy people ?
Again visceral feeling are not an excuse, you're have higher reasoning, and are supposed to at least try to understand and control your feelings if you want to treat other people fairly.
Otherwise there's no sense of accountability for your actions, you just go by pretending you're a mere vessel to your emotions, and stay indifferent to how your behaviour affects other people.
You're demonizing all women who like straight guys but are turned off by bi guys by calling them biphobic.
If the only thing turning off a woman in a man is that he is bisexual then yeah, that's what being prejudiced is. Same guy, same level of physical attractiveness, just as good a person, but straight : desirable. Exact same person but bisexual man : repulsive and less than a real man. That's a biphobic woman, she doesn't see bisexual men as worthy of the same level of respect as straight men, as equals to straight men.
But I get the sense that your ethics and mine don't mix.
Objectivity is when something is true with no observer present. Morality requires an observer to decree what is right and wrong. This is why we have many philosophical schools of ethics, but only one school of physics (except at the very edge of research).
Look. I'm not a philosopher or a historian of Ideas, so my knowledge of moral relativism and moral objectivism or universalism, is at a highschool level, so I think what I'm saying and how I'm saying is perfectly understandable in every day language without resorting to philosophical semantics (and frankly I don't even know why you brought up physics in a story about social issues).
In my stance of moral objectivism, I hold my ex accountable for her prejudice against bisexual and gay men, because it's a stance where seeing bisexual men as inferior and repulsive is wrong regardless of your personal history, culture and upbringing, since being a bisexual man does no harm to anyone and if that bothers you you should get a life.
In your stance of what I see as moral relativism, it's unfair to hold my ex accountable for her prejudice because the context of her "visceral feeling of disgust" is what is truly important, and she's just unjustly misunderstood.
your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it’s fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them.”
I mean, I'm referring to sexual repulsion. This is typically what people are referring to when they talk about having a preference against some person or other. It manifests as a visceral negative reaction, very similar to what one might feel if they think about eating something they find gross. A gay man would find the idea of sleeping with a woman repulsive. He can still treat women with respect. In the same way, a woman can find the idea of sleeping with a bi guy repulsive, and can still treat bi men with respect. This is an incompatibility in sexual orientation.
Same guy, same level of physical attractiveness, just as good a person, but straight : desirable. Exact same person but bisexual man : repulsive and less than a real man
I could just as easily swap in what kind of shoes the guy wears, the guy's political affiliation, the accent the guy has, the way he has chosen to style his hair, or literally anything else.
But I am curious, do some groups of people give you a “visceral feeling of disgust” like mint chocolate gives you ? What groups of people would those be ?
Certainly. I'm straight. The idea of sleeping with another man gives me a visceral feeling of disgust. This is fine. I am completely comfortable admitting this, because this is my sexual preference.
Or are you saying it’s ok or normal being viscerally repulsed by poor or shy people?
It is 100% okay to feel whatever feelings one feels. If the thought of sleeping with someone who is poor or shy is repulsive to you, then that is fine. You don't have to sleep with them.
and frankly I don’t even know why you brought up physics in a story about social issues
Because I don't think you know what the word "objective" means.
The Aztecs thought it was right to sacrifice children to the gods by cutting their hearts out. We don't. Moral relativism says that both of these points of view are equally valid in their respective cultures. I happen to think that this is more or less the correct point of view, since any kind of objective morality is literally impossible because all morality is is values, and values are pure subjectivity. But that's an academic distinction.
My point fits squarely within good ol' fashioned liberal western ethics, which you identified as "does no harm to anyone".
Being sexually repulsed by bisexual men, and expressing this preference by simply not sleeping with them harms no one.
I could give a detailed answer like I did till now but why bother.
No to all you've just said.
Also moral relativism and nihilism is edgelord garbage, I thought so when I was a highschooler and I always will.
You can and you should have some universalism regarding morals. You shouldn't fuck children, no matter the culture or time in history. Pain is also universal and so is the evil of inflicting it for pleasure or callousness. I could go on but you and I have nothing to say to each other.
Where’s the rape joke? I understand that most jokes involving prison and sex are rape jokes, but that one doesn’t seem to be. The writer gave handjobs, and everybody liked him after. Sounds like a fun, consensual time.
Prison rape is never funny. It's traumatic, violent, and life destroying.
Giving hand jobs to potential rapists in order to appease them in advance is neither consentual nor funny.
Sea-lioning replies justifying rape will be blocked.
Edit: @[email protected] I am so sorry this happened to you. I also understand dark humor can be a helpful relief. I hope you get the support you need.
"Sea-lioning" is a way of arguing in bad faith; specifically, asking for evidence or feigning ignorance every time the opposing party makes a claim, regardless of how trivial said claim is.
Nobody knows what BonkTheBonkTheAnnoyed thinks sea-lioning has to do with anything though.
Very strange you haven't absorbed this concept yet. "Bi women are straight but bi men are gay" is one of the most common tropes in the larger culture's conception of sexual identity.
I’m in my mid thirties, and I’m a bi woman who tends to go for bi men. I was once chatting about one of my exes with my dad and same aged stepsister, when she expressed deep surprise that I would be willing to date a man who had dated a man. My dad agreed, which is par for the course, but I could not for the life of me get a believable answer from my stepsister as to why that would be a dealbreaker.
She had been part of the GSA in one of the most progressive towns in America and was at that time in first cohort of women to join a previously men-only fraternity at her college, so she definitely falls under the progressive umbrella.
I literally can’t think of a reason except for donating blood, but that wasn’t it.
I mean you kinda said the reason yourself: "[she] join[ed] a previously men-only fraternity at her college". Of course I'm only speculating.
The people she surrounded herself with probably thought that way and thus she thought that way. Most people do not think critically about their beliefs very much, yes even most progressives are just progressives because of the people around them.
Tbh, the fraternity was pretty inclusive. It wasn’t required that they go coed, they just decided to. I do wonder what she’s like now that she’s a lot further removed from her hometown, but I know she’s at least still heavily anti-trump.
For a long time (at least through the late 2010s and possibly still now, I’m no longer a good candidate to donate for other reasons), you couldn’t donate if you were a man who had sex with men (MSM) or if you had had sex with a MSM recently (6 months-2 years). Your own condom use was irrelevant.
I did once decide to stick with hands only with someone because I had an appointment to donate blood later that week. My stepsister wasn’t aware of that restriction though and I can’t imagine it’s the presiding reason why a lot of even queer women aren’t interested in bi men, given the demographics of blood donation.
There are a lot of wild things that preclude you from donating blood depending on where you live though, including time spent in the UK during the mad cow disease spike, even if you were a vegan. I understand that blood donation organizations are working with such large numbers and such a small margin for error that they would rather exclude a thousand good candidates than let one bad candidate donate, but it ends up being extremely discriminatory. I looked for some recent numbers, and it is true that even today the majority of new HIV cases occur in MSM or people who have sex with MSM, but given how widespread HIV suppression treatment is (in the US), correct condom usage reduces that risk to nearly zero.
It may be a byproduct of some dating issues from before her time dating that got passed down to her. Namely, that lots of gay men were in the closet, and ended up leaving their wife/girlfriend when they came out. And that could have carried through to women thinking it was that, because it's easier to think the person leaving you doesn't want women, not just doesn't want you.
Hopefully that mentality just disappears on its own after awhile. I think it's already on its way out.
taking the post at plain value, it would be a lot cooler if less people were homophobic against bi men. i dont want all the assholes to stay away from me, i want them to be decent people.
I'm just saying: as a guy, this is not the only double standard, and not the only thing that people see as "you did it once so you're $thing forever" that guys go through.
It's probably one of the most notable though.
As men, we deal with a lot of judgemental shit and we're expected to deal with it "like a man"... Whatever the fuck that means.
Another good example of this is crying. If you have a mental breakdown and fall into a crying fit, people will brand you as a cry baby or some shit, and that will stay with you for a long ass time.
There's so much more. I don't have time to think of, nor detail any of it. Any fellas that have examples, I invite you too add them in reply. Ladies, you can too. And anyone else can, honestly; let's not forget our non-binary family.
I've had two relationships with women immediately go downhill after I cried in front of them. It was like someone flipped a switch and turned off any physical attraction they had to me.
I've had two relationships with women immediately go downhill after I cried in front of them. It was like someone flipped a switch and turned off any physical attraction they had to me.
Can absolutely confirm this, myself, on a personal level.
Never let them see you genuinely vulnerable unless you want to drive them away, or want that to be weaponized against you at some point in the future. Sometimes even both, but never neither.
Only ever provide curated vulnerabilities that offer of themselves no true vulnerability, but satisfies any desire they may have to see vulnerability in you. Like being distressed at the sight of an unknown dead dog on the side of the road, for example. Clean, simple, controllable, and superficial.
Violate this tenet at your own psychological risk.
It’s how “toxic masculinity” is forced upon men against their will.
Do we want to be sensitive and vulnerable? Sure!
Do we want partners that can accept that sensitivity and vulnerability? Of course!!
But when the vast majority of women do not do as they say, or say as they do, the calculus becomes massively brutal and clear-cut: either cram that shit down to where it will never see the light of day, or see it emotionally/sexually revolt our partner and possibly even make them leave.
Yes! It's intentionally used to invoke blame. Foremost by implying that some list of bad behaviours is only or primarily displayed by men, and secondly by implying that it is the fault of men (often read as all men) when they exhibit these behaviours. I would much rather we just call it toxic behaviour. Both sexes are capable of violence, jealousy, etc. "Toxic masculinity" merely ensures half of the people one is speaking to switch off and might even take the opposite side of the discussion because it's really offensive.
I'm not saying it's right, just, or how it should be,
What makes it infinitely more worse is that almost all women fully and absolutely deny this happens, even when behaving exactly like this.
It’s why such near-ubiquitous behaviour - and women’s hypocritical denial of its existence - is widely documented within both redpill and blackpill writings, and is one of the core reasonings behind MGTOW.
Such overwhelmingly predictable behaviours are what make those philosophies so devastatingly effective and compelling long before anything even mildly misogynistic crops up… after all, facts and evidence that survive tests of disproof speak volumes. These philosophies would have no reason to exist if behaviours and double standards like this weren’t everywhere, and all it takes for a man to see them properly is for their societal brainwashing to be disrupted.
I’ve discovered that emotional availability means you’re available to mirror her emotions. If she’s mad, you better get mad. If she’s sad, you better get sad.
Yes! We need a translator because what many of them say is not what they actually mean. I kept being told I was emotionally unavailable. So I started opening up more, which killed the attraction pretty quickly. What they meant was that they wanted me to listen to them and react in a way which implied I felt their feelings. Most women definitely DO NOT want a man who is in touch with his emotions or is "emotionally available." They want to feel emotionally validated.
Conversation about this can be helpful with the right person. I felt rather one sided in the emotional validation in my relationship. We had a long emotional talk about it and things are better now.
I'll make sure that next time a loved one dies I'm not in public!! Just because some dude finds it uncomfortable to see other people be sad or upset. I'll call my mom now, let her know she can only die when I'm at home in private.
I think my favourite part was "planning to have a mental breakdown" as if that's something that people plan.
Like, yeah, let me just check my calendar for the day. Yeah, I've got lunch with Josh at 12:30, sales meeting at 2:00, mental breakdown at 3:00, panic attack at 6:00. Man, my day is packed!
Some absolute gem of a human being decided to express their opinion that people shouldn't be out in public if they're "planning to have a mental breakdown" because it's so embarrassing for everyone around them to be seen having to comfort a friend who is going through a hard time.
my nephew was murdered, I helped raise him as a teenager while my brother was in the military. I cried in front of my "friends" and they judged me. They are no longer my friends. Terrible people. just like you
thank you. I am happily married and enjoying life with friends that aren't going all in on machismo bs. This all happened a long time ago, so I can slightly forgive my ex-friends for being immature and mocking me behind my back about it. Feelings are hard to deal with yourself let alone with other people when you are 20 years old.
"If any of my friends are stressed and pushed to the breaking point, they need to schedule their mental breakdown in advance for a place and time when I am not around so they don't inconvenience me."
I've definitely had mental breakdowns in the past where I still went into work and went to the grocery store without making it everyone else's problem.
Frankly it sounds like you weren't having a mental breakdown if you went into work or the grocery store without being thrown out. I think we're just operating with different definitions of "mental breakdown."
The funniest part about this to me is that the AIDs epidemic actually forced medical researchers to accept that sometimes guys have sex with other guys, and they even created the term "Men who have Sex with Men" or MSM to cover this fact, since they aren't necessarily gay or bi.
Like, society needs to get over this. Sometimes people have sex with other people. Sometimes they happen to be different genders, sometimes they're the same. It only means whatever it means to the people fucking and little else
I've seen so many cases of staunch progressive groups weaponize a guys sexuality as soon as they have a falling out with him. Its like these people never believed what they were saying. People are so spineless and have no morals.
I'm a woman who is straight AF, not a bicurious-bone in my body that I've discovered yet, and I'm having a casual fling with a bisexual dude. It doesn't bother me at all, he's hot as fuck, sweet as hell, we have a good time together, and I have better things to do with my life than sit around and brood about the gender of his previous partners.
People like this are the progressive version of evangelicals. And like with Christianity they don't get called out enough to keep it from becoming a major problem.
Villainizing male sexuality is why we have a whole new generation boys heading into alt right circles and so far the response has been a variant of telling them to 'man up.' And its going to get a lot worse before it gets even a little better.
This is the root of the problem with much of the discussion around male identity online.
Women finally, and rightfully, gained a voice, and plenty of dudes listened. Many of them, not really understanding feminism as an academic discipline or having any real sympathy towards any aspect of being a man, used that voice to point of the many issues faced by women in the world and to fight for women.
Where this falls apart is that because of the lack of real understanding regarding feminism and the concept of patriarchy, a lot of it boiled down to "shut up, the women are talking" and "we don't care about your problems"
None of this makes the problems away, none of this is really geared towards equality, and much of it is just switching the genders on deeply toxic patriarchal power structures that were used to oppress women for centuries.
When you think about how stupid 90% of the people involved on both sides of this discourse online are, it's of little surprise so many women went looking for easy answers from hucksters who pitched exploitation and oppression as empowerment.
they don’t get called out enough to keep it from becoming a major problem.
idk man 9 times out of 10 I hear someone talking about progressives, they're exclusively referring to the most hypocritical ones. Like, when does anyone talk about the normal progressives that just want good things for everyone? That's boring.
I've had these conversations with people before. I was telling a fellow man how I don't care if my partner is bi. He said something like "woah man, there can be some major trust issues there" implying that her "homosexual needs" will lead her to cheat on me with my sister or something. I didn't follow his logic.
I'm a straight male. My wife is bi. The most important part of her orientation, to me, is that it means everyone else was my competition for her love instead of just other men, but I still won.
As if straight/gay people don't cheat all the time because they're apparently not getting their "needs" met. The person being shitty is the issue, not their sexuality.
Some of the weirdest shit I have seen in the LGBT sphere is how comfortable some of them are with dictating who is allowed to date whom and whether or not their preferences are okay.
It's the main reason I don't really vibe with the LGBT community. Don't mind gays and trans and whatever else is out there. Normal people living their normal lives and loving the people they love and finding ways to be comfortable in their own bodies is how things should be.
But the LGBT sometimes reminds me of organized religion. It's not the individual believer who lives his or her life in peace who is the problem, but the weird cultlike behavior going on in the group where everybody has to hold the same opinions that tend to become progressively more extreme over time until the church controls every aspect of your life. Including whom your are allowed to love.
But it is difficult to bring this up without immediately being labeled a phob because the LGBT owns non-straight sexuality and if you criticize the movement, you criticize all the non straight people.
BLM has similar vibes.
I just don't like groups. Churches, political groups, grassroots movements, you name it. It all ends up the same in the end. With group pressure, control, shaming and ostracizing when you don't toe the line.
If I learned anything in my 20s, its that being a part of any ideological groups is not in your best interest. No matter how good and safe it feels in the beginning.
I don't think they are the only ones on this platform, tbh xD I will say that I have run into some chill blåhaj people here and I have run into people who are affiliated with entirely different instances or what you call them that have displayed some of the most unhinged, unpleasant behavior I have experienced online. I was so close to just delete myself from this platform and forget about having any online social outlet after a series of interactions with particularly disgusting individuals on here. I can kind of see why they were banned off of reddit, ngl. I haven't interacted enough with blåhaj people to say if they are as bad as that or not. Seems like a mixed bag to me.
The most pleasant people on here that I have met have mostly been my fellow Danes and all the Linux people. For whatever reason, the Linux fanatics just tend to be super welcoming and encouraging which statistically shouldn't be the case. All lived experience tells me that groups that are obsessed with a specific topic/lifestyle are usually some of the worst people to be around. Doesn't matter the subject. But somehow these nerds manage to be chill. 😆
I mean I have met many chill lemmy.ml, lemmygrad and hexbear users. They're just a pain when you talk about their specific topics. The same applies to blahaj users. The main issue is ada, the instance admin of blahaj
I guess that's true. Personally I like to give everybody a chance and if they decide to be unhinged toward me and ignore any and all attempts I make to have us meet in the middle, they get a block. I used to think that blocking people was weak and that I should be able to find common ground with others no matter what, but at this point in my life, I have accepted that some people aren't just misunderstood or misunderstanding me or are just having a bad day. Some people are just assholes and a waste of time, so block.
But honestly, someone can belong to any group or ideology, genuinely, any one of them and I will still try and meet them as a person first and be open minded. I have talked to unhinged leftwing extremists and I have talked to unhinged right-wing extremists, religious, atheists, vegans, you name it, and I have found the humanity in them or I have accepted that they are not worth my time. It always depends on the individual, but some individuals are so stuck in the hivemind of their ideology that there really isn't much individual to connect with. And that is kind of scary and sad to come across that. Both online and irl.
True, I should leave it instead of fighting, but I still feel like discussing can be helpful for people stumbling on those posts later. I don't want them to believe the opposite side just because I stopped answering
It's really easy to be manipulated into believing what people write here is true. Most people think the same thing, and it's vastly different from reality
My current girlfriend is cool with it, but she's absolutely fantastic about pretty much everything.
One of my exs on the other hand was a bit more aggressive and weird about it. She had a lot of toxic masculinity beliefs going on.
The real issue I have is that a lot of them think its hot, along with some of the other things I may have been into at one point. It's a bit of a struggle to explain that I'm not asking for more, I'm just being transparent to avoid a potential bombshell being dropped in the future. I don't have the energy for a polycule, to bother with a third, or anything in the lifestyle anymore.
Im 47 years old. In my time I have not once been told Im less of a man by another man. I even had one woman calling me a "poofter" because I said I said I sit down to pee. "No real man would sit down to pee" energy. Meanwhile, all Im thinking is that I dont wanna piss all over the floor in my house because lets face it, some times the stream just goes wherever the fuck it wants to go.
Imagine that, Im not a real man for not wanting to piss on the floor sometimes...
You're lucky to have only been in the company of stand-up men, then. I've had plenty of men ask for my and each other's "man cards" for similarly petty offenses against masculinity.
There is a weird bias against bisexual men in media. Someone I knew even once said she didn't believe bisexual men existed, all men are either straight or gay. For me self identification is important. If someone tells me they're straight but I believe they're bisexual, I'm going to call them straight.
There's a streamer who I use to follow. Use to because she slowly went alt right. Anyway, one of her hangups with partners was refusing to date any man she suspected of being bi because she didn't want a penis that was up an ass in her. She also believes that most men are bisexual. She probably only dates men who are vocally homophobic.
This is one of those things that I see mentioned now and then (and I feel like at some point, someone was able to back it up maybe?), but my brain just refuses to accept that it's real. It just... cannot be real. No. I refuse.
It's funny, because I see so much bi-erasure among gay friends. The idea that every dude is a 6 on the Kinsey Scale and just suffering through straight sex because they don't know any better is stubbornly resilient.
I mean, yeah. Most men are probably somewhat bi, but the idea that most men will seek out other men or even admit to not being repulsed by other men is laughable.
I remember back in highschool, a guy being so defensive, he wouldn't even describe what another guy looked like. I'm a straight guy, but I don't have any issues being able to describe another guy as conventionally attractive.
I have no issues acknowledging a conventionally attractive guy, I do however seem to have absolutely no notion of what this actually looks like. I know by dint of existing in the 21st century that Brad Pitt, George Clooney etc are considered attractive, but for the life of me I couldn't take that knowledge and apply it to someone else. I can spot an egregiously "unattractive" dude, but there's a very broad spectrum of men that just look like "blokes" to me.
I know she makes her boy friends buy new sex toys cause instead of reusing one from previous partners. Honestly, anyone who would actually get with her deserves everything.
ehh... Sex toys are kind of a private and personal thing. I'm all for resusing and that, but I also wouldn't expect someone to reuse my old partners underwear, or toothbrush.
Please don't equivocate homophobia with closeted homosexuality.
There are tons of homophobes who aren't in the closet, and tons of gay guys in the closet who aren't homophobic. Not to mention that using this as an 'attack' toward a homophobe is literally using gay as an insult, which is the same thing homophobes do.
The less I know about her opinions on sex, the better. She seemed to believe any outrageous sex act was more common than it probably was and decry the loss of common sense.
She's really the exception as far as vtubers go. Lots of trans and allies in that sphere. Being able to use a digital avatar to represent yourself lends itself to trans people.
She use to be fun to watch, but that's about 2 years ago at this point.
fwiw the 'queer' women in my life have been the most judgemental of my sexuality. i guess if you agonize about your own sexuality all the time you project that onto other folks though.
That's probably not a coincidence, as the label "queer" is a political identity statement. That is, the people who have made it an important part of their personality are the ones who self-identify that way. I've known many gay men and women for whom their sexuality is an incidental part of their lives, and none of them feel affinity for the "queer" label.
i do wild shit to make the girls im dating lose attraction for me all the time. burping really loud constantly, saying the word "COCKS" when i sneeze, crying about wall-e, shitting with the door open. who cares?
While there is a kernel of truth about the whole gay men stereotype I can't say I ever met a girl who wouldn't date or dumped a guy if she learned he had a bi/gay phase. The only thing that comes close was the guy who got dumped cause he cheated on his gf with her gay best friend.
Hell I had a girl actually try to hook up with me because she heard a rumor I did something with a twink (I hadn't) and wanted set up some weird love triangle with her bi twink friend. I backed away from that one cause it was clear the guy crushed bad for her and there was no way that relationship was going to end with everyone walking away content.
They didn't claim that. They said even progressive women will leave you, meaning they have that issue with all the usual suspects, but also progressive women.
There's degrees to everything, though. There's plenty of traits I think are perfectly okay for people to have, but that I'm still not looking for in a partner. So I guess I probably also fail your purity test.
No obviously not. I wouldn't date black or Asian folks for instance, or fat people, or dumb people or overly outdoorsy folks or a right-winger or a religious person or anyone under 5'10" or a cis woman. I'll happily stand to defend all those folks rights and I'll stand by them hand in hand in solidarity, we just won't fuck.
This is ok. This is normal. When it comes to personal association, especially sexual, freedom of association - is a core tenet of any libertarian socially progressive ideology worth it's salt. And that's the kind of progressive I'm down for.
You know, I was pretty assured on my line of reasoning here until I read "I wouldn't date black or Asian folks" and... eeeeh, maybe there's room for nuance here.
In my defense, I'll say it's the way of putting it that feels icky more than the sentiment. But still. Kinda ew. Don't know if this was a Socratic, reverse psychology thing, but if so, well played.
It's both really, I actually do hold that viewpoint as described in the original comment, but I also wanted to say it in a way that conveyed why some folks might be made uncomfortable by rhetoric like that.
I definitely agree it's how you say it - but also where and when and how much you say it.
I think such preferences are fine obviously, but I'd question the motives of anyone who goes around claiming that often and considers it a large part of their identity. Context is everything in the end.
Well, yeah, but that's the point. It's "I'm not into that", as opposed to "I wouldn't date X type of people". The point is you can not be into things without it being a political statement. Even if your political line of choice tends to favor a particular aesthetic.
Why would you be? You can be absolutely aware of the social patterns imposed on you, including those that are discriminatory or unfair, and still be subject to their effects.
Humans build a lot of their psyche by socializing. From aesthetic preference to sexual arousal or choices of flavor and texture for food. You're not a hypocrite for not liking spicy food growing up in a culture with milder tastes and you're not a hypocrite for finding traditional gendered aesthetics attractive after growing up in a culture that reinforced them at you at every turn.
You're a hypocrite if you find those distasteful or exploitative and still perpetuate them forward to your kids, but even if you don't, you're not the only influence they have.
See, that's why this is a bit of a bummer. This fiction on leftist circles that you can change a deeply ingrained societal pattern overnight or you're a failure or a hypocrite is not just unrealistic, it's kind of ignorant and mean spirited. You should be concerned with not making things worse and moving them in the right direction, but you shouldn't always take the maximalist approach and assume you're responsible for enforcing overnight radical change.
That's how right wingers keep setting up their dumb absurdity checks. They just dare progressives to go maximal on every stupid detail and then point at it and call it a lack of common sense. You can recognize a consequence of inequality without enforcing a complete solution instantly. Change takes time, even on an individual level.
Man, that's even more confused. So you can be heteronormatively horny, but only as long as you acknowledge the possibility of boning outside your comfort zone? If gender nonconforming sex happens in the hypothetical woods does anybody hear it?
Honestly, that'd be kinda funny if it wasn't such a depressing proxy for leftist purity tests and frequent inability to accept any intermediate states between utopian idealized outcomes and right wing dystopia.
Huh? I didn't dismiss either OP's or the other commenters's experience.
But I'm not going to jump to conclusions blindly at your say-so or he-said-she-said or your insults, because when you look at statistics: consistently, across a decade, across all age groups, women are far more supportive of LGBT folks, even the T in the UK (TERF Island).
I know this is a popular go-to thought terminating cliche for "bothsidesbad" type people, but beyond empathizing, what do you expect me to do exactly?
I am sorry to hear you had shitty experiences with progressive women. I had only good experiences with women period, even those on the older side, and I'm a trans woman in the UK. It's your word against mine unless we have studies and data and statistics, and unless you can demonstrate me some to support an actual argument or some attempt to convince, this conversation is as pointless as someone saying "well I had the hwaccine and it turned me autistic and gay!"
If you have no such data, then at least pose a hypothetical, proposes a mechanical explanation, suggest methodological flaws in existing data, but don't expect the world to adjust to your experiences or opinions.
Aight, so you are just trolling by saying random words with no meaning or relevance. Shouldn't you be called smoothestsapphic instead because you're a fucking smooth brain?
Reflect on that and grow the fuck up and speak like an adult.
Go on then enlighten me, what am I missing? What is it that I'm not self reflecting on? I'm the most self-aware person I know frankly, but I'm happy to accept I have blind spots, eager, even, so stop posturing and start talking.
IME of having dated mostly progressive women... they are the ones perpetuating it the most while shouting in public that they aren't doing that. Or that they can't be biased because they are women and therefore nothing they think is wrong... only men can be homophobic in their minds.
I think the difference is the perceived energy barrier if one wanted to fool around on their partner if they a bi vs het.
A bi guy could, hypothetically, find a guy on grindr pretty much on a whim if he wanted to. This is a much lower barrier than straight guys face unless they seek a sex worker. If you are a woman in the early stages of dating someone, where you don't know yet how much you can trust a guy, if a guy tells you he is bi that can come off as a higher cheating risk than a straight guy.
Straight guys dating a bi-girl don't have a similar perceived risk increase. Early in the relationship, guys may not even see the potential of a bi-girl hooking up with a girl as 'cheating', vs a bonus for his enjoyment. But also - finding a new girl to date is considered harder than finding an interested guy. So the 'cheating' risk doesn't feel that much higher for guys dating a bi-girl compared to a straight girl; he may feel like he is still mostly competing against other guys.
Is this fair or even realistic? No, this is based on perceived stereotypes rather than the behaviors and character of individuals.
But this plays out at a stage of dating where people don't know each other well yet and are relying on heuristics.
It's also that gay sex is gross, and lesbian sex is 'hot'.
The policing around male sexuality is far more intense than it is around female sexuality. Also applies to sexual assault and statutory rape. a lady does it, NBD, if a guy does it, it's a heinous act.
Further, how many people agonize about female pedophiles vs male pedophiles?
how many people agonize about female pedophiles vs male pedophiles?
What makes this statement even more horrifying is that more and more evidence is emerging that - like with cross-gender rape between adults - rates of pedophilia in the general population seems to be about 50/50 between the genders.
As in, it is equally as likely for a child to be preyed upon by a woman as a man.
And society doesn’t give two shits about female pedophiles or their victims. Hell, if the pedophile gets pregnant, the government will even gleefully re-victimize the victim on a monthly basis the moment he hits legal adulthood by forcing him to pay child support to his rapist.
Now, for the purest example of anti-male gender bigotry, examine the fury and outrage if the genders were reversed.
Seriously, if a female pedo gets pregnant by her victim, that child needs to be taken away from her and put up for adoption. No way a young victim should be held responsible because that bitch raped him.
Sorry, female pedos are as repulsive and degenerate as male pedos. All the stories of kiddie diddlers that are female teachers or nannies make me ill and inspire violence (which I refrain from) but they deserve to be locked up....for good.
Early in the relationship, guys may not even see the potential of a bi-girl hooking up with a girl as ‘cheating’, vs a bonus for his enjoyment.
Oh boy is that a land-mine I've stepped on.
A real, "wait I don't understand what do you mean you're in love with her?" moment that rang my bell back in my 20s. And then they ran off and got married. Which... hey, at some point how can you even be mad? They were clearly very happy together. Still sort of sucks to find out your axle was actually a third wheel.
So they prefer to be with someone who would cheat at the first occasion but the occasion is hard to find than with someone who has no problem to find an occasion but decides not to?
I'd rather be disappointed early than wasting years on a scumbag
To be fair, this kind of kinetics-as-pevention works.
I use this strategy to prevent eating too many snacks -- I do not keep them at home. I can't have them if they are not here. If 90% of the time I would "choose" not to have chips, not-having-them stops me the other 10%
Um, no. I am an old Xer lady and we know men can be bi too. And like the ladies... sexuality is on a continuum. Some people just love to canoodle with young beautiful bodies no matter what flavor... and as we get older, old beautiful kind considerate people.
Bi men here, progressive women are not like that. Only "progressive" (read: plays lip service to some popular cause, until it's popular, often are TERFs etc.) do that, and you just need to skip on them, for more than one reason. I almost dated one, she turned out to be a "progressive" anti-abortionist, because "babies are people too", and "you can just use contraception".
This is comment is proof the LGBT people can lie too... "Its not the good ones, only the evil ones".
Meanwhile, almost every other guy in the world that admits to sucking a cock even once and hes kicked out of the "youre so hot" gang forever by some progressive women. And no, its not just the ones its ok to hate cos social media said so.
I'm not. I've seen it happen many times to friends. Straight girls can make out drunk at a bar/party and that's the end of it, but two men doing so are absolutely and irreversiblly gay.
It's just yet another facet of gender enforcement and cishet normalization. Heck during the first season of Love is Blind an engaged couple breaks up because he admitted to his fiance that he has slept with men before. Not that reality TV relationships are real relationships, but there are vast majority of women who see it as a deal breaker.
Unless of course you're just doubting anon talks to women at all. In which case, yeah... sus... 😒
In my experience, gay men are much more poly-curious than straight women. So "bi" can easily be clocked as "cheating" from a certain perspective.
And there's definitely a lingering existential "what if my man's gay and he leaves me for another dude?" dread that I've seen more than one straight woman grapple with, particularly if the guy they're with is pushing 2+ on the Kinsey scale.
Tag in the Reddit-style "Dump him, he's not good for you!" social media vibe, and you'll get women who end a relationship because they would rather do the breaking-up than be on the receiving end.
gay men are much more poly-curious than straight women
I used to have a gay man cut my hair (back when I used to have hair lol). Casey would talk very loudly about his sexual activities and it was always amusing to see the looks the other (female) hairdressers in the shop gave him. One time he was telling me about fucking an old woman, saying "sure, I'll stick my dick in whatever, why not?" This was especially amusing because it was right before prom night and the place was filled with high school girls getting their hair elaborately coiffed while their fading-flower mothers hovered nearby with shocked looks on their faces. This was in Louisiana, which is surprisingly a lot more tolerant of homosexuality than you might think (at least in some parts) - he was fired that day, which was a common occurrence for him. I think he worked out of five different salons during the time he cut my hair.
"what if my man's gay and he leaves me for another dude?"
I hate stupid people. Like what if my "girlfriend is gay and leaves me for a woman?", "what if my girlfriend is straight and leaves me for a different man?", sounds like insecurity to me. Work on yourself and your insecurity and find someone who is loyal and commited to you. Their sexual orientation does not fucking matter and will not have any effect on weather or not they cheat on you if they do.
Fun fact: back in Roman times, it was manly to fuck a twink. Being fucked by another man made you a woman (in their eyes, women were inferior in every aspect). I suppose something similar happened in Greece for a good while
There are legitimate reasons for avoiding bi people in a straight relationship. Straight folks use contraceptives a fair bit more frequently than gay folks, for instance, leading to lower sti rates. Risk of infection is a legitimate concern and an awkward conversation in a fledgling relationship.
But, from what I’ve seen, it’s largely just not understanding how you’re meant to act in a relationship with a bi person and ingrained bigotry. Everyone is at least a little jealous, but you can’t remove your partner from the entire populace. Half is a big ask but doable. 100% is just abuse. Despite the world becoming safer and more accepting, we’re still dumb animals that ping ancient and irrelevant instruction sets, and ostracism is one of the oldest.
To be clear, this paragraph where I state that it’s largely bigotry and insecurity that drives potential partners away, it read as though it was written about me and my specific perspective on my dating bi people?
it read like this: "to be fair, sometimes hitting your spouse is justified. after all you can't have them talking back to you, right? wait, what, you think I'm talking about my own experiences and perspective?"
like, yes dude, I dont even know you beyond the things you shared. as far as I'm aware, your entire existence is what you said, and the person behind the screen is kind of irrelevant.
not dating someone bi because of STI risk is ignorant and bigoted. I get that it's a perspective. it's a shitty misinformed one. no need to explain it here unless you're advocating for it. jealousy is equally shitty. it's controlling. essentially what the perspective says is that bi people are harder to control.
i get the desire to understand the mind of hatred... but as they say, maybe not every time we see a literal devil we should think "hey that guy could use an advocate!"
MLM actually have higher condom use rates than MLW. It wasn't the case before AIDS, because they didn't have to worry about pregnancy and all of the STIs were pretty treatable, but they pivoted once they had a compelling reason.
Dude... Bi people still do monogamy and a lot of them don't want polyamory or cheating. If you have a problem keeping to a single person that's a you thing, don't project it onto others.
To be clear, this paragraph where I state that it’s largely bigotry and insecurity that drives potential partners away, it read as though it was written about me and my specific perspective on my dating bi people?
It was more your entire second paragraph that hinges on the idea that just because bi people are potentially attracted by both sexes that it is unfair and "abuse" to expect bi folk to desire monogamy or make monogamy work. That's a pretty old fashioned form of biphobia that projects that a bi person is either incapable of being satisfied by any one person like a straight or gay person is or that they are more likely to stray or be a problem for their partners.
It isn't abuse to expect a partner to be faithful.
Some bi people cheat or go in for polyamory because some people cheat or go in for polyamory regardless of gender or sexually . Bi people are not especially predisposed. Projecting your own wandering eye and assuming that is a more universal problem for people of a different sexuality that negates their viability in a form of romantic relationship isn't cool.
I suspect that men who have sex with men are more prone to STIs because they have a lot more sex with a much wider pool of partners, not because they're less careful statistically.
Some people in a general sense are sluts. This is an old assumption that bi and gay folk are more sexually careless that hasn't really been true since the aids crisis.
Fun fact, wherever there is stigma or barriers in seeking health care or populations that are discriminated against you see higher rates of STIs because people wait longer to check on things that go wrong and don't catch them before they take hold. This includes immigrant populations, religious minorities in hostile cultures, queer people, racial minorities, homeless populations... They aren't all rawdogging it, these groups often feel they can't be honest with a doc or fear being rejected from healthcare situations. Some queer folk have trauma around medical care in the past. Where management and early testing drops off disease transmission becomes more common.
You will see old studies positing the multiple partners thing but the cutting edge data has seen this is a problem faced by multiple populations with the core of the problem sourced and traceable to the degree of stigma against the patients.
Everyone is at least a little jealous, but you can’t remove your partner from the entire populace. Half is a big ask but doable. 100% is just abuse.
The idea that you somehow cannot trust a bi person because they have more potential partners is patently ridiculous. Forbidding your partner from seeing people of an entire gender is similarly ridiculous. I'm not sure what your point is here exactly, but this perspective is certainly sad.
Lol at you trying to frame blatant homophobia as an "innocent" question. Do you also do birthdays you fucking clown.
If a woman wants a strong husband, is that regressive ?
"If someone doesn't want to date outside their race, is that regressive?"
If your reasoning for not being attracted to someone, is because what they are makes them seen as "inferior" by bad people, you are a bad person yourself.
"I'm a progressive but I would never date a woman who's not down to raise me three kids, clean, cook, shop, never drinks, smokes. She mustn't been ran through. Also she has to satisfy me every time I want, without having the expectations of she receiving it back, a human fuck puppet of sorts, also she has to keep pretty, sexy, lingerie, she has to keep fit, no tattoos. And also I want her to sign a prenup, she wasn't there when I earned everything I have, she don't get to keep half of nothing after we divorce. Also she has to be content with me fucking somebody younger on the side when her tits start to sag or gets crows feet. Also she has to fear god but first to fear me, also she can't be black or brown, also.. also.. also.. "
Also this is not a joke, this is how I've been raised and this is what my entourage of friends all push and strive for. I myself have broken from these traditional values inflicted by society and parents, but I will never forget how men sit down at the table and women are there only to serve.
They can fuck whoever they want, but don't be homophobic about it
I also notice the thing about men sitting and women serving. It bothers me a lot, even though it could be an innocent division of roles in a different context. It clearly serves to re-enforce women as subservient. Our society has wronged women: we can do better in this generation.
Gender differs in all sorts of societies throughout the globe and across time. There are a lot of objectively healthy ways to not conform to gender standards...
But society is not objective. I pay little costs like an occasional rude comment. Career costs from judgy people, and those who would prefer to work with judgy people. And life-threatening costs. If I go to the wrong neighborhood at the wrong time wearing the wrong clothes I could be attacked. These are my risks to take. How can I blame another person for staying away? (Personally I like a little more courage in my romances with women.)
...
I have spent years fighting my own internalized homophobia in order. I am much happier and healthier when I make safe spaces for my authentic self to relax and enjoy. Its not easy. Its an ongoing process. Its something I struggle with every day and every night. How dare the moderator (who temp-banned me) casually accuse me of homophobia! It cheapens my fucking struggle, dude.
Though I commend the noble urge to protect the reader from homophobic sentiment. The proposition 'Being gay is weak.' is already on the table. Everybody is asking themselves if it is true and whether if it applies to them. It demands to be considered.
I'm pushing back on the stereotype that homophobes are young-earther types (who take the bible literally). My parents used to be atheists, but now they are capital T Twits. Them and their thought-leader Elon Musk are Social Darwinists. There are some bad assumptions that traditional gender norms are closely tied to the realities of healthy sex and survival, and evolution. Such as the vomituous ideology of Jordan Peterson. It needs to be debunked. Not censored.
When I was fairly younger, I was in a relationship with a woman who told me that if she were to learn that I had sex with a man, especially bottoming but also topping (she didn't use those terms, she used bad terms), then she would feel disgusted and betrayed and would never feel attracted to me again or see me as a man again.
I said to her that I was disappointed in her, that she had internalised homophobia and that she was a massive hypocrite. Her self proclaimed best male friend presented to the world as flamingly gay, and she was openly bi herself, not as in "I would totally fuck women cause I like the idea of it", bus as in she had fucked women before and would do it again. Apparently she deserves to be fucked by a real man, which apparently bi men are not.
So...yeah, you can be a loudly proclaimed ally AND a member of the LGBTQ community yourself, and still be a disgusting homophobe right alongside the best of bigots.
I have a similar story to share.
When I was in my early 20s I briefly dated a girl who told me she was having feelings for another woman and was being curious, she eventually broke up with me in order to be with her, but we remained good friends after that.
Eventually she came out as a lesbian and when I told her that I was bi she immediately ended our friendship all even yelled some slurs at me.
AFAIK she's married with a guy and has kids now
Wow, that's some intense double standards there.
That’s an odd way of saying “ubiquitous female standards”.
I know it’s a bit different, but there are cis women out there knowingly dating trans women who’ve likely had sex with men. So common yet, but I think ubiquitous isn’t accurate.
Actually now that I’m thinking about it I knew a girl who hooked up with her gay guy best friend.
I wasn’t commenting on this particular double standard anywhere as much as double standards in general; especially those which are almost exclusively one-way and “acceptable” for only women to hold. That a man trying to employ the same attitudes would be pilloried and castigated to the same degree that women would be lauded and supported.
You've just been all over this thread with your misogynistic hot takes and telling people how "all women" act. You should get off the internet for a while.
Mmm-hm. Attempts to socially shame me into silence and an ad hominem on top of that, but not a whisper of a viable rebuttal.
That’s the problem with these censure attempts – always feelings over facts, instead of facts over feelings.
There is nothing you've said worthy of rebuttal.
Ah - a sour grapes response!
Don’t worry, I know you had absolutely nothing to counter with once I saw the ad hominem. That’s the problem with intellectual bankruptcy, after all - nothing to work with except rage and other emotions. No facts, only feelings. So out come the personal attacks like the ad hominems, because rage and shame are the only usable tools left.
Sorry you had to experience this bullshit. I think people like that lack the emotional intelligence to see other people as equals. Instead they only value them as much as whatever personal satisfaction they extract out of them. Intrinsically you've lost nothing of value that day, but I know the sudden betrayal of the friendship you thought you had can be shocking and hurtful.
Maybe calling women lesbians instead of gay allows people to be homophobic while accepting lesbians. After all, the word was invented by men who thought women couldn't be gay the way men can.
I'm curious what the people's opinions are who downvoted you. Do they disagree or are they just angry? If they disagree they should have left a comment explaining why, so I'm assuming they're irrationally upset and voicing their opinion would make them look bad maybe?
Can't really imagine it. Even stubborn homophobes do not end friendship over someone coming out. A lot of them just become curious and eventually accepting. Am not LGBTQ+ though, so my judgement is kinda not reliable, but still.
The woman you're talking about is exceptionally weird and she can go fuck herself
It's adorable that you think "stubborn homophobes" wouldn't end a friendship over someone coming out. I genuinely wish they did just become curious and eventually accepting, instead of immediately rejecting and intimidating and expressing feelings of disgust and revulsion.
In my 20s I was this homophobe until a friend came up to me. Maybe it's my projection, idk
Yeah no i think you just valued that friendship, or your homophobia wasn't as deep as many's.
Your experience is valid, as it happened to you and none of us in this thread were there probably anyway.
In my experience, friends don’t end friendships over homophobia. They just suddenly become very busy and they have less and less time to spend with the person who comes out as bi.
‘Bi erasure’ is such a common phenomenon that we invented the term ‘bi erasure’.
Also I come from a different background to the most of those who are here. In Russia, we have this state propaganda that seals homophobia and since nobody is trusting the government propaganda, a lot of people are simply curious what it is to be gay (or bi, trans). And homophobia is not typical to what I hear from my peers in the west: it often has somewhat patronizing form of "don't you know that if you say you're gay, you'll get a lot of trouble". It was literally the thing I said to a lovely gay couple when we went to the bar in Saint Petersburg.
I would categorize it as a weird fetish and leave her by herself with it
IME this is incredibly common.
I had a bi girlfriend who was also super uncomfortable with the idea of me being with another man.
I don't know how common it is, but I've had several past girlfriends express internalised homophobia against gay men, bisexuals or lesbians, and that's too damn high a number since as french leftist, I don't harmonize with conservative women. When I was younger I was naive or dumb enough to think that we would both grow as people in the relationship and some of my values would rub up on them. Now that would an instant curtain call for me, you can grow up as person in your own time, I have better things to do.
I had a bi girlfriend who wanted me to be bi. I've seen it go every which way. I'm not sure what the overall social trend is, but people are individuals and can defy your hopes and expectations of them in strange ways, for better or for worse.
Honestly, while the exact way your ex handled the situation probably wasn't ideal, this notion is really just an extension of the sexual puritanism that created homophobia in the first place. Imo, we should just accept that people's sexual desires are what they are. If someone is turned off by bi guys, that's fine - she doesn't have to date them. Just like it is perfectly fine to be turned off by people with red hair, or people with annoying laughs, or people who are skinnier or fatter than whatever your personal preference is. Some people aren't interested in shy people. Some people aren't interested in dumb people. Some people aren't interested in poor people. Does it suck when someone you like isn't interested in you because of something you can't control? Yes! But at the same time, people's sexual preferences are also largely outside their control. So why demonize them for them?
Ugh... Thanks for whiteknighting my ex's being biphobic with your moral relativism.
First of all I don't know why you felt the need to inject sexual puritanism into the conversation, it's not really a thing culturally in present day France, especially not in me or my exes mindset or social circles.
Second, don't give me this your mileage may vary bullshit, some things are objectively bad. Having preferences is fine. Being phobic against a group of people is not. It's fine to be more easily attracted to tall people, or short, or green eyed, or mixed raced or whatever physical characteristic, as long as it doesn't turn into a fetish, and I won't get into that whole other subject. But being repulsed or disliking an entire group of people because of a not morally wrong trait, is objectively wrong and textbook definition of being phobic. Being attracted more easily/often to white people with blue eyes and dimples rather than black people is fine, you like what you like. But being repulsed by all black people, or gingers, or Asians, for the sole reason they are black, or ginger, or Asian, is not. And no, nobody said you owe some random person a shag, just because they're from a minority. But questioning why someone is repulsed by the entirety of group of people is legitimate. If there's something universally morally wrong with a group, like fucking Nazis, it's fine being repulsed. If there's a rational reason to reject someone, like not wanting to get a in a relationship with a firefighter cause you don't want a partner who may die in a fire one day, or your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it's fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them. If the only reason you dislike or are repulsed by a group of people is irrational, like they're a different race or different sexual orientation, then it's textbook bigotry/phobia, and that's objectively wrong.
So to go back to the story with my ex; being a bisexual man is not a visual or physical trait. So if you're a woman who likes having sex with men, and you were to reject or feel disgust for a man you otherwise are attracted to and enjoy having sex with, for the only reason that you can't deal with the idea/image of him having sex with other men in the past, that's textbook biphobia and homophobia, and that's objectively wrong. If you feel so disturbed by this hypothetical, you feel the need to ask me, your partner at the time, a self declared straight man you are in a committed relationship with, if I hid sexual experiences with men from you, to assuage your irrational fears, you're being biphobic and that's just wrong. Again, if you're a woman having sex with men, and don't trust bisexual men because you think they will cheat with men, guess what, still biphobic, still wrong. Nobody's demonizing anybody, moral relativism sucks, some things are in fact objectively wrong.
yeah, it's super weird how desperate people are to rationalize this nonsense.
like... being turned off by someone's race. it's just your phobia/racism. it's not a 'preference' like people like to claim. esp if your 'turned off' feelings are a product or assumption about that person's sexuality/race being a crude stereotype or entrenched in outdated nonsense. neither of those things is a choice either.
it's the idea that they are disgusted/turn off by. it's not a part of sexuality at all, it's that they associate negative traits with a certain sexuality. that's messed up. and it's also not really rejecting the person, it's rejecting the category.
So gay men should suck it up and give women a chance?
Most of attraction/unattraction is not rational. It is emotional. It is a visceral feeling that doesn't care about logic.
I, personally, don't like mint chocolate. When I put it in my mouth, I feel a visceral feeling of disgust, and spit it out. There is no logic behind this - it is just what I like and don't like.
I also provided examples of being turned off by people who are shy, dumb, or poor. Again, these are not logical reasonings, but visceral responses to an individual and their traits.
You're demonizing all women who like straight guys but are turned off by bi guys by calling them biphobic.
Objectivity is when something is true with no observer present. Morality requires an observer to decree what is right and wrong. This is why we have many philosophical schools of ethics, but only one school of physics (except at the very edge of research).
...
"If there's a rational reason to reject someone, like [...]or your sexual orientation is not compatible, then it's fine rejecting them but not disliking or being repulsed by them."
Second paragraph, towards the end. So what else didn't you bother to read / try to understand ?
Are the sexual orientations of gay men and women compatible ? Did I imply that anywhere ?
I, personally, don't like mint chocolate. When I put it in my mouth, I feel a visceral feeling of disgust, and spit it out. There is no logic behind this - it is just what I like and don't like.
We're not talking about food, were talking about people. If they're not harming anyone, they deserve to be treated with respect, as equals. Treating people with respect includes overcoming any prejudice you may have internalised growing up. Also having a visceral reaction, not an excuse. Visceral reactions can be questioned, and their causes deconstructed. It is possible to grow up as a person even as adult. Racism is visceral reaction, and it still wrong. At least in the reality of moral objectivism that I live in.
But I am curious, do some groups of people give you a "visceral feeling of disgust" like mint chocolate gives you ? What groups of people would those be ?
Yeah, and you can choose whomever you like as a partner, but repulsion for an entire group of people not doing any harm like poor people or shy people, is the realm of irrational hatred or fear, and that's never ok. Or are you saying it's ok or normal being viscerally repulsed by poor or shy people ?
Again visceral feeling are not an excuse, you're have higher reasoning, and are supposed to at least try to understand and control your feelings if you want to treat other people fairly. Otherwise there's no sense of accountability for your actions, you just go by pretending you're a mere vessel to your emotions, and stay indifferent to how your behaviour affects other people.
If the only thing turning off a woman in a man is that he is bisexual then yeah, that's what being prejudiced is. Same guy, same level of physical attractiveness, just as good a person, but straight : desirable. Exact same person but bisexual man : repulsive and less than a real man. That's a biphobic woman, she doesn't see bisexual men as worthy of the same level of respect as straight men, as equals to straight men.
But I get the sense that your ethics and mine don't mix.
Look. I'm not a philosopher or a historian of Ideas, so my knowledge of moral relativism and moral objectivism or universalism, is at a highschool level, so I think what I'm saying and how I'm saying is perfectly understandable in every day language without resorting to philosophical semantics (and frankly I don't even know why you brought up physics in a story about social issues).
In my stance of moral objectivism, I hold my ex accountable for her prejudice against bisexual and gay men, because it's a stance where seeing bisexual men as inferior and repulsive is wrong regardless of your personal history, culture and upbringing, since being a bisexual man does no harm to anyone and if that bothers you you should get a life.
In your stance of what I see as moral relativism, it's unfair to hold my ex accountable for her prejudice because the context of her "visceral feeling of disgust" is what is truly important, and she's just unjustly misunderstood.
Those two stances are not compatible.
I mean, I'm referring to sexual repulsion. This is typically what people are referring to when they talk about having a preference against some person or other. It manifests as a visceral negative reaction, very similar to what one might feel if they think about eating something they find gross. A gay man would find the idea of sleeping with a woman repulsive. He can still treat women with respect. In the same way, a woman can find the idea of sleeping with a bi guy repulsive, and can still treat bi men with respect. This is an incompatibility in sexual orientation.
I could just as easily swap in what kind of shoes the guy wears, the guy's political affiliation, the accent the guy has, the way he has chosen to style his hair, or literally anything else.
Certainly. I'm straight. The idea of sleeping with another man gives me a visceral feeling of disgust. This is fine. I am completely comfortable admitting this, because this is my sexual preference.
It is 100% okay to feel whatever feelings one feels. If the thought of sleeping with someone who is poor or shy is repulsive to you, then that is fine. You don't have to sleep with them.
Because I don't think you know what the word "objective" means.
The Aztecs thought it was right to sacrifice children to the gods by cutting their hearts out. We don't. Moral relativism says that both of these points of view are equally valid in their respective cultures. I happen to think that this is more or less the correct point of view, since any kind of objective morality is literally impossible because all morality is is values, and values are pure subjectivity. But that's an academic distinction.
My point fits squarely within good ol' fashioned liberal western ethics, which you identified as "does no harm to anyone".
Being sexually repulsed by bisexual men, and expressing this preference by simply not sleeping with them harms no one.
I could give a detailed answer like I did till now but why bother.
No to all you've just said.
Also moral relativism and nihilism is edgelord garbage, I thought so when I was a highschooler and I always will. You can and you should have some universalism regarding morals. You shouldn't fuck children, no matter the culture or time in history. Pain is also universal and so is the evil of inflicting it for pleasure or callousness. I could go on but you and I have nothing to say to each other.
Sounds like you've realized I'm right but just don't want to admit it.
Goddamn you're dumb
Fucking a twink is the manliness thing a man can do and if anyone wants to disagree with that I’ll fuck you too and I’m straight as fuck.
Twinks are feminine, so fucking a twink is also feminine and that's gay. The manliest thing you can do is fuck the manliest guy you can find.
Coincidentally, that is also what you should do on your first day in prison. Or so they told me, I dunno
EDIT: Wait... was it beat OFF the manliest guy or beat UP? Hmmm... doesn't matter. Everybody liked me after anyway.
Rape jokes (incarcerated or free it's the same) getting upvoted... what a weird timeline.
Where’s the rape joke? I understand that most jokes involving prison and sex are rape jokes, but that one doesn’t seem to be. The writer gave handjobs, and everybody liked him after. Sounds like a fun, consensual time.
Do you really want me to spell it out? Okay.
Prison rape is never funny. It's traumatic, violent, and life destroying.
Giving hand jobs to potential rapists in order to appease them in advance is neither consentual nor funny.
Sea-lioning replies justifying rape will be blocked.
Edit: @[email protected] I am so sorry this happened to you. I also understand dark humor can be a helpful relief. I hope you get the support you need.
What’s the fuck is ‘sea-lioning’?
"Sea-lioning" is a way of arguing in bad faith; specifically, asking for evidence or feigning ignorance every time the opposing party makes a claim, regardless of how trivial said claim is.
Nobody knows what BonkTheBonkTheAnnoyed thinks sea-lioning has to do with anything though.
The manliest thing you can do is being fucked by Kronar.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xxiK6Z4eXs&t=202s
Been looking for this recently. Thank you!
I'm sorry, but you are completely wrong
;)
Reminds me of this stand up bit.
I just want to fuck a bloke, man
It makes me bifurious
I chuckled under my breath
I exhaled a little more air than usual through my nose
I smiled but my breathing remained unchanged
How dare you
Bread makes you fat?!
At least your not bifurcated.
Initial reaction: there's no way that's real
After reading the comments: what the fuck
Very strange you haven't absorbed this concept yet. "Bi women are straight but bi men are gay" is one of the most common tropes in the larger culture's conception of sexual identity.
I don't mean to brag, but I have an astonishing lack of culture.
bisexual women are hot
bisexual men are gross.
that's the underlying assumption.
homosexuality is considered positive/attractive among women, and normalized. a woman doesn't become less woman for being with a woman.
however, works the opposite for a guy. homosexuality makes a man less manly, or something.
Imagine being a dude and caring if people thought you were manly or not.
imagine being a dude and other people incessantly police your sexuality/masculinity and make comments on it almost everyday of your life.
I am shocked too wtf. I feel bad for men who went through that BS.
I’m in my mid thirties, and I’m a bi woman who tends to go for bi men. I was once chatting about one of my exes with my dad and same aged stepsister, when she expressed deep surprise that I would be willing to date a man who had dated a man. My dad agreed, which is par for the course, but I could not for the life of me get a believable answer from my stepsister as to why that would be a dealbreaker.
She had been part of the GSA in one of the most progressive towns in America and was at that time in first cohort of women to join a previously men-only fraternity at her college, so she definitely falls under the progressive umbrella.
I literally can’t think of a reason except for donating blood, but that wasn’t it.
I mean you kinda said the reason yourself: "[she] join[ed] a previously men-only fraternity at her college". Of course I'm only speculating.
The people she surrounded herself with probably thought that way and thus she thought that way. Most people do not think critically about their beliefs very much, yes even most progressives are just progressives because of the people around them.
Tbh, the fraternity was pretty inclusive. It wasn’t required that they go coed, they just decided to. I do wonder what she’s like now that she’s a lot further removed from her hometown, but I know she’s at least still heavily anti-trump.
So, this woman is an asshole and you big brained your way to blaming men for it??? lol Did you get a temp ban from Reddit or something?
Dude, you have got to stop taking all these ricochets. Not everything is a point to tally in the war between mars and venus.
What is the correlation between donating blood and being homophobic ?
Gay and bi men are often excluded from donating due to higher HIV risk I believe.
For a long time (at least through the late 2010s and possibly still now, I’m no longer a good candidate to donate for other reasons), you couldn’t donate if you were a man who had sex with men (MSM) or if you had had sex with a MSM recently (6 months-2 years). Your own condom use was irrelevant.
I did once decide to stick with hands only with someone because I had an appointment to donate blood later that week. My stepsister wasn’t aware of that restriction though and I can’t imagine it’s the presiding reason why a lot of even queer women aren’t interested in bi men, given the demographics of blood donation.
There are a lot of wild things that preclude you from donating blood depending on where you live though, including time spent in the UK during the mad cow disease spike, even if you were a vegan. I understand that blood donation organizations are working with such large numbers and such a small margin for error that they would rather exclude a thousand good candidates than let one bad candidate donate, but it ends up being extremely discriminatory. I looked for some recent numbers, and it is true that even today the majority of new HIV cases occur in MSM or people who have sex with MSM, but given how widespread HIV suppression treatment is (in the US), correct condom usage reduces that risk to nearly zero.
The FDA actually revised their donor rules for LGBT donors, so many blood donation places, the red cross for example, no longer have this restriction.
It may be a byproduct of some dating issues from before her time dating that got passed down to her. Namely, that lots of gay men were in the closet, and ended up leaving their wife/girlfriend when they came out. And that could have carried through to women thinking it was that, because it's easier to think the person leaving you doesn't want women, not just doesn't want you.
Hopefully that mentality just disappears on its own after awhile. I think it's already on its way out.
good news, those red flags are getting out of your way.
better them gone than polluting your potential partner pool.
taking the post at plain value, it would be a lot cooler if less people were homophobic against bi men. i dont want all the assholes to stay away from me, i want them to be decent people.
yhea, agree 100%, but I only have the power to choose who I associate with, not to change bigots.
So just throw gay men under the bus? Because this whole thing is just homophobia.
I love white people. Let's see how long it takes to ban me from Lemmy
Btw I like black people too. You can say I'm a people lover or whatever
Just ask a friend or family member for attention instead of doing this shit.
Seek therapy
I'm just saying: as a guy, this is not the only double standard, and not the only thing that people see as "you did it once so you're $thing forever" that guys go through.
It's probably one of the most notable though.
As men, we deal with a lot of judgemental shit and we're expected to deal with it "like a man"... Whatever the fuck that means.
Another good example of this is crying. If you have a mental breakdown and fall into a crying fit, people will brand you as a cry baby or some shit, and that will stay with you for a long ass time.
There's so much more. I don't have time to think of, nor detail any of it. Any fellas that have examples, I invite you too add them in reply. Ladies, you can too. And anyone else can, honestly; let's not forget our non-binary family.
I've had two relationships with women immediately go downhill after I cried in front of them. It was like someone flipped a switch and turned off any physical attraction they had to me.
Can absolutely confirm this, myself, on a personal level.
Never let them see you genuinely vulnerable unless you want to drive them away, or want that to be weaponized against you at some point in the future. Sometimes even both, but never neither.
Only ever provide curated vulnerabilities that offer of themselves no true vulnerability, but satisfies any desire they may have to see vulnerability in you. Like being distressed at the sight of an unknown dead dog on the side of the road, for example. Clean, simple, controllable, and superficial.
Violate this tenet at your own psychological risk.
I'll be honest, I can't imagine not being able to cry in front of my partner. It sounds depressive.
It’s how “toxic masculinity” is forced upon men against their will.
Do we want to be sensitive and vulnerable? Sure!
Do we want partners that can accept that sensitivity and vulnerability? Of course!!
But when the vast majority of women do not do as they say, or say as they do, the calculus becomes massively brutal and clear-cut: either cram that shit down to where it will never see the light of day, or see it emotionally/sexually revolt our partner and possibly even make them leave.
TBH I think "toxic masculinity" is a shitty term for the concept. It feels like calling forced female gender roles "toxic femininity".
Yes! It's intentionally used to invoke blame. Foremost by implying that some list of bad behaviours is only or primarily displayed by men, and secondly by implying that it is the fault of men (often read as all men) when they exhibit these behaviours. I would much rather we just call it toxic behaviour. Both sexes are capable of violence, jealousy, etc. "Toxic masculinity" merely ensures half of the people one is speaking to switch off and might even take the opposite side of the discussion because it's really offensive.
It sounds depressing because it is.
This is the way of things.
I'm not saying it's right, just, or how it should be, but in my experience, yes, this.
What makes it infinitely more worse is that almost all women fully and absolutely deny this happens, even when behaving exactly like this.
It’s why such near-ubiquitous behaviour - and women’s hypocritical denial of its existence - is widely documented within both redpill and blackpill writings, and is one of the core reasonings behind MGTOW.
Such overwhelmingly predictable behaviours are what make those philosophies so devastatingly effective and compelling long before anything even mildly misogynistic crops up… after all, facts and evidence that survive tests of disproof speak volumes. These philosophies would have no reason to exist if behaviours and double standards like this weren’t everywhere, and all it takes for a man to see them properly is for their societal brainwashing to be disrupted.
I’ve discovered that emotional availability means you’re available to mirror her emotions. If she’s mad, you better get mad. If she’s sad, you better get sad.
Yes! We need a translator because what many of them say is not what they actually mean. I kept being told I was emotionally unavailable. So I started opening up more, which killed the attraction pretty quickly. What they meant was that they wanted me to listen to them and react in a way which implied I felt their feelings. Most women definitely DO NOT want a man who is in touch with his emotions or is "emotionally available." They want to feel emotionally validated.
Conversation about this can be helpful with the right person. I felt rather one sided in the emotional validation in my relationship. We had a long emotional talk about it and things are better now.
Those women need to grow up.
The Reprieve community is a good place for guys to vent.
I'm glad I'm not your friend.
Wild thing to say after expressing one of the most childish opinions I've ever seen.
I'll make sure that next time a loved one dies I'm not in public!! Just because some dude finds it uncomfortable to see other people be sad or upset. I'll call my mom now, let her know she can only die when I'm at home in private.
I think my favourite part was "planning to have a mental breakdown" as if that's something that people plan.
Like, yeah, let me just check my calendar for the day. Yeah, I've got lunch with Josh at 12:30, sales meeting at 2:00, mental breakdown at 3:00, panic attack at 6:00. Man, my day is packed!
Some absolute gem of a human being decided to express their opinion that people shouldn't be out in public if they're "planning to have a mental breakdown" because it's so embarrassing for everyone around them to be seen having to comfort a friend who is going through a hard time.
Understandable downvote count
my nephew was murdered, I helped raise him as a teenager while my brother was in the military. I cried in front of my "friends" and they judged me. They are no longer my friends. Terrible people. just like you
I'm glad you were able to rid yourself of those clearly toxic people.
I'm sorry that it took that event to figure out that they're not worth having as friends.
I hope you are doing better after all of that.
Sincerely, ·some random dude on the Internet.
thank you. I am happily married and enjoying life with friends that aren't going all in on machismo bs. This all happened a long time ago, so I can slightly forgive my ex-friends for being immature and mocking me behind my back about it. Feelings are hard to deal with yourself let alone with other people when you are 20 years old.
You defeated your own point
"If any of my friends are stressed and pushed to the breaking point, they need to schedule their mental breakdown in advance for a place and time when I am not around so they don't inconvenience me."
That's more or less what you sound like
Their point is probably that mental breakdowns are inherently not a choice and cannot be scheduled.
I've definitely had mental breakdowns in the past where I still went into work and went to the grocery store without making it everyone else's problem.
Frankly it sounds like you weren't having a mental breakdown if you went into work or the grocery store without being thrown out. I think we're just operating with different definitions of "mental breakdown."
The funniest part about this to me is that the AIDs epidemic actually forced medical researchers to accept that sometimes guys have sex with other guys, and they even created the term "Men who have Sex with Men" or MSM to cover this fact, since they aren't necessarily gay or bi.
Like, society needs to get over this. Sometimes people have sex with other people. Sometimes they happen to be different genders, sometimes they're the same. It only means whatever it means to the people fucking and little else
Did they say no homo first?
No but they kept their socks on so it's good
Am I weird if I like to keep my socks on?
I had a gay friend who up on learning of that "get out of gay free card" said "well shit I guess I've been straight all this time!"
The no homo spell kills aids.
I've seen so many cases of staunch progressive groups weaponize a guys sexuality as soon as they have a falling out with him. Its like these people never believed what they were saying. People are so spineless and have no morals.
I'm a woman who is straight AF, not a bicurious-bone in my body that I've discovered yet, and I'm having a casual fling with a bisexual dude. It doesn't bother me at all, he's hot as fuck, sweet as hell, we have a good time together, and I have better things to do with my life than sit around and brood about the gender of his previous partners.
But why do you care? Why does it matter? How does it affect you in any material way?
Why do they care that he's bisexual? They're saying they don't.
Wow. I can't read at all. I think I was on painkillers when I commented. Lol
Haha, no problem, yo. :p
People like this are the progressive version of evangelicals. And like with Christianity they don't get called out enough to keep it from becoming a major problem.
Villainizing male sexuality is why we have a whole new generation boys heading into alt right circles and so far the response has been a variant of telling them to 'man up.' And its going to get a lot worse before it gets even a little better.
This is the root of the problem with much of the discussion around male identity online.
Women finally, and rightfully, gained a voice, and plenty of dudes listened. Many of them, not really understanding feminism as an academic discipline or having any real sympathy towards any aspect of being a man, used that voice to point of the many issues faced by women in the world and to fight for women.
Where this falls apart is that because of the lack of real understanding regarding feminism and the concept of patriarchy, a lot of it boiled down to "shut up, the women are talking" and "we don't care about your problems"
None of this makes the problems away, none of this is really geared towards equality, and much of it is just switching the genders on deeply toxic patriarchal power structures that were used to oppress women for centuries.
When you think about how stupid 90% of the people involved on both sides of this discourse online are, it's of little surprise so many women went looking for easy answers from hucksters who pitched exploitation and oppression as empowerment.
idk man 9 times out of 10 I hear someone talking about progressives, they're exclusively referring to the most hypocritical ones. Like, when does anyone talk about the normal progressives that just want good things for everyone? That's boring.
OMG i've been saying this for years and every time I get bashed for it (in liberal/left/prog circles)
Because you can't suggest that the (liberal/left/blue/prog/nonfash) aren't perfect or are doing something not ideal
I wouldn't consider a woman that drops a guy for this reason to be a progressive.
You would be suprised by how much of the left hates bisexuals, without realizing that makes them as bad as any other bigot
I've had these conversations with people before. I was telling a fellow man how I don't care if my partner is bi. He said something like "woah man, there can be some major trust issues there" implying that her "homosexual needs" will lead her to cheat on me with my sister or something. I didn't follow his logic.
I'm a straight male. My wife is bi. The most important part of her orientation, to me, is that it means everyone else was my competition for her love instead of just other men, but I still won.
That's always how I looked at it.
As if straight/gay people don't cheat all the time because they're apparently not getting their "needs" met. The person being shitty is the issue, not their sexuality.
Exactly.
Damn it, not all bi people are greedy horn dogs.
I mean, I am, but not all of us are.
Some of the weirdest shit I have seen in the LGBT sphere is how comfortable some of them are with dictating who is allowed to date whom and whether or not their preferences are okay.
It's the main reason I don't really vibe with the LGBT community. Don't mind gays and trans and whatever else is out there. Normal people living their normal lives and loving the people they love and finding ways to be comfortable in their own bodies is how things should be.
But the LGBT sometimes reminds me of organized religion. It's not the individual believer who lives his or her life in peace who is the problem, but the weird cultlike behavior going on in the group where everybody has to hold the same opinions that tend to become progressively more extreme over time until the church controls every aspect of your life. Including whom your are allowed to love.
But it is difficult to bring this up without immediately being labeled a phob because the LGBT owns non-straight sexuality and if you criticize the movement, you criticize all the non straight people.
BLM has similar vibes.
I just don't like groups. Churches, political groups, grassroots movements, you name it. It all ends up the same in the end. With group pressure, control, shaming and ostracizing when you don't toe the line.
If I learned anything in my 20s, its that being a part of any ideological groups is not in your best interest. No matter how good and safe it feels in the beginning.
blahaj.zone basically
Turns into an authoritarian cult. You're either completely with them or fully against them
I don't think they are the only ones on this platform, tbh xD I will say that I have run into some chill blåhaj people here and I have run into people who are affiliated with entirely different instances or what you call them that have displayed some of the most unhinged, unpleasant behavior I have experienced online. I was so close to just delete myself from this platform and forget about having any online social outlet after a series of interactions with particularly disgusting individuals on here. I can kind of see why they were banned off of reddit, ngl. I haven't interacted enough with blåhaj people to say if they are as bad as that or not. Seems like a mixed bag to me.
The most pleasant people on here that I have met have mostly been my fellow Danes and all the Linux people. For whatever reason, the Linux fanatics just tend to be super welcoming and encouraging which statistically shouldn't be the case. All lived experience tells me that groups that are obsessed with a specific topic/lifestyle are usually some of the worst people to be around. Doesn't matter the subject. But somehow these nerds manage to be chill. 😆
I mean I have met many chill lemmy.ml, lemmygrad and hexbear users. They're just a pain when you talk about their specific topics. The same applies to blahaj users. The main issue is ada, the instance admin of blahaj
I guess that's true. Personally I like to give everybody a chance and if they decide to be unhinged toward me and ignore any and all attempts I make to have us meet in the middle, they get a block. I used to think that blocking people was weak and that I should be able to find common ground with others no matter what, but at this point in my life, I have accepted that some people aren't just misunderstood or misunderstanding me or are just having a bad day. Some people are just assholes and a waste of time, so block.
But honestly, someone can belong to any group or ideology, genuinely, any one of them and I will still try and meet them as a person first and be open minded. I have talked to unhinged leftwing extremists and I have talked to unhinged right-wing extremists, religious, atheists, vegans, you name it, and I have found the humanity in them or I have accepted that they are not worth my time. It always depends on the individual, but some individuals are so stuck in the hivemind of their ideology that there really isn't much individual to connect with. And that is kind of scary and sad to come across that. Both online and irl.
True, I should leave it instead of fighting, but I still feel like discussing can be helpful for people stumbling on those posts later. I don't want them to believe the opposite side just because I stopped answering
It's really easy to be manipulated into believing what people write here is true. Most people think the same thing, and it's vastly different from reality
You're other with them or a tankie.
What?
I wouldn’t say “the left” but biphobia is absolutely insane among non traitor lunatics.
biphobia is prevalent even among gays and lesbians. It sucks.
Absolutely. My wife was bisexual and many lesbians wanted nothing to do with her.
but it's a good thing if it happened when she was your wife (if you're exclusive ofc)
You wouldn't believe how many progressive women only date stereotypically conservative men. Here is a metanalysis of five studies showing how women in general prefer men who espouse and act out "benevolent sexism." This is the age old problem for men: women say they want one thing, but date something completely different.
Fortunately for me, in the dating arena, being honest about myself to a fault did a great job vetting dates all on its own.
My current girlfriend is cool with it, but she's absolutely fantastic about pretty much everything.
One of my exs on the other hand was a bit more aggressive and weird about it. She had a lot of toxic masculinity beliefs going on.
The real issue I have is that a lot of them think its hot, along with some of the other things I may have been into at one point. It's a bit of a struggle to explain that I'm not asking for more, I'm just being transparent to avoid a potential bombshell being dropped in the future. I don't have the energy for a polycule, to bother with a third, or anything in the lifestyle anymore.
Ive said it once, Ive said it a thousand times. No one pushes toxic masculinity like women do.
I think it's a lot of both, and to say either is the primary issue is probably wrong.
Heterosexual men self police to conform to their idea of what attracts women. They operate on anecdote and stereotype to form that idea.
Im 47 years old. In my time I have not once been told Im less of a man by another man. I even had one woman calling me a "poofter" because I said I said I sit down to pee. "No real man would sit down to pee" energy. Meanwhile, all Im thinking is that I dont wanna piss all over the floor in my house because lets face it, some times the stream just goes wherever the fuck it wants to go.
Imagine that, Im not a real man for not wanting to piss on the floor sometimes...
You're lucky to have only been in the company of stand-up men, then. I've had plenty of men ask for my and each other's "man cards" for similarly petty offenses against masculinity.
Anon wants that BUSSY without social stigmas. Based and gay.
There is a weird bias against bisexual men in media. Someone I knew even once said she didn't believe bisexual men existed, all men are either straight or gay. For me self identification is important. If someone tells me they're straight but I believe they're bisexual, I'm going to call them straight.
There's a streamer who I use to follow. Use to because she slowly went alt right. Anyway, one of her hangups with partners was refusing to date any man she suspected of being bi because she didn't want a penis that was up an ass in her. She also believes that most men are bisexual. She probably only dates men who are vocally homophobic.
Easy solution, only date bottoms
bi-/homophobic steamer went alt right you say?
sounds like she didn't really "go" alt right as much as she came out as alt right. phrasing intended.
Her pronouns became alt/right you say?
True, but that's semantics and I wasn't going to write an essay on my phone.
wasn't intended as a rebuttal
Do the men she fucks not wash their junk?
Some homophobes think touching their own genitals would be homosexual, so they don't wash them.
This is one of those things that I see mentioned now and then (and I feel like at some point, someone was able to back it up maybe?), but my brain just refuses to accept that it's real. It just... cannot be real. No. I refuse.
It's funny, because I see so much bi-erasure among gay friends. The idea that every dude is a 6 on the Kinsey Scale and just suffering through straight sex because they don't know any better is stubbornly resilient.
I mean, yeah. Most men are probably somewhat bi, but the idea that most men will seek out other men or even admit to not being repulsed by other men is laughable.
I remember back in highschool, a guy being so defensive, he wouldn't even describe what another guy looked like. I'm a straight guy, but I don't have any issues being able to describe another guy as conventionally attractive.
I have no issues acknowledging a conventionally attractive guy, I do however seem to have absolutely no notion of what this actually looks like. I know by dint of existing in the 21st century that Brad Pitt, George Clooney etc are considered attractive, but for the life of me I couldn't take that knowledge and apply it to someone else. I can spot an egregiously "unattractive" dude, but there's a very broad spectrum of men that just look like "blokes" to me.
This was the 2000's and I just used "wouldn't look out of place in as a magazine model", which while is a high standard, still has a lot of variety.
Used to, not use to
So, she refuses anal... does she also refuse oral?
I know she makes her boy friends buy new sex toys cause instead of reusing one from previous partners. Honestly, anyone who would actually get with her deserves everything.
ehh... Sex toys are kind of a private and personal thing. I'm all for resusing and that, but I also wouldn't expect someone to reuse my old partners underwear, or toothbrush.
Maybe, but I feel like if you're going to be that way, maybe bring your own instead of making your partner buy new ones.
You mean the ones who're in the closet?
Please don't equivocate homophobia with closeted homosexuality.
There are tons of homophobes who aren't in the closet, and tons of gay guys in the closet who aren't homophobic. Not to mention that using this as an 'attack' toward a homophobe is literally using gay as an insult, which is the same thing homophobes do.
It does gay people no good.
This is how she encounters so many closeted gay men.
how does she feel about her ass being penetrated her or penetrating a guy's ass?
The less I know about her opinions on sex, the better. She seemed to believe any outrageous sex act was more common than it probably was and decry the loss of common sense.
Did her streamer name coincidentally have something to do with 👟⬇️👨?
No. Cherries is my only hint.
Ah yes, the gacha nazi and TERF activist with the weird rape fantasies. God, most Vtubers really are a bunch of scum!
Good on you for not falling into that trap
She's really the exception as far as vtubers go. Lots of trans and allies in that sphere. Being able to use a digital avatar to represent yourself lends itself to trans people.
She use to be fun to watch, but that's about 2 years ago at this point.
If everyone just embraced being queer, everything would be ok. Sex and relationships can barely survive identity politics, old school or new.
> Be me
> Be straight
Well, fuck me, I guess
fwiw the 'queer' women in my life have been the most judgemental of my sexuality. i guess if you agonize about your own sexuality all the time you project that onto other folks though.
I'm sure this isn't universal but every self identified queer person I've met or dated has made it their entire personality.
That's probably not a coincidence, as the label "queer" is a political identity statement. That is, the people who have made it an important part of their personality are the ones who self-identify that way. I've known many gay men and women for whom their sexuality is an incidental part of their lives, and none of them feel affinity for the "queer" label.
Well, if you insist, bud, but you'll need to update those labels when we're done. ⚔⚔ /j
lol
FAKE: anon thinks girls are real GAY: anon wants to fuck a twink
i do wild shit to make the girls im dating lose attraction for me all the time. burping really loud constantly, saying the word "COCKS" when i sneeze, crying about wall-e, shitting with the door open. who cares?
While there is a kernel of truth about the whole gay men stereotype I can't say I ever met a girl who wouldn't date or dumped a guy if she learned he had a bi/gay phase. The only thing that comes close was the guy who got dumped cause he cheated on his gf with her gay best friend.
Hell I had a girl actually try to hook up with me because she heard a rumor I did something with a twink (I hadn't) and wanted set up some weird love triangle with her bi twink friend. I backed away from that one cause it was clear the guy crushed bad for her and there was no way that relationship was going to end with everyone walking away content.
"Straight" just cause you are in a relationship with a member of another sex doesn't make you straight.
Yeah that's the point
Not really, it's about different perception of bisexuals depending on their gender.
No, it's about how one gender's sexual self-identification is taken more seriously than another's
It's definitely a thing but i doubt it's progressive women who are perpetuating it.
They didn't claim that. They said even progressive women will leave you, meaning they have that issue with all the usual suspects, but also progressive women.
But it feels odd to single them out rather than who would really perpetuate.
You're right, the difference is that I'm reading it in bad faith and you're reading it in good faith.
doesn't count as a true Scotsman fallacy if I assume they aren't really progressive.
but you can't be progressive if you have an issue with queer people or anyone bending gender boundaries.
There's degrees to everything, though. There's plenty of traits I think are perfectly okay for people to have, but that I'm still not looking for in a partner. So I guess I probably also fail your purity test.
Okay, but are you banned from progressivism if you're not into them sexually?
That's a hell of an onus. Like, you literally need to work yourself up to being horny for "anyone bending gender boundaries" or you're out?
No obviously not. I wouldn't date black or Asian folks for instance, or fat people, or dumb people or overly outdoorsy folks or a right-winger or a religious person or anyone under 5'10" or a cis woman. I'll happily stand to defend all those folks rights and I'll stand by them hand in hand in solidarity, we just won't fuck.
This is ok. This is normal. When it comes to personal association, especially sexual, freedom of association - is a core tenet of any libertarian socially progressive ideology worth it's salt. And that's the kind of progressive I'm down for.
You know, I was pretty assured on my line of reasoning here until I read "I wouldn't date black or Asian folks" and... eeeeh, maybe there's room for nuance here.
In my defense, I'll say it's the way of putting it that feels icky more than the sentiment. But still. Kinda ew. Don't know if this was a Socratic, reverse psychology thing, but if so, well played.
It's both really, I actually do hold that viewpoint as described in the original comment, but I also wanted to say it in a way that conveyed why some folks might be made uncomfortable by rhetoric like that.
I definitely agree it's how you say it - but also where and when and how much you say it.
I think such preferences are fine obviously, but I'd question the motives of anyone who goes around claiming that often and considers it a large part of their identity. Context is everything in the end.
Well, yeah, but that's the point. It's "I'm not into that", as opposed to "I wouldn't date X type of people". The point is you can not be into things without it being a political statement. Even if your political line of choice tends to favor a particular aesthetic.
No, but you're a hypocrite.
Why would you be? You can be absolutely aware of the social patterns imposed on you, including those that are discriminatory or unfair, and still be subject to their effects.
Humans build a lot of their psyche by socializing. From aesthetic preference to sexual arousal or choices of flavor and texture for food. You're not a hypocrite for not liking spicy food growing up in a culture with milder tastes and you're not a hypocrite for finding traditional gendered aesthetics attractive after growing up in a culture that reinforced them at you at every turn.
You're a hypocrite if you find those distasteful or exploitative and still perpetuate them forward to your kids, but even if you don't, you're not the only influence they have.
See, that's why this is a bit of a bummer. This fiction on leftist circles that you can change a deeply ingrained societal pattern overnight or you're a failure or a hypocrite is not just unrealistic, it's kind of ignorant and mean spirited. You should be concerned with not making things worse and moving them in the right direction, but you shouldn't always take the maximalist approach and assume you're responsible for enforcing overnight radical change.
That's how right wingers keep setting up their dumb absurdity checks. They just dare progressives to go maximal on every stupid detail and then point at it and call it a lack of common sense. You can recognize a consequence of inequality without enforcing a complete solution instantly. Change takes time, even on an individual level.
you aren't obligated to be attracted to anyone.
but if you have a rule that intentionally discriminates someone, then sort of. there's some work for them to do internally.
Man, that's even more confused. So you can be heteronormatively horny, but only as long as you acknowledge the possibility of boning outside your comfort zone? If gender nonconforming sex happens in the hypothetical woods does anybody hear it?
Honestly, that'd be kinda funny if it wasn't such a depressing proxy for leftist purity tests and frequent inability to accept any intermediate states between utopian idealized outcomes and right wing dystopia.
That's a BrandNewSentence if I've ever seen any.
Love seeing progressive people dismiss the experiences of men
Keep up the bigoted work soldier
Huh? I didn't dismiss either OP's or the other commenters's experience.
But I'm not going to jump to conclusions blindly at your say-so or he-said-she-said or your insults, because when you look at statistics: consistently, across a decade, across all age groups, women are far more supportive of LGBT folks, even the T in the UK (TERF Island).
I know this is a popular go-to thought terminating cliche for "bothsidesbad" type people, but beyond empathizing, what do you expect me to do exactly?
I am sorry to hear you had shitty experiences with progressive women. I had only good experiences with women period, even those on the older side, and I'm a trans woman in the UK. It's your word against mine unless we have studies and data and statistics, and unless you can demonstrate me some to support an actual argument or some attempt to convince, this conversation is as pointless as someone saying "well I had the hwaccine and it turned me autistic and gay!"
If you have no such data, then at least pose a hypothetical, proposes a mechanical explanation, suggest methodological flaws in existing data, but don't expect the world to adjust to your experiences or opinions.
You have no self reflection abilities
Aight, so you are just trolling by saying random words with no meaning or relevance. Shouldn't you be called smoothestsapphic instead because you're a fucking smooth brain?
Reflect on that and grow the fuck up and speak like an adult.
You trolling and then dismissing me when I tell you to self reflect is funnier than you'll realize.
Go on then enlighten me, what am I missing? What is it that I'm not self reflecting on? I'm the most self-aware person I know frankly, but I'm happy to accept I have blind spots, eager, even, so stop posturing and start talking.
IME of having dated mostly progressive women... they are the ones perpetuating it the most while shouting in public that they aren't doing that. Or that they can't be biased because they are women and therefore nothing they think is wrong... only men can be homophobic in their minds.
That sucks, I'm sorry to hear that.
Hopefully your experience is merely anecdotal. I'd need to have some numbers or a study before I change my mind personally though
if they do that, they aren't really "progressive".
I think the difference is the perceived energy barrier if one wanted to fool around on their partner if they a bi vs het.
A bi guy could, hypothetically, find a guy on grindr pretty much on a whim if he wanted to. This is a much lower barrier than straight guys face unless they seek a sex worker. If you are a woman in the early stages of dating someone, where you don't know yet how much you can trust a guy, if a guy tells you he is bi that can come off as a higher cheating risk than a straight guy.
Straight guys dating a bi-girl don't have a similar perceived risk increase. Early in the relationship, guys may not even see the potential of a bi-girl hooking up with a girl as 'cheating', vs a bonus for his enjoyment. But also - finding a new girl to date is considered harder than finding an interested guy. So the 'cheating' risk doesn't feel that much higher for guys dating a bi-girl compared to a straight girl; he may feel like he is still mostly competing against other guys.
Is this fair or even realistic? No, this is based on perceived stereotypes rather than the behaviors and character of individuals.
But this plays out at a stage of dating where people don't know each other well yet and are relying on heuristics.
It's also that gay sex is gross, and lesbian sex is 'hot'.
The policing around male sexuality is far more intense than it is around female sexuality. Also applies to sexual assault and statutory rape. a lady does it, NBD, if a guy does it, it's a heinous act.
Further, how many people agonize about female pedophiles vs male pedophiles?
What makes this statement even more horrifying is that more and more evidence is emerging that - like with cross-gender rape between adults - rates of pedophilia in the general population seems to be about 50/50 between the genders.
As in, it is equally as likely for a child to be preyed upon by a woman as a man.
And society doesn’t give two shits about female pedophiles or their victims. Hell, if the pedophile gets pregnant, the government will even gleefully re-victimize the victim on a monthly basis the moment he hits legal adulthood by forcing him to pay child support to his rapist.
Now, for the purest example of anti-male gender bigotry, examine the fury and outrage if the genders were reversed.
Seriously, if a female pedo gets pregnant by her victim, that child needs to be taken away from her and put up for adoption. No way a young victim should be held responsible because that bitch raped him.
Sorry, female pedos are as repulsive and degenerate as male pedos. All the stories of kiddie diddlers that are female teachers or nannies make me ill and inspire violence (which I refrain from) but they deserve to be locked up....for good.
Oh boy is that a land-mine I've stepped on.
A real, "wait I don't understand what do you mean you're in love with her?" moment that rang my bell back in my 20s. And then they ran off and got married. Which... hey, at some point how can you even be mad? They were clearly very happy together. Still sort of sucks to find out your axle was actually a third wheel.
So they prefer to be with someone who would cheat at the first occasion but the occasion is hard to find than with someone who has no problem to find an occasion but decides not to?
I'd rather be disappointed early than wasting years on a scumbag
To be fair, this kind of kinetics-as-pevention works.
I use this strategy to prevent eating too many snacks -- I do not keep them at home. I can't have them if they are not here. If 90% of the time I would "choose" not to have chips, not-having-them stops me the other 10%
Maybe it works, I wouldn't build a relationship on this principle though
I wouldn't date snacks either but i'm sure someone got offended by this remark. Weird times.
?
Um, no. I am an old Xer lady and we know men can be bi too. And like the ladies... sexuality is on a continuum. Some people just love to canoodle with young beautiful bodies no matter what flavor... and as we get older, old beautiful kind considerate people.
Bi men here, progressive women are not like that. Only "progressive" (read: plays lip service to some popular cause, until it's popular, often are TERFs etc.) do that, and you just need to skip on them, for more than one reason. I almost dated one, she turned out to be a "progressive" anti-abortionist, because "babies are people too", and "you can just use contraception".
This is comment is proof the LGBT people can lie too... "Its not the good ones, only the evil ones".
Meanwhile, almost every other guy in the world that admits to sucking a cock even once and hes kicked out of the "youre so hot" gang forever by some progressive women. And no, its not just the ones its ok to hate cos social media said so.
Found the incel.
Found the reddit user with nothing to offer the conversation but personal attacks and dogshit takes.
> uses "reddit user" as a slur
Not beating the incel allegations with that.
They ruined a perfectly good bum when they put teeth in your mouth.
They're fucking all over this thread.
Have blocked some of them, because they're not the kind that you can debate with.
Let's not "no true scotsman" this, that only leads to madness.
Jim Jeffries talked about this topic in his new Netflix special that came out last week.
If he's a hot twink, then yeah no that'd be fine with me. Perfectly understandable.
Just shows how deeply ingrained power relations are in society with an unproportional low complementing awareness and reflection about it.
Women will leave him? I'm surprised to hear this.
I'm not. I've seen it happen many times to friends. Straight girls can make out drunk at a bar/party and that's the end of it, but two men doing so are absolutely and irreversiblly gay.
It's just yet another facet of gender enforcement and cishet normalization. Heck during the first season of Love is Blind an engaged couple breaks up because he admitted to his fiance that he has slept with men before. Not that reality TV relationships are real relationships, but there are vast majority of women who see it as a deal breaker.
Unless of course you're just doubting anon talks to women at all. In which case, yeah... sus... 😒
I assumed anon is a woman, based on the picture.
Since she's on 4chan she still probably doesn't talk to women.
In my experience, gay men are much more poly-curious than straight women. So "bi" can easily be clocked as "cheating" from a certain perspective.
And there's definitely a lingering existential "what if my man's gay and he leaves me for another dude?" dread that I've seen more than one straight woman grapple with, particularly if the guy they're with is pushing 2+ on the Kinsey scale.
Tag in the Reddit-style "Dump him, he's not good for you!" social media vibe, and you'll get women who end a relationship because they would rather do the breaking-up than be on the receiving end.
I used to have a gay man cut my hair (back when I used to have hair lol). Casey would talk very loudly about his sexual activities and it was always amusing to see the looks the other (female) hairdressers in the shop gave him. One time he was telling me about fucking an old woman, saying "sure, I'll stick my dick in whatever, why not?" This was especially amusing because it was right before prom night and the place was filled with high school girls getting their hair elaborately coiffed while their fading-flower mothers hovered nearby with shocked looks on their faces. This was in Louisiana, which is surprisingly a lot more tolerant of homosexuality than you might think (at least in some parts) - he was fired that day, which was a common occurrence for him. I think he worked out of five different salons during the time he cut my hair.
I hate stupid people. Like what if my "girlfriend is gay and leaves me for a woman?", "what if my girlfriend is straight and leaves me for a different man?", sounds like insecurity to me. Work on yourself and your insecurity and find someone who is loyal and commited to you. Their sexual orientation does not fucking matter and will not have any effect on weather or not they cheat on you if they do.
Sounds like a problem solving itself. Being on the other end of toxic insecurity is fucked.
Fun fact: back in Roman times, it was manly to fuck a twink. Being fucked by another man made you a woman (in their eyes, women were inferior in every aspect). I suppose something similar happened in Greece for a good while
Yes, that was an episode of Insecure.
Recommended reading: "Bi: Notes for a Bisexual Revolution", by Shiri Eisner
This post is bi-reasiure
Heteropatriarchal system
Bi guys are the best. Me too, thanks.
I always notice that the women that jump in and out of lesbian and straight relationships. Are usually slutty skanks. Just my personal experience.
There are legitimate reasons for avoiding bi people in a straight relationship. Straight folks use contraceptives a fair bit more frequently than gay folks, for instance, leading to lower sti rates. Risk of infection is a legitimate concern and an awkward conversation in a fledgling relationship.
But, from what I’ve seen, it’s largely just not understanding how you’re meant to act in a relationship with a bi person and ingrained bigotry. Everyone is at least a little jealous, but you can’t remove your partner from the entire populace. Half is a big ask but doable. 100% is just abuse. Despite the world becoming safer and more accepting, we’re still dumb animals that ping ancient and irrelevant instruction sets, and ostracism is one of the oldest.
You have to check that with EVERY sexual partner, not just gay or bi ones.
Jesus christ, if you're so insecure you can't bear the thought of your partner being in proximity to ANYONE else, maybe you're the abuser here
To be clear, this paragraph where I state that it’s largely bigotry and insecurity that drives potential partners away, it read as though it was written about me and my specific perspective on my dating bi people?
it read like this: "to be fair, sometimes hitting your spouse is justified. after all you can't have them talking back to you, right? wait, what, you think I'm talking about my own experiences and perspective?"
like, yes dude, I dont even know you beyond the things you shared. as far as I'm aware, your entire existence is what you said, and the person behind the screen is kind of irrelevant.
not dating someone bi because of STI risk is ignorant and bigoted. I get that it's a perspective. it's a shitty misinformed one. no need to explain it here unless you're advocating for it. jealousy is equally shitty. it's controlling. essentially what the perspective says is that bi people are harder to control.
i get the desire to understand the mind of hatred... but as they say, maybe not every time we see a literal devil we should think "hey that guy could use an advocate!"
dont worry about it though. be well
MLM actually have higher condom use rates than MLW. It wasn't the case before AIDS, because they didn't have to worry about pregnancy and all of the STIs were pretty treatable, but they pivoted once they had a compelling reason.
aaand thats why most of them just shut the fuck up and keep the past adventures to themselves
you usually don't talk in detail about previous women either.
Dude... Bi people still do monogamy and a lot of them don't want polyamory or cheating. If you have a problem keeping to a single person that's a you thing, don't project it onto others.
Calling it "abuse" is really fucking weird.
Apologies for copy pasting but,
To be clear, this paragraph where I state that it’s largely bigotry and insecurity that drives potential partners away, it read as though it was written about me and my specific perspective on my dating bi people?
It was more your entire second paragraph that hinges on the idea that just because bi people are potentially attracted by both sexes that it is unfair and "abuse" to expect bi folk to desire monogamy or make monogamy work. That's a pretty old fashioned form of biphobia that projects that a bi person is either incapable of being satisfied by any one person like a straight or gay person is or that they are more likely to stray or be a problem for their partners.
It isn't abuse to expect a partner to be faithful.
Some bi people cheat or go in for polyamory because some people cheat or go in for polyamory regardless of gender or sexually . Bi people are not especially predisposed. Projecting your own wandering eye and assuming that is a more universal problem for people of a different sexuality that negates their viability in a form of romantic relationship isn't cool.
That was my point. I get the impression folks here haven’t dated immature people before
If that was your point you did not elucidate it well.
I'm straight and I couldn't give a fuck less who a partner fucked before me so long as it was legal and ethical.
I suspect that men who have sex with men are more prone to STIs because they have a lot more sex with a much wider pool of partners, not because they're less careful statistically.
* literal propaganda from the Aids epidemic
Some people in a general sense are sluts. This is an old assumption that bi and gay folk are more sexually careless that hasn't really been true since the aids crisis.
Fun fact, wherever there is stigma or barriers in seeking health care or populations that are discriminated against you see higher rates of STIs because people wait longer to check on things that go wrong and don't catch them before they take hold. This includes immigrant populations, religious minorities in hostile cultures, queer people, racial minorities, homeless populations... They aren't all rawdogging it, these groups often feel they can't be honest with a doc or fear being rejected from healthcare situations. Some queer folk have trauma around medical care in the past. Where management and early testing drops off disease transmission becomes more common.
You will see old studies positing the multiple partners thing but the cutting edge data has seen this is a problem faced by multiple populations with the core of the problem sourced and traceable to the degree of stigma against the patients.
Username checks out
26
Could you list a point I made that you’d disagree with? Aside from contraception use, I take that one back.
The idea that you somehow cannot trust a bi person because they have more potential partners is patently ridiculous. Forbidding your partner from seeing people of an entire gender is similarly ridiculous. I'm not sure what your point is here exactly, but this perspective is certainly sad.
??
I've never heard of gay people ever using contraceptives. That'd be silly.
Maybe being gay is a weakness. If a woman wants a strong husband, is that regressive?
If that's how they view men, then yes.
Lol at you trying to frame blatant homophobia as an "innocent" question. Do you also do birthdays you fucking clown.
"If someone doesn't want to date outside their race, is that regressive?"
If your reasoning for not being attracted to someone, is because what they are makes them seen as "inferior" by bad people, you are a bad person yourself.
"I'm a progressive but I would never date a woman who's not down to raise me three kids, clean, cook, shop, never drinks, smokes. She mustn't been ran through. Also she has to satisfy me every time I want, without having the expectations of she receiving it back, a human fuck puppet of sorts, also she has to keep pretty, sexy, lingerie, she has to keep fit, no tattoos. And also I want her to sign a prenup, she wasn't there when I earned everything I have, she don't get to keep half of nothing after we divorce. Also she has to be content with me fucking somebody younger on the side when her tits start to sag or gets crows feet. Also she has to fear god but first to fear me, also she can't be black or brown, also.. also.. also.. "
Also this is not a joke, this is how I've been raised and this is what my entourage of friends all push and strive for. I myself have broken from these traditional values inflicted by society and parents, but I will never forget how men sit down at the table and women are there only to serve.
They can fuck whoever they want, but don't be homophobic about it
I also notice the thing about men sitting and women serving. It bothers me a lot, even though it could be an innocent division of roles in a different context. It clearly serves to re-enforce women as subservient. Our society has wronged women: we can do better in this generation.
Gender differs in all sorts of societies throughout the globe and across time. There are a lot of objectively healthy ways to not conform to gender standards...
But society is not objective. I pay little costs like an occasional rude comment. Career costs from judgy people, and those who would prefer to work with judgy people. And life-threatening costs. If I go to the wrong neighborhood at the wrong time wearing the wrong clothes I could be attacked. These are my risks to take. How can I blame another person for staying away? (Personally I like a little more courage in my romances with women.)
...
I have spent years fighting my own internalized homophobia in order. I am much happier and healthier when I make safe spaces for my authentic self to relax and enjoy. Its not easy. Its an ongoing process. Its something I struggle with every day and every night. How dare the moderator (who temp-banned me) casually accuse me of homophobia! It cheapens my fucking struggle, dude.
Though I commend the noble urge to protect the reader from homophobic sentiment. The proposition 'Being gay is weak.' is already on the table. Everybody is asking themselves if it is true and whether if it applies to them. It demands to be considered.
I'm pushing back on the stereotype that homophobes are young-earther types (who take the bible literally). My parents used to be atheists, but now they are capital T Twits. Them and their thought-leader Elon Musk are Social Darwinists. There are some bad assumptions that traditional gender norms are closely tied to the realities of healthy sex and survival, and evolution. Such as the vomituous ideology of Jordan Peterson. It needs to be debunked. Not censored.
Women having freedom is a weakness. If a man is wants a slave, is that regressive?
Lol gym bros are some of the gayest fucking straight people you'll ever meet, but gay = weak tooootally. You're funny
Attention addict says edgy things for attention.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xxiK6Z4eXs&t=202s