The LGBTQIA-community

[Star_Jammer]

Cross-posting from another thread:

Because erasure of homosexuality and bisexuality are real social phenomena. And, biological, psychological, and sociological studies that benefit from things like clinical categories and methods of categorization are also both real and important. Allowing the former to be aided by, and the latter impeded by social stigmas or even personal comfort is bad for everyone.

When, and how openly someone discusses their sexuality is their business, but putting names to behaviors and sexual interests can't be left to "what they're comfortable saying," any more than "We're all Africans" is acceptable statement from a white American about a lack of diversity on a judging panel, or we let people call lungs, "upper air kidneys."

Calling a lung a lung is not a moral judgment. "Homosexual," "heterosexual," and "bisexual" are not moral indictments. It's not even as specious as "it's a choice" or "born this way," both of which get thrown around continually.

I can't help but feel that this is disingenuous.

I'm not saying for anyone should accept that an obviously (through his actions) homosexual male is heterosexual (these are the non-candid extremes you are using to try and make a point). As I've said earlier in the other thread, there are points on the spectrum where people just aren't going to take someone else seriously if they claim to be something very contradictory to their actions.

What I am saying is that A) people shouldn't assign these labels to other people until they assign it to themselves and B) for anything in between heterosexual and homosexual, people should let the individual assign the specific term (bisexual, pansexual, bi-but-same-sex-leaning, straight-but-will-do-a-cute-dude etc.).

My own coming out story may shed some light on why I think the way I do:

During 7th grade (ages 12-13, so 19 years ago) I had a very best friend. A "rumor" in school started that we were gay. I remember in between classes one day a girl asked me about it. I also remember being quite dumb-founded, and having to ask her, "What does gay mean?" I had no clue! Sure, I seemed to like boys in a sexual way, but personally I thought it was normal: some guys liked girls, some guys liked guys, and I assumed some girls liked girls (hadn't really experienced lesbianism at that point, though!). But in questioning what "gay" was, I started questioning whether or not it was wrong.

In 8th grade, I went to a different school (with my bestie as well; long unrelated story, don't ask) and the same rumor started over (different kids, mind you). Here's where I really started questioning the meaning of this word being thrown at me. Kids are laughing, pointing, teasing...this word surely means something bad, right? Nobody at school got made fun of for being called straight! Wait...nobody at school got called straight...

Enter Freshmen year at High School, and wouldn'tyafreakin'knowit...the rumor starts (or continues...) again.

Having that word thrown at me...having people define my sexuality for me...forced me into a shell. I became socially recluse; I didn't make friends easy, and the few social acquaintances I made were highly superficial and only school-project related.

When I came out in the late 9th grade...on my own? Full weight on my shoulders lifted; I was an entirely different person the next school year. It would have been different had I had a friend to guide me through my feelings, but all I had was a label shoved down my throat; other people telling me who I was, and who I wasn't.

It's important to label things; human's propensity for doing so is strongly ingrained in our biology. What we don't need to do is assign labels to people who don't want them, or aren't ready for them.

[t hedge coke]

I didn't suggest anyone define your sexuality for you, any more than someone defines your lungs for you or your income bracket.

I get that you feel strongly that each individual should be the only one to ever put a name on someone's sexuality, but I thought I made reasonable points why that isn't a great, or even often honest way to go about it.

You're assuming a moral judgment, an indictment, again, that I'm not. And you're assuming that I'm saying people should be allowed to lie about someone's sexuality in order to categorize that sexuality and that's nowhere in what I said.

When, and how openly someone discusses their sexuality is their business...

..."Homosexual," "heterosexual," and "bisexual" are not moral indictments.

I specifically referred to them as clinical categories. Not playground slurs from junior high.

[Star_Jammer]

I'm get that you feel strongly that each individual should be the only one to ever put a name on someone's sexuality, but I thought I made reasonable points why that isn't a great, or even often honest way to go about it.

Yes, you're quite right about what I'm arguing for. And I admitted it can be dishonest at times. Defining peoples' sexualities for them doesn't really help that though; it can possibly encourage hiding it further/better.

Of paramount importance to me is that each individual explores, for themselves, what their sexuality is and isn't. In helping to do that, we define what the various levels of sexuality are, and let the individual decide where they fall. But I don't think one person should concretely say to another "You're a dude who sleeps with other dudes on occasion, so you're bisexual".

[Reality]

Yes, you're quite right about what I'm arguing for. And I admitted it can be dishonest at times. Defining peoples' sexualities for them doesn't really help that though; it can possibly encourage hiding it further/better.

Of paramount importance to me is that each individual explores, for themselves, what their sexuality is and isn't. In helping to do that, we define what the various levels of sexuality are, and let the individual decide where they fall. But I don't think one person should concretely say to another "You're a dude who sleeps with other dudes on occasion, so you're bisexual".

But there aren't "levels of sexuality." They're categories that people fall into. If you sleep with your own sex you're homosexual. If you sleep with the other you're heterosexual. If you sleep with both you're bisexual. Because that's what all of those words mean. You may be confusing "sexuality" with "romantic history". Just because someone never dated someone of a certain sex doesn't mean all those times they slept with them don't count. And whether or not someone identifies personally with one doesn't mean it can't be applicable to them. That's what "closeted" means.

But, of course, you're saying denial is more important than words having defined meanings. So I doubt that sways your opinion much.

Seriously- "a dude who sleeps with other dudes on occasion" never could describe a straight man. That isn't what straight is. No qualifiers necessary.

[Star_Jammer]

But there aren't "levels of sexuality." They're categories that people fall into. If you sleep with your own sex you're homosexual. If you sleep with the other you're heterosexual. If you sleep with both you're bisexual. Because that's what all of those words mean. You may be confusing "sexuality" with "romantic history". Just because someone never dated someone of a certain sex doesn't mean all those times they slept with them don't count. And whether or not someone identifies personally with one doesn't mean it can't be applicable to them. That's what "closeted" means.

But, of course, you're saying denial is more important than words having defined meanings. So I doubt that sways your opinion much.

Seriously- "a dude who sleeps with other dudes on occasion" never could describe a straight man. That isn't what straight is. No qualifiers necessary.

Firstly, to the bolded: there's not many ways I can civilly discuss with someone who purposely inserts an agenda into my words that I have not stated. Yes I, a gay man of 32 who came out 17 years ago at the age of 15, am a staunch supporter of remaining closeted.

To address the rest of your post, I'd like to share various links for your reading pleasure (some of the "Google searches" will have a lot of cross-over, but I wanted to use various neutral phrases so as to not be accused of "cherry-picking"):

MSM

Google Search #1

Google search #2

Google search #3

Sexual Identity

And one particularly interesting find: Not Gay: Sex between Straight White Men

There's plenty to dig through there. Casually reading many, in-depth reading others, I found: many articles say the same things. A few contradict each other. One or two seemed to have an anti-LGBT bias, while others were strongly pro-LGBT. Some contained very in-depth research points, others were speculation.

Of important note is that among the various articles you will find in the above links (and especially the Sexual Identity link), most corroborate what I've been saying since I first entered into this discussion in the other thread: that sexual identification "is how one thinks of oneself in terms of to whom one is romantically or sexually attracted."..."Sexual identity and sexual behavior are closely related to sexual orientation, but they are distinguished,[1] with identity referring to an individual's conception of themselves, behavior referring to actual sexual acts performed by the individual, and sexual orientation referring to romantic or sexual attractions toward persons of the opposite sex or gender, the same sex or gender, to both sexes or more than one gender, or to no one."

It's important that the individual decides what he or she identifies as.

As hard as some people have fought, and continue to fight, for LGBT rights, it astounds me that anyone pro-LGBT can think we've reached "the end" of defining sexuality, and that everyone needs to fit into Box A, B, or C (or G, L B, T, Q, A...if you prefer).

With that, I bid you adieu...and hope you'll enjoy your reading.

[Charmed]

I agree with some of what star_jammer is saying.

Yeah, I don't think just sleeping with the same sex/different sex/both sexes makes a person homosexual/heterosexual/bisexual. In most cases, people usually sleep with the people they are sexually/romantically attracted to, but not always.

I do like that breakdown of sexual identity, behavior, and orientation.

Also, I'm not sure how I feel about that link to "Not Gay: Sex between Straight White Men" A part of me is genuinely intrigued, eager to find out more, etc. Another part thinks it's one giant "no homo" charade.

[Mah VM]

Bi erasure in full swing in an LGBT thread... gotta love the internet.

The book mentioned above is nothing but an essay on closeted men and the polite new ways they found to say "No Homo" without seeming utterly ignorant and homophobic and failing miserably.

I don't think anybody here has ill intentions but that's bi erasure at it's finest. Plain and simple. Yes, there are plenty of people who are attracted to men and women and have the possibility of falling in love with either... But we have already been identified: Bisexuals, Pansexuals and Queer. Done. Case solved. I know sexuality can be really hard to figure out and there's not telling how long or complicated a person's journey will be but if we dismiss the knowledge we do have about sexuality thus far it becomes impossible. Having attraction to men and women is really not something new that needs a new name or too exotic that it can't be understood and identified. It has been around forever and it already has a name. More than one name actually.. And it ain't gay or straight. To deny that is, albeit unintentionaly, contributing to the pervasive trend of erasing bisexuals.

People have the right to self-identify as whatever they please and we should respect it. However, when you start projecting your own personal interpretation of sexuality onto other people and it steps into a very old and insidious trope, there is a problem. As long as people are validated when they erase the "inbetweeners" in favor of identifying individuals who are attracted to both genders as gay or straight or whatever bullshit closeted people wrote essays about, bi erasure will always be a thing. And that IS damaging to our community. There are way more bi and pan people out there than we'll probably ever know since so many seem hellbent on explaining away those sexualities and that's disheartening.

The only thing that I can agree with is the idea that sexual orientation and sexual behavior are different things and people often get orientations assigned to them by other people because of their sexual behavior or history. Sexual orientation reflects who you are sexualy attracted to, not who you have sex with.
* Many straight teenagers experiment with the same sex and gay teenagers experiment with the opposite sex out of confusion with what they are or just out of curiosity.
* Many gay teens and adults have relationships with the opposite gender out of repression, fear of rejection from family and friends, religious beliefs and/or the need to fit in.
* Many straight men and women have sex and relatioships with the same sex in prison out of convinience and lack of options.
* Many straight men and women have sex with the same sex in the military out of convenience and/or lack of options.
* Many straight and gay people resort to porn or prostituition and have sex with people they are not attracted to at all out of need of money and/or lack of better options.

The pattern here is: They are not really sexualy attracted to the people they're having sex with. They have other reasons and situations that led them into that. Their sexual orientation is determined by who they are sexualy attracted to, not who is in their bed. However, if someone is or has been sexualy attracted to men and women, regardless of how many times it happened or however many excuses they pull out of their asses for it, they're bi, pan or queer.

[Silvermoth]

I find the golden rule is just to listen to however people want to label themselves. If they say they're bi don't say they're just "not out of the closet yet" or "just confused". Let them say who they are. Also, if they say they don't want labels or they have other terms then don't label them and do use their terms.

It is a little surprising though that shows like "orange is the new black" do everything they can to avoid using the word "bisexual"

[Andru]

I find the golden rule is just to listen to however people want to label themselves. If they say they're bi don't say they're just "not out of the closet yet" or "just confused". Let them say who they are. Also, if they say they don't want labels or they have other terms then don't label them and do use their terms.

Agreed! I have never claimed to be bisexual, but I know many gay men who started off as "bi" until they were ready to admit they were gay.

They are already dealing with enough, they don't need people "helping" them come out.

And as for Charlie Cox... he is quite fine!

[t hedge coke]

Agreed! I have never claimed to be bisexual, but I know many gay men who started off as "bi" until they were ready to admit they were gay.

And, there are plenty of gay men who're sleep sleeping with women, or checking them out often enough, while insisting that bi is "just a road to gay" and they're gay. Straight men sleeping with dudes, but, oh so straight. Lesbians who "only sleep with guys when ____" and so on. How often do we come across "she's not bisexual, women are just more sexual with each other, but it's not gay" and variations?

Any desperate attempt not to use the b-word. It's not that, they're just women. It's a phase. They'll grow out of it. They're only doing it because they're pressured. Or, they're horny. They're desperate.

Seriously, if we started throwing this stuff around about gay men, I'd like to see how many of you would still be supporting it.

"I've known a lot of gay men who said they're straight. So they're straight." "I've known plenty of men who have gay sex, but is it a pattern? It's always a different guy and for ten minutes, but they go home to their wife. Straight." "They're just not comfortable being straight, yet. There's so much societal pressure insert various 4chan phrases here SJW radical tumblr hate on straight men etc." "They don't have sex with men, they go 'eewwww' every time someone talks about how cute a guy is, but they're just as gay as anyone, because aren't we all?"

That's why solid terminology is, I think, more important than relying on individuals to self-ID except, at most, in their everyday life, and hopefully even phasing that out. Just like racial passing, or any other form of passing or closeting, I think it does far more damage to our society and world as a whole than the benefits of "allowing" it and pretending it's not happening are for most individuals unless they're living under active and serious threat.

Nobody, that I can see, is talking about "helping" anyone come out or forcing them to, except people who are against it. I think, actually, everyone in the thread is probably against it.

But, some of us are saying that "I sleep with men and women I find attractive, but I'm not bi," for example, would be hypocritical.

Someone saying so and so is gay cannot make them gay. Saying they're bi can't make them bi. Calling them an elephant or a turnip won't magically turn them into either of those. But, when discussing homosexuality, it helps that we have the word "homosexual," and that we have "heterosexual" and "bisexual," that we can distinguish "gay" and "lesbian," etc. But, not using the words, inventing all sorts of weak excuses not to use the words, may help someone be comfortable for awhile, but what it does largely, is erase that word and that idea from the broader social landscape.

If we're talking about a fifteen year old kid, fine. Teenagers can sort their stuff out. But, when we get down to adults in the 21st Century, particularly in English-dominant countries, no. We don't have to let each individual person rewrite the entire dictionary to make definitions that suit them best and let them closet themselves or anyone else off. Not, just so we can pretend that the b-word is just a transition to the realities of straight and gay.

[Andru]

And, there are plenty of gay men who're sleep sleeping with women, or checking them out often enough, while insisting that bi is "just a road to gay" and they're gay. Straight men sleeping with dudes, but, oh so straight. Lesbians who "only sleep with guys when ____" and so on. How often do we come across "she's not bisexual, women are just more sexual with each other, but it's not gay" and variations?

Any desperate attempt not to use the b-word. It's not that, they're just women. It's a phase. They'll grow out of it. They're only doing it because they're pressured. Or, they're horny. They're desperate.

Seriously, if we started throwing this stuff around about gay men, I'd like to see how many of you would still be supporting it.

"I've known a lot of gay men who said they're straight. So they're straight." "I've known plenty of men who have gay sex, but is it a pattern? It's always a different guy and for ten minutes, but they go home to their wife. Straight." "They're just not comfortable being straight, yet. There's so much societal pressure insert various 4chan phrases here SJW radical tumblr hate on straight men etc." "They don't have sex with men, they go 'eewwww' every time someone talks about how cute a guy is, but they're just as gay as anyone, because aren't we all?"

That's why solid terminology is, I think, more important than relying on individuals to self-ID except, at most, in their everyday life, and hopefully even phasing that out. Just like racial passing, or any other form of passing or closeting, I think it does far more damage to our society and world as a whole than the benefits of "allowing" it and pretending it's not happening are for most individuals unless they're living under active and serious threat.

Nobody, that I can see, is talking about "helping" anyone come out or forcing them to, except people who are against it. I think, actually, everyone in the thread is probably against it.

But, some of us are saying that "I sleep with men and women I find attractive, but I'm not bi," for example, would be hypocritical.

Someone saying so and so is gay cannot make them gay. Saying they're bi can't make them bi. Calling them an elephant or a turnip won't magically turn them into either of those. But, when discussing homosexuality, it helps that we have the word "homosexual," and that we have "heterosexual" and "bisexual," that we can distinguish "gay" and "lesbian," etc. But, not using the words, inventing all sorts of weak excuses not to use the words, may help someone be comfortable for awhile, but what it does largely, is erase that word and that idea from the broader social landscape.

If we're talking about a fifteen year old kid, fine. Teenagers can sort their stuff out. But, when we get down to adults in the 21st Century, particularly in English-dominant countries, no. We don't have to let each individual person rewrite the entire dictionary to make definitions that suit them best and let them closet themselves or anyone else off. Not, just so we can pretend that the b-word is just a transition to the realities of straight and gay.

I have to apologize, I skimmed over much of the conversation and really only read Silvermoth's post. So I probably missed most of the background.

However I 100% standby my agreement with Silvermoth and what I posted. I hated when people tried to tell me I was gay before I was ready to be out. And I know some of my friends who were "bi" hated being told to just admit they were actually gay.

It is none of my business what someone identifies as. When they are ready, I trust they will be honest with themselves and those they wish to share it with.

I know people in both groups. Those who don't like labels & those who are loud & proud to be any aspect of LGBT.

I don't really think the "straight" who hooks up with dudes in his spare time & yet is "disgusted" at the mention of gay sex in front his buddies is really hurting anyone or damaging society.

[MasterOfMagnetism]

I don't really think the "straight" who hooks up with dudes in his spare time & yet is "disgusted" at the mention of gay sex in front his buddies is really hurting anyone or damaging society.

I think it would offend anyone who isn't homophobic if they heard him saying that he's disgusted by gay sex.

[Andru]

I think it would offend anyone who isn't homophobic if they heard him saying that he's disgusted by gay sex.

Offensive? Sure, depending on who hears it I guess. I guess I didn't translate the image in my head that well into writing. My mistake.

My main point is I don't find it harmful if people who are LGBT, who don't want to identify as such. And there could be numerous reasons why they don't identify as LGBT. Maybe they really just don't believe in the labels, maybe they have a group of friends or family who would shun them for it, maybe they think others would feel differently about them, etc, etc...

It is their business, they can live their life however they feel most comfortable.

Not saying I agree with the "straight guy who hooks up with dudes in his spare time & yet is disgusted at the mention of gay sex in front his buddies". But I also understand there is probably a reason why he is "hiding who he is".

[Kieran_Frost]

Disney, Marvel Threaten Boycott Over Georgia's "Religious Liberty" Bill
http://www.comicbookresources.com/ar...s-liberty-bill
Disney and Marvel Studios have threatened to boycott Georgia if the state's governor signs into law a controversial "religious liberty" bill that critics say will legalize anti-gay discrimination. “Disney and Marvel are inclusive companies," a Disney spokesman said today, "and although we have had great experiences filming in Georgia, we will plan to take our business elsewhere should any legislation allowing discriminatory practices be signed into state law.
[MORE IN LINK]

While I think this is good, and progress for Disney; I don't think a company that has no LGBT superheroes in the MCU films, nor ever had a gay solo series... should get on its high-horse 'too much' about gay rights. They have the power to make a true difference in media, and yet don't. This... feels like headline grabbing to me.

My main point is I don't find it harmful if people who are LGBT, who don't want to identify as such. And there could be numerous reasons why they don't identify as LGBT. Maybe they really just don't believe in the labels, maybe they have a group of friends or family who would shun them for it, maybe they think others would feel differently about them, etc, etc...

If someone doesn't want to consider themselves LGBT, fine (their life, their choice). But if other's want to consider them LGBT, that's fine too (in my eyes). If you are a guy who sleeps with guys, you're LGBT. That person may not identify as such, but I certainly have no problem calling a spade a spade.

[numberthirty]

Doesn't Disney own Marvel now?