The LGBTQIA-community

[R.E.B]

100% agreed. And (to be honest) regardless what the "gay community" decide, to many in the rest of the world gay, lesbian, trans, bi, drag queen, queer = it's ALL THE SAME! Even IF the trans community "broke out", it wouldn't work, the majority view it as all one thing; and will treat it like that. We'd have to spend an incredible amount of energy trying to educate everyone... and for what? To celebrate the victory of isolation not unity?

It is all the same, yet now in alot of ways we're more divided than ever. For example, the Rupual "Trannie" controversy has really shown me that we as the LGBT have become alot more tribal and more defensive for our tribes. The constant debates of Bisexuality show how divided we are. Its becoming more and more that if you're not able to be quickly categorized, then problems will come.

I've never thought of that. Ultimately (for most) a monogamous relationship, ending in marriage and a life time together is "the goal." So if someone is bisexual, at the end of the day one half of their sexuality will "win" AND one half will lose. Damn... that's really sad, now I think about it. That to be committed and monogamous and married will mean forever denying a part of who you are. Wow; that's a really sad situation.

Any bi people in the thread got any thoughts on that specific (possible) inevitability???

Well, not all bisexuals are the same, some are coming to this in a purely sexual state, some just want the emotional intimacy of the same sex. So it depends. For me it's not about one sex winning against the other its about the person I choose to be with. I not one who says that "the genitals have nothing to do with anything, it's the person", because I feel that sex is an important component to a long lasting relationship, but you must also consider that every relationship has it's own version of monogamy and commitment.

Agreed; but we can all be more accepting and supportive.

Very true.... Very, very true.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

Great to see some B Folk embracing their "equal spot" hear.

To Kieran and Hedge Coke:

If a Bi man is seen kissing another man in hardcore traditionalist African regions, do you think he will be treated any less horridly than a man rating a 5 or 6 on the Kinsey Scale?

If a bi woman enriches her soul and eros from a mere dozen brief interludes with another woman/women during sultry Dubai afternoons, do you think she will receive any lesser severity from the courts in that jurisdiction by dint of the fact she also slept with men?

[R.E.B]

Great to see some B Folk embracing their "equal spot" hear.

Its nothing, I posted on here before the reboot so Im familiar with the regulars.

To Kieran and Hedge Coke:

If a Bi man is seen kissing another man in hardcore traditionalist African regions, do you think he will be treated any less horridly than a man rating a 5 or 6 on the Kinsey Scale?

If a bi woman enriches her soul and eros from a mere dozen brief interludes with another woman/women during sultry Dubai afternoons, do you think she will receive any lesser severity from the courts in that jurisdiction by dint of the fact she also slept with men?

They would be accused of committing of a crime in those countries. However, I do have an issue with some gay men proclaiming these countries to be barbaric wastlelands. It horrible and deplorable the way same sex relationships are treated in Africa and the Middle East but 1) Let's not write off a whole group of people, since there are some like us in these lands. 2) Our country is not on point with alot of GLBT issues ourselves.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

Its nothing, I posted on here before the reboot so Im familiar with the regulars.



They would be accused of committing of a crime in those countries. However, I do have an issue with some gay men proclaiming these countries to be barbaric wastlelands. It horrible and deplorable the way same sex relationships are treated in Africa and the Middle East but 1) Let's not write off a whole group of people, since there are some like us in these lands. 2) Our country is not on point with alot of GLBT issues ourselves.

I am not writing off any areas that gave us Shaka and the ability to navigate the seas by observance of the skies. My point is limited to the fact that any member of a hate demographic, whether in Modesto, Essex, Glasgow, Ukiah, Phoenix, Hungary, Uganda, Bunbury, or Saxony won't be checking someone's backstory to see if at any point the person they attack "passed" as per the way bi folks can "pass".

[Vibranium]

quick aside...now I don't know how many wrestling fans or former wrestling but I saw a discussion online about openly gay WWE star Darren Young and some random comment about Goldust being a homophobic character

to this I saw what? anyone that watched Goldust could see that character was in no way homphobic..sure it was some shock value but homphobic...uh no

[R.E.B]

quick aside...now I don't know how many wrestling fans or former wrestling but I saw a discussion online about openly gay WWE star Darren Young and some random comment about Goldust being a homophobic character

to this I saw what? anyone that watched Goldust could see that character was in no way homphobic..sure it was some shock value but homphobic...uh no

Well, I would question the crush on Razor Ramon storyline, but overall no, especially since the 00's he's been a comedic character. His team-tag with Booker T was classic. I would say Billy and Chuck were worse.

[Vibranium]

Well, I would question the crush on Razor Ramon storyline, but overall no, especially since the 00's he's been a comedic character. His team-tag with Booker T was classic. I would say Billy and Chuck were worse.

I thought Billy and Chuck were great to be honest...it was very tongue in cheek and got quite a bit of mainstream attention

[R.E.B]

I thought Billy and Chuck were great to be honest...it was very tongue in cheek and got quite a bit of mainstream attention

It was fine and actually fun, until the wedding and Rico.

[Vibranium]

It was fine and actually fun, until the wedding and Rico.

didn't Rico turn on them or something? yeah...it was used to start a feud with another tag team

WWE weddings are like that....all the time...if there is a wedding or a ceremony, something is going to happen

[Kieran_Frost]

Id be willing to say that in many instances, its just someone doesn't fully understand what it means to be asexual or transgendered or bisexual and there should be some "middle ground"

I think this is one of the major things; it's more often than not about lack of understanding, which is why it's always more beneficial to educate rather than attack. This is why shows like Modern Family or the Ellen Show are so important, because the first step in educating acceptance is helping them see LGBT people or characters they like and enjoy.

It is all the same, yet now in alot of ways we're more divided than ever. For example, the Rupual "Trannie" controversy has really shown me that we as the LGBT have become alot more tribal and more defensive for our tribes. The constant debates of Bisexuality show how divided we are. Its becoming more and more that if you're not able to be quickly categorized, then problems will come.

Ohhh, I haven't heard of this one, what happened?

Well, not all bisexuals are the same, some are coming to this in a purely sexual state, some just want the emotional intimacy of the same sex. So it depends. For me it's not about one sex winning against the other its about the person I choose to be with. I not one who says that "the genitals have nothing to do with anything, it's the person", because I feel that sex is an important component to a long lasting relationship, but you must also consider that every relationship has it's own version of monogamy and commitment.

But surely if you want a long-term (RE: in theory "till death do us part") monogamous relationship one half of your sexuality is going to be suppressed?

[bert]

Ohhh, I haven't heard of this one, what happened?

take with a grain of salt, as it's just MY opinion, and I'm not Transexual.

but in a nutshell?

two of the former contestants, whom are both Transexual, went on record (in a couple of interviews) on how they were disappointed that Ru was still using Transexuality for humor. It was based off of one particular challenge (and I can't recall off the top of my head which one, but I didn't find it offensive at the time (again. . grain of salt, as I noted).

anyways, the show has gone back and dropped "you've got She-Mail" in each episode, and is making a very PC effort not to offend anyone now.

I miss the "you've got She-Mail" only because it was a play on AOL, rather than something anti-trans. . . .but eh.

again, to me? a tempest in a tea-pot. But I understand others might not feel the same way.

here's a link to Ru's statement (and story):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5374897.html

[pro]

I've never thought of that. Ultimately (for most) a monogamous relationship, ending in marriage and a life time together is "the goal." So if someone is bisexual, at the end of the day one half of their sexuality will "win" AND one half will lose. Damn... that's really sad, now I think about it. That to be committed and monogamous and married will mean forever denying a part of who you are. Wow; that's a really sad situation.

Any bi people in the thread got any thoughts on that specific (possible) inevitability???

For me it's more like:
If I'm not in love with someone specific I like men and women about 50% equal.
If I am in love then I tend to be more interested in the gender of that person. Not exclusively but more so.
I don't really feel there is a loss there any more than it is for someone who is either gay or straight.
Everyone can have fantasies outside of those about their partner. That's common for straights and gays as much as for a bi person.
You don't stop finding other men or women attractive just because you're with someone.
But for a bi person those fantasies and attractions can be about men or women.
Doesn't mean you necessarily act on them. You can be bi and be happy with one partner.
It's not really that different than it is for straights or gays.

The only difference is the gender someone can be attracted to.
You like redheads, blondes, dark skinned, lightskinned.
And I happen to like both genders.
My range of likes is not exclusive to one gender.

The choice of monogamy is a different aspect of relationships and sexuality than what gender you are attracted to.
Some bi people will screw around sure, but again the same applies to straights and gays.
Not all gay or straight people are monogamous or faithful.
Personally I'm ridiculously loyal to the person I am in love with to the point where it takes me years sometimes to erase my loyalty to them should it not work out.
That is not so much a choice as the fact that I tend to bond on an emotional level with the one I'm in love with and pretty strongly so.
Same as everyone else, gay or straight.

[t hedge coke]

I like weddings. I like the idea of marriage. I'm a pretty domestic guy. But, if I marry a man, I'm still not waking up gay. If I marry a woman, it won't somehow straighten me out. Because, for me, it's not about who I'm having sex with more often or exclusively, but attraction. Not public, loud attraction. It's not like they come take your bi card away because you haven't had sex with the right kind of person this week. Just, attraction.

On another front, I notice there's another flap over Dan Savage and a loud defense of all things Dan Savage from another quarter, and I have to ask: Why is it for some (so many?), Savage is beyond reproach? He can say what he likes on race, culture, sexuality, gender and no one, especially not those actually in the categories he's speculating on (or making mandates for, that of course, he has no power to make happen) seem permitted to disagree or call him out, without a sort of wave of "How dare you Dan Savage has done so much and he's a gay white man stop oppressing our active gay white men and being so sensitive!"

[R.E.B]

I like weddings. I like the idea of marriage. I'm a pretty domestic guy. But, if I marry a man, I'm still not waking up gay. If I marry a woman, it won't somehow straighten me out. Because, for me, it's not about who I'm having sex with more often or exclusively, but attraction. Not public, loud attraction. It's not like they come take your bi card away because you haven't had sex with the right kind of person this week. Just, attraction.

Exactly, so I guess as the younger kids say, quoted for truth.

On another front, I notice there's another flap over Dan Savage and a loud defense of all things Dan Savage from another quarter, and I have to ask: Why is it for some (so many?), Savage is beyond reproach? He can say what he likes on race, culture, sexuality, gender and no one, especially not those actually in the categories he's speculating on (or making mandates for, that of course, he has no power to make happen) seem permitted to disagree or call him out, without a sort of wave of "How dare you Dan Savage has done so much and he's a gay white man stop oppressing our active gay white men and being so sensitive!"

I feel that Dan Savage is a lethargic, misogynist, bi-phobic, trans-phobic dinosaur from 90's era who only cares about what affects gay men in a position of privilege. I learned a long time ago not to take anything he says at face value. All of this "It gets better" and his new interest and concerns for other minorities are just illusions that dont erase everything that he has said before. From blaming the black church community for the prop 8 disaster to telling teenagers not to come out as Bisexual as teens because no one will believe them. There are numerous examples of him being quite venomous and this latest thing is no surprise. The only entertaining thing about his podcast is listening to how all the callers hang on his every word.

For me it's more like:
If I'm not in love with someone specific I like men and women about 50% equal.
If I am in love then I tend to be more interested in the gender of that person. Not exclusively but more so.
I don't really feel there is a loss there any more than it is for someone who is either gay or straight.
Everyone can have fantasies outside of those about their partner. That's common for straights and gays as much as for a bi person.
You don't stop finding other men or women attractive just because you're with someone.
But for a bi person those fantasies and attractions can be about men or women.
Doesn't mean you necessarily act on them. You can be bi and be happy with one partner.
It's not really that different than it is for straights or gays.

The only difference is the gender someone can be attracted to.
You like redheads, blondes, dark skinned, lightskinned.
And I happen to like both genders.
My range of likes is not exclusive to one gender.

The choice of monogamy is a different aspect of relationships and sexuality than what gender you are attracted to.
Some bi people will screw around sure, but again the same applies to straights and gays.
Not all gay or straight people are monogamous or faithful.
Personally I'm ridiculously loyal to the person I am in love with to the point where it takes me years sometimes to erase my loyalty to them should it not work out.
That is not so much a choice as the fact that I tend to bond on an emotional level with the one I'm in love with and pretty strongly so.
Same as everyone else, gay or straight.

In perfect agreement with this, could not of said it better myself.

[TroubleWithTrebles]

I just experienced 3 non sexual crushes on recent posters to this thread.

Not only for them saying what I might have.

Somtimes one must give up their Aladdin Sane to be with their Patsy from AbFab.

Also when matrimony is invoked, the international debate on the subject featuring Ben Law and disputes over fair definitions of committment and ironclad sexual monogamy vs romantic monogamy were argued (vehemently).