• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Everyday Biphobia

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Those researchers aren't oncologists or chemists or DNA specialists and really aren't going to be effective at researching cancer, nor do they have the desire to. That's a bit like saying - aren't there more important things to talk about than religion or sexuality or politics, on the internet?
I was thinking in terms of money and resources. It wouldn't be the same people studying, but those who are researching potentially life-saving treatments could have more. To me, it just seems an odd way to prioritize things. It's also that it seems rare to make cisgender heterosexuals the center of scientific study. Though of course they are often used, especially as a control, but rarely do we see it being asked "what makes someone heterosexual?"
 

Drolefille

PolyPanGeekGirl
I was thinking in terms of money and resources. It wouldn't be the same people studying, but those who are researching potentially life-saving treatments could have more. To me, it just seems an odd way to prioritize things. It's also that it seems rare to make cisgender heterosexuals the center of scientific study. Though of course they are often used, especially as a control, but rarely do we see it being asked "what makes someone heterosexual?"
This is true, but there have been extensive studies on arousal and aversion therapy and all sorts of things done on heterosexuals decades ago. The measurement of arousal isn't a new thing. It's all about the "reporting" of scientific results. The 2005 study didn't prove there were no male bisexuals, and the 2011 study doesn't prove that men prefer men or women, it just shows this is what happened. Pop Psychology reporting turns that into BI MEN NOT REAL SAYS SCIENCE.

As for money and resources it's the classic argument that we shouldn't donate to animal shelters because there are starving people, or to AIDS research when heart disease and cancer kill more people. It isn't a zero sum game, and places like the Kinsey Institute specifically fund research into sexuality. Research that was "unnecessary" proved that children raised by lesbian couples have at least as good if not slightly better outcomes than children raised by straight couples. That evidence helped in the fundamental court cases that legalized gay marriage (the Prop 8 one in particular.) Research has determined that transitioning is the most effective treatment for gender dysphoria. Billions of dollars have gone to try to cure breast cancer and we got nada right now. Why would millions taken from research into gender and sexuality change that? Just as we have money going into understanding why frogs die off first in extreme environmental conditions, how many potato chips kills a rat, does marijuana help X disease or just make people feel better, etc, we spend money on desire, arousal, relationship research, and the like. My thesis (had I not switched to a comp exam) was going to be on polyamory. Sure there were more "important" things I could ask about, but I didn't have the interest in those.

I think there's a tendency to be suspicious, and rightly so, of the scientific community by minorities. The forced sterilization of poor, minority women was horrific, but it doesn't make the entirety of the medical profession wrong. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment was unethical and exploitative, but all medical research isn't invalid. The search for knowledge isn't the problem as long as ethical safeguards are followed - that these men weren't pressured into showing up and were informed of the nature of the experiment - that they'd be watching porn with equipment hooked up to their penises. We should absolutely be critical of how the science is used and how it is reported.

/soapbox (Sorry)
 

-Peacemaker-

.45 Cal
I'd like to point out that you still apologized to everyone except the person most directly harmed and/or offended by your words. Totally what Jesus would do - ignore and insult the trans people and apologize only to the cis woman who didn't even respond to you.

I'll state again that I wasn't even talking to Wolf. I'll also state that my impression of this individual's statements is that the question wasn't the problem, it was WHO was asking it. I don't apologize for not calling transwomen "she" or "her". That's what I believe Wolf's issue really is with me
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
I'll state again that I wasn't even talking to Wolf. I'll also state that my impression of this individual's statements is that the question wasn't the problem, it was WHO was asking it. I don't apologize for not calling transwomen "she" or "her". That's what I believe Wolf's issue really is with me

If you think it's just Shadow Wolf's issue, you are sorely mistaken. I despise the transphobic attitude you are displaying here. You would really do yourself and your beliefs a favor by keeping such hateful garbage to yourself, although I realize everyone is entitled to express their opinion.

That's one of the downsides to freedom of speech (albeit one that doesn't outweigh the upsides): It forces people to listen to garbage and absurd views.
 

Drolefille

PolyPanGeekGirl
I'll state again that I wasn't even talking to Wolf. I'll also state that my impression of this individual's statements is that the question wasn't the problem, it was WHO was asking it. I don't apologize for not calling transwomen "she" or "her". That's what I believe Wolf's issue really is with me

A) You were still rude and offensive and I would think it would be the Christian thing to do to apologize for offense caused. You're now arguing that you shouldn't apologize for something else entirely, while again, ignoring the apology due for your rudeness.
B) In this very thread, someone else asked questions and apologized for rudeness. It wasn't just because YOU asked, but your bigoted remarks regarding trans people have only compounded the issue. I can't call it ignorance as you've been educated but refuse to listen.
C) Would you find it rude if other people called you a she because they felt like it? Or your coworkers called you by the wrong name deliberately? Would you find it rude if no matter how much you told people you were Christian, that others insisted on calling you a Muslim? I guarantee you have called a trans woman "she" because you didn't know she was trans. Similarly I guarantee you've called a trans man "he" because you didn't know. You don't ask everyone you meet if their genitals or chromosomes match their gender presentation, so you're simply being hypocritical, again.
D) She does have an issue with you, one you've earned. That is completely irrelevant to everything else that you ignore.
E) Deliberately misgendering Shadow Wolf would be inappropriate, you're walking a very fine line there.
F) You continue to run this thread off topic, and making it all about YOU. This is the exact point made by minorities - we're talking about our problems and you show up, derail the conversation by reducing us to our genitals and then whine about it. This is like if I made a post about how having large breasts hurts my back and causes me problems and you showed up and said "hehehe BEWBS ARE HAWT RIGHT?"
G) Even if I granted your bigotry was "right" would it be the Christian thing to do to apologize for stepping on an adulterer's foot, or would you instead say "I think you're really just upset that I called you an adulterer."
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
It wouldn't be the same people studying, but those who are researching potentially life-saving treatments could have more.

I used to do audit and research for the UK health service, that included looking at patient outcomes for new treatments. The experience I developed could have been transferred to doing research on sexuality ( for example ), but I imagine that would have been a low priority in terms of overall funding for research.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I think there's a tendency to be suspicious, and rightly so, of the scientific community by minorities. The forced sterilization of poor, minority women was horrific, but it doesn't make the entirety of the medical profession wrong. The Tuskegee syphilis experiment was unethical and exploitative, but all medical research isn't invalid.
I'll admit, I almost posted something about finding out what makes people homosexual, bisexual, or transsexual, and then having to defend ourselves against that very same research from people who want to try to use it as means to "fix" us. It also comes up a lot with Asperger's, where people want to fix things that we feel do not need fixed.
Your response did make me think of a good point though, that many fear the misuse of religion and blame religion as a whole, but hardly anyone does talk about the misuse of science, even though a few of some of the best scientists of the mid 20th century built a bomb capable of wiping out miles of a city with one blast. Off, topic, but not something I want to forget.

I'll state again that I wasn't even talking to Wolf. I'll also state that my impression of this individual's statements is that the question wasn't the problem, it was WHO was asking it. I don't apologize for not calling transwomen "she" or "her". That's what I believe Wolf's issue really is with me
You are so clueless. Are you sure you aren't single because you're so oblivious and women don't want to put up with your ****? I can see you being impressive to a girl with low self esteem who is just happy for the attention, but a woman wouldn't fall for your games.
I've also seen how guys like you turn out: alone, unwanted, and despised because everyone eventually grows tired of their toolish ways and shallowness. Not even the bartender really likes them.
My problem with you is that you can't even see what my problem with you is, even though it's all over this thread. It's barely even what you said in the other thread. Stupid **** like that doesn't bother me. It's how you showed up here that I have a problem with. Maybe you didn't read my post, or maybe you did and you're intentionally being an *******? But regardless, it's been explained several times why your behavior is inappropriate.

That's one of the downsides to freedom of speech (albeit one that doesn't outweigh the upsides): It forces people to listen to garbage and absurd views.
But without the garbage and absurd views, what would shows like South Park and American Dad use for cannon fodder? And if I ever work up the courage to try stand up comedy, it'll become my own cannon fodder. I could go on for awhile about how if Jesus is real, he'll be too busy punishing those who were an embrassment to him and his father to enjoy his millennial reign. They're going to have to merge the 8th circle of hell with the 7th, and maybe the 6th, just because the Malebolge will be overflowing. I wonder if these people will get a fair trail? A chance to defend to defend themselves? Satan as the prosecutor, and themselves and only their own knowledge of the Bible as their defense. It would be fair, and very simply for any Christian, but absolutely hair raising for most people who claim to be Christian. How many times do you suppose Jesus would stand up screaming "where the hell did I EVER say it was ok to do that?" Or perhaps did he loose the shock of what people do in his name during the Dark Ages?
 

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
I'll state again that I wasn't even talking to Wolf. I'll also state that my impression of this individual's statements is that the question wasn't the problem, it was WHO was asking it. I don't apologize for not calling transwomen "she" or "her". That's what I believe Wolf's issue really is with me

The thread is for discussion, for our place to discuss how biphobia and bi-erasure occur and the harm it induces on those of us in the queer community.

I invited discussions on trans phobia as well for reasons spelled out per the OP.

This thread is not a debate about bisexuality, homosexuality, or transgender people. It is not open to presenting or countering with differing opinions. There are other threads for that.

That being said, it is indeed enlightening to watch how the thread unfolded in a way that exemplifies how bi-erasure and blatant monosexism occurs.

To present in such a way that a person is only attracted to or is built in just one way or another perpetuates the very thing that I brought up in the OP.

The reason why I am addressing you specifically, PM, is because if you have any respectful questions concerning transgender people, please be so thoughtful to ask the person himself or herself. You have been avoiding talking to Shadow Wolf directly while assuming her perspective for her. That doesn't help the discussion, and in fact turns this into a debate about the validity of her experiences.

SW, I'm so sorry you've been the subject of so much in this thread. That wasn't my intention.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
SW, I'm so sorry you've been the subject of so much in this thread. That wasn't my intention.
There is nothing to be sorry for. An online forum discussion isn't something I'm going to loose sleep over. However, it has become a record of transphobia and obsession. And because it's online, it's permanent (RF even has an impressive collection on the way back machine), it's fair game for anything I want to use it for, and very exemplary of how some people (particularly men) speak poorly of transswomen but then want to know all the details about her vagina. I'm surprised he hasn't asked for all those bloody and gory details about SRS yet, which is something that group tends to crave.
Given my education and career paths, what he really ended up doing was unknowingly setting up a trap and falling into it. Because of this rare and golden opportunity to have this transphobia recorded, I now have one more way of presenting it to a larger audience of how transphobia functions, including the fact it comes with a lot of obsession over the genitals of transsexuals. He makes an *** of himself while I loose no sleep and gain writing/research material.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Read the "Discussion" portion at the bottom for some rather specific analysis of the reasons why the results may have shown the way they did. Additionally there is a phenomena where gay men will sometimes identify as bisexual prior to coming out as gay. This would fall under the "non-sexual" reasons for identification under the Discussion section and might influence how the person identified. It would be interesting to see if the results changed if people were classified based not just on identification but past sexual activity if this would change things.

This pattern of "progressing" from bisexual to gay identified is one of the reasons for bi-erasure. Guys who are actually bisexual (and I've met them, they do exist) get accused of being gay.

There's a lot of anecdata that women are more sexually fluid then men but I've not really seen that backed up scientifically.

This in itself is a huge issue. This whole "gay men, using bisexuality as a stepping stone to coming out completely gay".. This is probably the biggest reason why in most circumstances I am not open with my sexuality to people, not that I want to shout it from the roof tops or anything, I just don't like having to feel like I am lying to other people.

I deal with a lot of the negativity that Bisexuals have to put up with because I am a man, and so I "must really be gay." being in the Active Duty Military does not help any either. Not saying bisexual women are without their stigmas, they just have a whole slew of different stigmas that get tacked on.

I am also not blaming Gay men or Women, using bisexuality as a stepping out process, but it hasn't helped the image of those who are truly bi.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Lesbians can also perch awhile in the bisexual category just like gay men. I do not see where you explained the difference. In grappling with non-heterosexual identity there are some gay vs lesbian differences. Some gay men deny they are gay because they did not fall in love with a man only fooled around. Early lesbians may say the opposite: I love my female best friend in a very special way, but I am not lesbian because I don't want sex with her. In all three strategies people try to hold onto a piece of heterosexuality instead of admitting applicability to a more stigmatized group, ie homosexuality. Given the cover strategies ie people lie to themselves, how can you be sure self described male bisexuals are actually bisexuals for the long haul?

I have been a male bisexual for 12 years, is that long haul enough? Or is there some specific timeline I need to follow to be "truly bisexual"?

How long does a person have to "be gay" before they are gay for the long haul? How long does a person have to "be straight", before they are straight for the long haul?

I fail to see the logic in this.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
I never called them gay men. I simply said that it occurred to me that if someone with a male body wanted to live as a woman, since women typically sleep with men, they would have to find gay men to sleep with as that's who would be attracted to them.

I know a few MTF, that are interested in solely women, what of that?
 

Drolefille

PolyPanGeekGirl
Mystic, you're always so nice to me, even when I don't deserve it.
You know what, I think you're actually flirting with @MysticSang'ha and think that this isn't noticeable.

This in itself is a huge issue. This whole "gay men, using bisexuality as a stepping stone to coming out completely gay".. This is probably the biggest reason why in most circumstances I am not open with my sexuality to people, not that I want to shout it from the roof tops or anything, I just don't like having to feel like I am lying to other people.

I deal with a lot of the negativity that Bisexuals have to put up with because I am a man, and so I "must really be gay." being in the Active Duty Military does not help any either. Not saying bisexual women are without their stigmas, they just have a whole slew of different stigmas that get tacked on.

I am also not blaming Gay men or Women, using bisexuality as a stepping out process, but it hasn't helped the image of those who are truly bi.
It's a balance beam - on the one hand, using the label as a stepping stone hurts those of us with the label, on the other, we understand that coming out is difficult and confusing and scary and want it to be ok to take small steps... I just wish it wasn't on our backs. Kind of like how polyamorous people got thrown under the "same sex marriage" bus.

I know a few MTF, that are interested in solely women, what of that?
Clearly they're straight dudes in dresses. Gah I feel sick even typing that.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Eh. Anyone who ever met a MTF for more than fifteen minutes and with anything resembling respect knows that they are, indeed, MTF.
 

Drolefille

PolyPanGeekGirl
Eh. Anyone who ever met a MTF for more than fifteen minutes and with anything resembling respect knows that they are, indeed, MTF.
There are two ways to take your comment, and I'd like it if you clarify what you mean before I assume one or the other?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Sorry, I probably should have made myself clearer.

MTF isn't something subtle (at least in my experience). They are people who are, indeed, women born in male bodies.

It is a very serious issue for them. And it is very disrespectful to be aware of any of them and decide that somehow they are "exagerating" or something.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
I know a few MTF, that are interested in solely women, what of that?
Transphobia very typically includes projecting a heterosexual orientation onto transswomen*, and if frequently associates gay men and transwomen together. In it's most insulting form, it comes out suggesting that we are gay men who can't handle the social stigmas of being gay, or even that we just can't handle to pressures of being a man. Transphobia not only targets transsexuals, it frequently targets other groups, especially homosexuals. But what is the worst, and even more saddening, is when the homosexual community and transgender community turn on each other, even to the point of transsexual denouncing homosexuals (and probably bisexuals, but it's never brought up).
And of course there is also transphobia within the transcommunity itself. In a discussion at a transgender forum, I have been accused of not "being real" just because of my preference of wearing jeans. Even though I've always delighted in the fact I can find women's jeans in my size much easier than I can in men's since I've started wearing them, and because of this ease I also have an actual variety to choose from, rather than just having only one or two different styles to pick from, which thrills me, I get told I'm "not real." Even being unable to tolerate what society has largely labeled "chick" music and being infinitely annoyed with emotionally gaggy and patriarchal conforming "chick" flicks is enough to make some in the transcommunity question your identity. IMO, this is the worst kind of transphobia because we are doing it to each other.

*this, at one time, was actually a requirement for transitioning. If you weren't attracted to men, you failed to meet the criteria. Fortunately, much progress has been made in that regard, as transwomen now do not have to be attracted to men, or even have to take jobs that are more traditionally "female." But it does show their are very strong patriarchal and monosexual roots even in psychiatry and psychology.
 

Drolefille

PolyPanGeekGirl
Sorry, I probably should have made myself clearer.

MTF isn't something subtle (at least in my experience). They are people who are, indeed, women born in male bodies.

It is a very serious issue for them. And it is very disrespectful to be aware of any of them and decide that somehow they are "exagerating" or something.
Gotcha. I was slightly concerned you were going down Peacemaker's "mannish face" route.
I've met people who were trans that I didn't have a clue were until later as well as met people who were cis but presented in a non-gender stereotypical way where my brain, to my dismay, would grab the wrong pronoun for them if I wasn't attentive. But what you're saying is true - as long as people don't assume that a trans woman is going to be a femme woman. There are trans butch lesbians out there who are female, presenting in a "masculine" manner, dating other women. This blows bigots's minds :p

Transphobia very typically includes projecting a heterosexual orientation onto transswomen*, and if frequently associates gay men and transwomen together. In it's most insulting form, it comes out suggesting that we are gay men who can't handle the social stigmas of being gay, or even that we just can't handle to pressures of being a man. Transphobia not only targets transsexuals, it frequently targets other groups, especially homosexuals. But what is the worst, and even more saddening, is when the homosexual community and transgender community turn on each other, even to the point of transsexual denouncing homosexuals (and probably bisexuals, but it's never brought up).
And of course there is also transphobia within the transcommunity itself. In a discussion at a transgender forum, I have been accused of not "being real" just because of my preference of wearing jeans. Even though I've always delighted in the fact I can find women's jeans in my size much easier than I can in men's since I've started wearing them, and because of this ease I also have an actual variety to choose from, rather than just having only one or two different styles to pick from, which thrills me, I get told I'm "not real." Even being unable to tolerate what society has largely labeled "chick" music and being infinitely annoyed with emotionally gaggy and patriarchal conforming "chick" flicks is enough to make some in the transcommunity question your identity. IMO, this is the worst kind of transphobia because we are doing it to each other.

*this, at one time, was actually a requirement for transitioning. If you weren't attracted to men, you failed to meet the criteria. Fortunately, much progress has been made in that regard, as transwomen now do not have to be attracted to men, or even have to take jobs that are more traditionally "female." But it does show their are very strong patriarchal and monosexual roots even in psychiatry and psychology.

The push and pull of gender roles and gender identity is interesting, dismaying and sometimes hopeful all at the same time.
 
Top