Trans Activists Are Erasing Bisexuals

 

The more I talk to my kiddo and gathered friends (in SoCal), the more I am getting called “old” and “old fashioned”.  Imagine me, a young mother, not yet 50, being schooled by my 18-year-old about how the LGBTQIA+ community isn’t what it used to be.

I’ve been told time and again that my experiences are no longer valid.  Whether or not they’d come out and say it exactly, that’s the gist.  It would never be said explicitly, because everyone’s experiences are valid, etc, etc.  But it has been said to me that everything I know is the old way.

The old way includes bisexuals.  You know, the women or men that love women and men.

Since we know now that gender either doesn’t exist at all or is completely non-binary or on a scale of masc to femme (unless you’re indigenous and Two-Spirit), this means that bisexuality no longer exists.  The Federalist called it back in 2017.  Trans movements are erasing homosexuality.  If there is no gender or it is how you feel or it is fluid, then there can be no protections based upon gender or sexual orientation since it can be changed at any moment.

According to my kid, this makes me a TERF.

Maybe it does.  But I have always felt that rights for people with various disorders are individual and shouldn’t be lumped into a large, generalized group that does not take into account their various issues.  Trans people are not a homogenous group.  Some are relatively well adjusted.  Many are not.  Many have serious identity conflicts that are not just related to their ideas of being in the wrong body.

Regardless, by definition, this eliminates bisexuality.  If there are no genders, then bisexuality is a lie.  It is even to the point that biresource.org, the resource for bisexuals is now calling it “bi+” because there are trans people who consider themselves bisexual.  They even go so far as to define it:

For example, bi+ activist Robyn Ochs defines bisexuality as “the potential for attraction to people with genders similar to and different from [your] own.”

I guess the bi, in bisexual refers to what, then?  No one really has an answer for that.  It is like lesbian or gay.  It is out of fashion.  Now it is all just queer.

There is, therefore, only pan-sexuality; the idea that one is attracted to a person, not a gender.

In 2017, 390 people out of 100,000 were estimated to be trans.  Approximately 50% of respondents were younger and it was expected that more would identify in the future.  According to the Williams Institute, over 1,397,000 people in the US identify as transgender.  It is only expected to rise as younger people are identifying more and more as queer, trans, or non-binary.

I never needed particular visibility.  I never felt the need to “come out” to anyone.  Whoever I dated was my business and if I introduced my person to someone, that was what it was.  If I felt like talking about the relationship, I did.  If I didn’t, I didn’t.  I didn’t need a flag or a pin or an undercut to show just how bisexual I was/wasn’t.  I never felt the need to explain it to anyone (except maybe my parents when I was in college, but I got over that).

I still do not need “visibility” or special treatment.  What I would like, however, is for my orientation to be respected and not turned into something it isn’t based upon this apparent fluidity of gender.  I would like to not be judged as some sort of bigot because I love men and women.

And I want my men to be men and my women to be women.

Otherwise, what is even the point of bisexuality or the attraction to the two?  The idea is that they are different.  The idea is that it is okay to be attracted to that.

I understand that trans life is very hard and I have known a number of people who have transitioned partially or completely, had surgeries (or not).  I am not discounting any of that.  But what I do discount is changing the terminology to mean something completely other than what it is.

I am not bisexual+.  I am not queer.

Also, I’m not old!

Fun side note: according to the Williams Institute, Texas is gayer than New York by more than 24,000 people.

Second side note: pictures searched through Shutterstock show more “trans” when searching “bisexual”.  Can’t be escaped.  I will provide no commentary about this.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 152 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    TheRightNurse (View Comment):
    Once you get into that, then you’re getting into what the purpose of sex ed is.  Which I think needs to be another post altogether.

    That is sort of odd. 

    I was in school when the sex ed classes were starting to be a rage.  It was all about teaching children about sexuality but seemed to be about the Left’s how to screw and avoid children.  Backward people back then said it was a slippery slope that would be teaching children about all sort of sexual stuff that was not what they wanted.  Now we have adults upset they can not talk to 5 years old about how to suck their private parts and drag queen story hour.  Those backward people were so stupid.  No vision at all on how far they would go with the perversions.  Simple minded people really.  Not sophisticated people that understand that men / women are just labels that can be changed at a whim or what proper pronouns are or that 2 and 3 year olds can decide what their sex is and have parts chopped off to get there.   

    • #151
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    TheRightNurse (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):

    So – while I’m on board with not exposing children to information about sex that is not age appropriate (and I am fairly straight laced about this) I think that the objective of making difference okay (which is contrary to our instinct) is a noble one.

    What troubles me about the don’t say gay laws (I know they’re not called that, and that they don’t even mention gay, which is [CoC] meta) is that from my understanding (1) they leave ‘age appropriate’ undefined [any parent can define that] and (2) school districts and teachers can be sued by anybody based on their subjective standard.

    Fun story: if it isn’t defined, the legal precedent is to base what a “reasonable person” would do. This is great because it gives some amount of leeway for everyone instead of the government jumping in and deciding the exact ages for different things (that don’t always generalize well to age as opposed to maturity). For example, kids may know what gay is and what it means. They don’t need lessons in same-sex activities, just like they don’t need lessons in opposite-sex activities.

    Until they’re older.

    Then you get into sex ed and that sort of stuff.

    Once you get into that, then you’re getting into what the purpose of sex ed is. Which I think needs to be another post altogether.

    By then they may have already seen “The Loophole” on youtube.

    • #152
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.