Bi radical
Love, rage and pride
Posts tagged Bisexuals
Snippet #5: Internalized biphobia in intimate relationships (click link for original post)
This is from the chapter about monosexism and biphobia, from the sub-section about internalized biphobia (and the sub-sub section about internalized biphobia in intimate relationships). I wrote about three types of internalized biphobia inside intimate relationships; this is the second.
Similar to social settings, internalized biphobia might also influence people inside intimate relationships in a way that is disruptive and harmful both to the relationship and the people within. Inside relationships, some bisexual people might treat their partners in ways similar to those of biphobic monosexual people, as informed by stereotypes about bisexuals’ dishonesty and lack of loyalty, as well as returning to some of the basic underlying themes of internalized biphobia such as lack of acceptance and worthlessness.
[…]
Bisexuals who […] choose to date other bisexuals might […] be influenced by internalized biphobia, often in subconscious ways. Many bisexuals people might fear that their partner might cheat on them or leave them for a member of another gender. If the relationship is nonmonogamous, then people might need to deal with more jealousy or a feeling of being threatened when their partner hooks up with someone of a particular gender. For example, in one of my relationships, my partner and I needed to deal with her internalized biphobia when I started dating a man. She feared that he might be able to satisfy me in ways that she couldn’t and that I might leave her for him (despite our polyamorous relationship). True to the under-the-radar character of internalized biphobia, she didn’t realize that this is what it was until I pointed it out.
I’ve found that these sorts of fears are more often triggered by (potential) male partners rather than anyone else, and regardless of the gender of the person in the relationship. To simplify: whether the person inside the relationship is a man, a woman, a non-binary gender or any other gender, these feelings might be more likely triggered by interest in a man than a person of any other gender. This means that these fears are more related to masculinist* and patriarchal** values than to categorical gendered thought (i.e. “this other person is of a different gender category than me, therefore they are more threatening”). The social presumption that males have more value here plays out through the assumption that bisexual people of any gender would always prefer men. Thus, the fear that one’s bisexual partner might leave them for the proverbial “someone with a penis”*** are informed both by sexism (assuming men’s superior value) and by biphobic notions according to which bisexuals are “actually” monosexual. In addition, a contributing factor might be people’s feelings of worthlessness as bisexuals, thinking themselves as undeserving of love and intimacy, or as “not good enough” to be with and thus dismissible by their partners.
* Patriarchy means the system of male superiority and rule.
** Masculinism is the system attributing more value and power to masculine people or to anything else which might be perceived as masculine (personality characteristics, hobbies, interests, social values, etc.)
*** Note that not all men actually have penises (notably, many transgender men). However, popular sexist, cissexist and heteropatriarchal thought often constructs men as metaphorically phallic (or as possessing phallic power) whether or not they “possess” the organ itself.
Reblogged from bialogue-group
Sorry to be the party pooper, but: bi assimilationism. Why do we need to base our legitimacy on similarity to the gay mainstream?
Also: what’s with the token black man? Racism much?
These are for a brand new Canadian Campaign aimed at getting better health-care for bisexual people within the greater LGBTQ+ community. As mentioned in the accompanying literature, “The four posters provide visibility to groups identified in our pilot study, and in the literature on bisexual health, as strongly impacted by biphobia.”. The aim being to get health-care providers to re-think preconceived notions about who Queer people are and what they might possibly look like in order to make sure all LGBTQ+ people are provided with the best services possible.
There are only a total of four photos and Canada is a multi-ethnic/multi-racial country, so it would be counterproductive to use people of European background only. As it is one half of those pictured are not cisgendered (one Trans* person and one Genderqueer/Two-spirit person) and one half of those pictured are of non-European background (one First Nation person and one person of African decent).
This doesn’t seem to be assimilationist or tokenism, merely representational of the actual types of people an Ontario Health-care provider might reasonably be expected to come across in their daily practice.
Thanks for the link, that was really helpful and might help me make my point clearer.
Let me start by saying that the goal of this campaign is doubtlessly a noble one. Lack of appropriate health care is one of the biggest problems stemming from biphobia and monosexism, and the idea of a campaign addressing the health needs of bisexual people is both necessary and laudable.
On the other hand: wait, what? I don’t see any reference to bi people’s health anywhere on these posters. There’s no way of knowing what these posters are actually about unless you go on the website and read about it. So, here’s my first point: the posters fail pretty much completely at reflecting the original message.
Second point: What do these posters even have to do with the purpose of the campaign? If an organization wants to address the grave problem of bisexual health, why do it through posters? Is this really the most efficient method to counter misconceptions and lack of knowledge amongst care givers? Just off the top of my head, some more efficient methods would be: getting into contact with care givers, giving lectures about bisexual health needs, forming new care guidelines or a “standard of care” for bisexual people, launching a booklet containing information about the health needs of bisexual people, creating a network of bi friendly care givers, etc. etc… All of these methods would have contained a lot more information, carried more knowledge and therefore produced more results than a poster ever could. So why a poster?
Third point: Why a poster like this? To quote the campaign page: “The “This is Our Community” posters address the issue of bisexual inclusion in LGBTQ communities”. As I mentioned in my first point, this totally fails to address the goal of the campaign. But not only that, but this stance also presumes that in order to get better health care, bisexuals needs to become assimilated into the gay community. To me this implies a presumption that bisexuality by itself isn’t a good enough reason for demanding acceptance - it needs a legitimizing agent, and this agent is gay normativity. “Homophobia hurts me too”, as if biphobia isn’t reason enough, or, “I fight for all our rights”, as if bisexuals have to redeem ourselves - our bisexuality - by “community service” and political commitment. Acceptance is conditioned. The point in all the posters (except perhaps the pregnant one?) is similarity to other people and “redemption” of bisexuality through gayness (or being trans), meaning anything but bi. Just to be clear, this is what I call “bi assimilationism”.
Fourth point: The presumption that stereotypes and “invisibility” are the main sources of biphobia and monosexism, and that if we only change those stereotypes then both these structures would magically be resolved and go away. In fact, monosexism and biphobia are much deeper than mere stereotyping, and more significant work than simple “myth busting” needs to be done first in order to challenge them.
Fifth point: Regarding people of color - I wasn’t suggesting that only white people needed to be in this campaign. That would be overtly racist rather than the current covertly racist message which I saw in black tokenism. After reading the campaign link I now realize that the person whom “homophobia also hurts” is supposed to also represent racialized people. So here I’m guessing that the campaign designers expected people to have telepathic abilities, since the person in the picture passes for white (which is to be expected in a racist society where white is the default) and no mention of their racialized identity is made. So, huh?
No off Switch: yeahitsokay replied to your post: yeahitsokay replied to your post: ok...
Reblogged from bialogue-group
yeahitsokay replied to your post: yeahitsokay replied to your post: ok stop.Just…
I’ve had pansexuals tell me I should call myself pan because bi is so tainted by negative stereotypes. While they perpetuate and create new stereotypes. Sigh.I get that a lot too.
Also in doing so they are creating a stereotype of themselves that is kinda way worse then “bi’s can only date cis people”
the stereotype that they are all a bunch of pretentious assholes who ride shot gun in the identity police squad car.
I think that is a worse stereotype then any I have to deal with as bi so far.It’s gotten to bad esp here on tumblr any time I see some one say “I’m pansexual” I immediately think “oh man better write down the identity police badge number and squad car plates cause here we fuckin go.”
It is unfortunate, but the backlash has made me worry about what I post here and on facebook now. For example I feel I must be careful about where I put Ronete Cohen’s essay “Trust Me, You’re Bisexual” becasue of this one line: “Bisexuality means a million different things to a million different people. It includes terms like pansexual, bi-curious, heteroflexible and fluid”.
Now I understand that she is from an different generation than most on here, that she writing for an older less politically aware audience and also that she is in Holland writing for an English-language publication. However the hours of screaming back-lash that I would have to cope with from the identity police if the “wrong” people should see that means that I’m just not going to put the article out there as much as I might have in the past.
This has been bothering me a bit for the past few days.
First off, I’m bothered by this automatic connection made here between older people and lack of political awareness. Ronete isn’t very much older than me, nor are many other people from a wide spectrum of political opinions in the bisexual movement. I’ve seen younger bi people write outrageous things, even here on tumblr (for example, that pansexuality isn’t real because there aren’t actually more than two genders). On the other hand, some of the awesome politically-aware people in the bi movement are older than most here on tumblr (for example, Robyn Ochs). So why make age the issue rather than ideology and awareness?
Secondly - and this is something that I’ve really been wondering about since I’ve read this - why is advocating the use of “bisexuality” an as umbrella term problematic? It is only fear of backlash? In which case, maybe it’s worth raising this issue more on tumblr, not less, and on our terms (for example, clarifying that it only includes those who want to be included in it, or making up new terms such as BPQ [Bi, Pan, Queer]). Personally, I really like the umbrella use of “bisexual” (or “bisexual*”). But maybe there are problems with it that I can’t see?
Thoughts?
Very respectfully there was no implication at all that “older” means “lack of political awareness”. All it is referring to is “dealing with other issues”, such as the rights of those who are still coming out in a hostile world to define themselves as straight until such time (which might be never) as they feel more comfortable with some other identity.
As accurately noted by then BiNet USA president Wendy Curry who came from a distinctly very disadvantaged proletariat background when the craze for renaming plain old boring bisexual to something newer and hipper first began to gain traction in 2006, “the far majority of the folks discussing the evil bi label are college educated, white, and folks who like to discuss the utopian version of the world”.
It was just whining and complaining about all the silly but time-consuming and sometimes painful and painfully ignorant anti-bi-ness which has currently turned into such a fad in some quarters. Disbanding the pity-party now and getting back to work. Nose to the grindstone and all that.
Hmm? I was referring to this: “an older less politically aware audience”. The connection is pretty sound…
No off Switch: yeahitsokay replied to your post: yeahitsokay replied to your post: ok...
Reblogged from bialogue-group
I’ve had pansexuals tell me I should call myself pan because bi is so tainted by negative stereotypes. While they perpetuate and create new stereotypes. Sigh.I get that a lot too.
Also in doing so they are creating a stereotype of themselves that is kinda way worse then “bi’s can only date cis people”
the stereotype that they are all a bunch of pretentious assholes who ride shot gun in the identity police squad car.
I think that is a worse stereotype then any I have to deal with as bi so far.It’s gotten to bad esp here on tumblr any time I see some one say “I’m pansexual” I immediately think “oh man better write down the identity police badge number and squad car plates cause here we fuckin go.”
It is unfortunate, but the backlash has made me worry about what I post here and on facebook now. For example I feel I must be careful about where I put Ronete Cohen’s essay “Trust Me, You’re Bisexual” becasue of this one line: “Bisexuality means a million different things to a million different people. It includes terms like pansexual, bi-curious, heteroflexible and fluid”.
Now I understand that she is from an different generation than most on here, that she writing for an older less politically aware audience and also that she is in Holland writing for an English-language publication. However the hours of screaming back-lash that I would have to cope with from the identity police if the “wrong” people should see that means that I’m just not going to put the article out there as much as I might have in the past.
This has been bothering me a bit for the past few days.
First off, I’m bothered by this automatic connection made here between older people and lack of political awareness. Ronete isn’t very much older than me, nor are many other people from a wide spectrum of political opinions in the bisexual movement. I’ve seen younger bi people write outrageous things, even here on tumblr (for example, that pansexuality isn’t real because there aren’t actually more than two genders). On the other hand, some of the awesome politically-aware people in the bi movement are older than most here on tumblr (for example, Robyn Ochs). So why make age the issue rather than ideology and awareness?
Secondly - and this is something that I’ve really been wondering about since I’ve read this - why is advocating the use of “bisexuality” an as umbrella term problematic? It is only fear of backlash? In which case, maybe it’s worth raising this issue more on tumblr, not less, and on our terms (for example, clarifying that it only includes those who want to be included in it, or making up new terms such as BPQ [Bi, Pan, Queer]). Personally, I really like the umbrella use of “bisexual” (or “bisexual*”). But maybe there are problems with it that I can’t see?
Thoughts?
Reblogged from bialogue-group
Rainbow Health Ontario, CAMH and The Public are incredibly excited to launch the Bisexual anti-stigma campaign in Toronto this fall. Check out the launch party on September 9th. For more information check out http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=199052006821971
We are thrilled to have been a part of this exciting initiative. Challenging biphobia is part of building strength in our communities!
That top one really makes me happy. YAY VISIBILITY AND INTERSECTION AND YES.
Today on “fabulous things that show up on my dash”.
(Because, seriously, unfuck the fact that this has to be an issue at all, since the whole anti-bi thing I understand even less than normal heterosexism, which says a lot.
But hella props to this lot.)
Woo!
BITASTIC!
Sorry to be the party pooper, but: bi assimilationism. Why do we need to base our legitimacy on similarity to the gay mainstream?
Also: what’s with the token black man? Racism much?
Reblogged from bisexual-community
Transgenders - you’re not worth our breath
o.O
(Source: her-luckyduck)
Reblogged from bialogue-group
“I’ve found that because the gay community treats us poorly that enables the straight community to do the same, because their gay friends have de facto sanctioned it.” ~Micah Z. Kellner, out bisexual member of the New York State Assembly July 2009
Uh, WTF? Got the power balance a bit wrong, much?
I mean SRSLY, you can’t claim that gays and lesbians have more social power than heterosexuals. That’s both unconvincing and kind of insulting. If anything, gays and lesbians are participating in the monosexism sanctioned by the heterosexual culture, not the other way around.
SRSLY.
I believe you have misinterpreted his comments. What he is saying is that when gay/lesbian people do not stand up for all their compatriots in the greater queer community and most especially when they work with the dominant culture to enforce a heteronormative paradigm that they are essentially collaborators with worst instincts of the straight culture in the oppression of the LGBTQ+ community.
Another example of this taken from relatively recent events in the USA would be when a major so called “gay rights” organization agreed to jettison trans* & gender variant people in return for an (ultimately illusory) “agreement” that a small cissexists/assimilationists subset of gay men and lesbian women would be given more “rights” and greater access power, money, et. al.
I am definitely not denying the rampant biphobia and transphobia in the GGGG movement. However, the way Kellner put it, you’d think that heterosexuals are accomplices in gay and lesbian monosexism, rather than the other way around.
Reblogged from bisexual-community
“I’ve found that because the gay community treats us poorly that enables the straight community to do the same, because their gay friends have de facto sanctioned it.” ~Micah Z. Kellner, out bisexual member of the New York State Assembly July 2009
Uh, WTF? Got the power balance a bit wrong, much?
I mean SRSLY, you can’t claim that gays and lesbians have more social power than heterosexuals. That’s both unconvincing and kind of insulting. If anything, gays and lesbians are participating in the monosexism sanctioned by the heterosexual culture, not the other way around.
SRSLY.
