#making a bi characters attraction the the opposite sex a negative is biphobic

[anunfortunatekinlist]

note to marauders fandom: just cause you add a bunch of queer characters and poc xcharacters to your fanfics, it doesn’t mean your inclusive and understanding

[unsaidace]

nah, i think the other anon is right. it is weird to act like buck can't have casual fun after a break up cos hes bi. like he was trying to force his relationship with Tommy (the whole moving in thing) it feels right for the character to relax and not take relationships too seriously for a bit

and yeah, it's good if that means we get to see him be bisexual. cos it would be off if the casual sex (or any future relationships) were only with men or women

idk ive seen a lot of character have their attraction to either men or women be erased so im not mad at the opposite

and often mlm wlw characters get a lot less relationships than straight ones? they just get a partner then that's it. this feels more equal

it would be playing into bad stereotypes if buck was allergic to commitment, cheating with people different genders to his partners, etc

this just seems to me to be portraying a bi person having a realistic normal sex life. especially for a soap character. like they have sex and breakup. that's v inherent to the genre

a lot of people are sounding v sex negative and biphobic over this whole thing

Okay, a couple points to address here.

Where did I say Buck couldn’t have casual fun because he’s bi? Please point that out to me. I’m not saying he can’t have casual fun, that is literally not my point. What I will say is that Buck has already done the whole “sleeping around” thing. We all remember Buck 1.0. I’d rather not see the character regress to that stage again.

I agree that it would be representation, but again; Buck’s bisexuality wouldn’t just magically disappear if he stayed single for a while. We know he’s bi, the show has canonised that. We don’t need to see him sleeping around to make that obvious, we know it’s part of his character.

I understand this point, I’ve also seen bi erasure happen in far too many TV shows to count. Glee springs to mind; they had one bisexual character and they treated her like dirt. I don’t have any notes for this one, it’s entirely valid.

Again, valid point, but I do have a genuine question. I’m not trying to be a bitch, and I’m sorry if this comes off that way, I just want to know; does this criticism extend to Hen and Karen? Because they’re each other’s only consistent partners that we’ve seen them have. Sure, we had the whole “Hen cheated with her ex” angle a couple seasons back, but in terms of actually stable long term relationships? We’ve never seen them have any other partners. They were already married when the show started.

I’ll combine the last two points into one paragraph, this post is getting too long. I’m not saying that Buck sleeping around is “unrealistic” or stereotypical or inherently wrong. I’m saying that it’s weird that Oliver wasn’t saying any of this after Buck broke up with his female partners, he only says it when he breaks up with the male partner. My entire point was about Oliver’s lack of consistency. One minute, he wants to get Buck off the hamster wheel, the next he’s trying to revert back to Buck 1.0: Bisexuality Bonus Round™️. I honestly don’t care what direction he wants to take Buck in, I couldn’t give less of a shit about who Buck’s endgame is if I tried. I care about the character development and growth that will be lost if Buck goes back to that stage of his life, and I care that Oliver is the one advocating for that regression.

[panickedpansexualprincess]

(1/5) I’ve never interacted with you and you have me blocked but I was going to explain why pansexuality is inherently biphobic. You said it yourself they’re the same thing so if they are the same thing what is the point in iding as pan over bi? Well this generally boils down to two different reasons. First we should define biphobia. Biphobia is discrimination or hatred towards bi people, this can look like a couple things such as discomfort with bisexuality or the perpetuation of negative

stereotypes. So why do we identify as pansexual instead of bi if they’re the same thing? 

1. Pansexuality feels more comfortable. Well this would suggest a discomfort with bisexuality which is biphobic in and of itself. This is the characterization of internalized biphobia. 

2. People, especially straight people, view bisexuality as liking two genders, which is transphobic or that bisexuality is described as promiscuous, sexual, and gender obsessed. 

First of all, none of these stereotypes are true and to create a separate sexuality because you are uncomfortable with these stereotypes effectively makes it seem like you accept them as true and validated biphobes claims. It screams of virtue signaling, The solution to dealing with biphobia is not to make an entirely new word for bisexuality, it’s to correct it and educate biphobes and fight against it. 

Pansexuality does not do that. Pansexuality actively perpetuates these negative stereotypes which is in and of itself biphobic. That’s why pansexuality is biphobic. They mean the same thing except pansexuality has the added bonus of perpetuating biphobia. 

Also sure you have the right to use whatever labels you please, however, when bi people call you out for being biphobic, because that’s what you are doing by identifying as pan, don’t get mad. Bi/pan solidarity is a mask used to deter bi people from speaking up against biphobia. It’s about silencing us and almost primarily used by pan people. Bisexuals do not have to stay silent or stay kind in the face of your biphobia, that is not required or necessary of us and it’s biphobic to try and silence us too. 

Also as a side note, the word transgendered which you used a million times is transphobic.

1. Whether or not we’ve interacted, if you’ve posted blanket claims about pansexuality being inherently biphobic using the ‘pansexuality’ tag, that is likely the reason I have you blocked. I track the tag, and thus get random posts from it on my dash on a regular basis. Despite the discourse I attempted to have earlier today, I’ve been trying to be better about not picking internet fights, and have blocked such posts/posters on my dash when I was in a bad mental place, or was otherwise not willing/able to deal with panphobia at that point in time.

2. I have not used the word ‘transgendered’ a million times. I just checked myself (as I often do in situations like this, because I never want to perpetuate phobic behaviors), and looking through my transgender tag, I have used it once recently. It was a typo, one for which I apologize and will correct in a moment. That said, do not put words in my mouth or use such gross hyperboles please; it does neither of us any favors.

3. Alright. Let me try and find where to even begin with the rest of this.

The existence of pansexuality as a label does NOT enforce stereotypes about bisexuality being limited to two genders, or transphobic, or promiscuous, sexual, or gender obsessed. 

I won’t deny that there are bigoted assholes who will try to claim shit like that, because I have run into plenty of them. I have had knock down, drag out, shouting and cursing fights with such assholes, because whatever label I personally prefer, I refuse to allow such stereotypes about bisexuality to stand. Like, my poor wife has had a front row seat to my fights with biphobes, and is probably long tired of my anger as I pick far too many fights with such prejudiced biphobic idiots. (Seriously, I’m sure she’s tired of it, because she’s usually the one who tries to calm me down or pull me back from such assholes, because winning against those people is almost always a futile task.) And yes, some of those biphobic bigots may identify as pansexual, and they are a fucking smear against the pansexual label.

But guess what. Just as many of those bigots identify as bisexual too. Those bigots are usually the prejudiced assholes who are transphobic, polyphobic, slutshamers, etc. And those bigots are a fucking smear against the bisexual label.

(And then there’s the rest of such bigots who identify as heterosexual/homosexual/other. They’re just a fucking smear against humanity in general.)

So what am I trying to establish by pointing that out? Being biphobic and perpetuating bisexual stereotypes like that isn’t tied to being pansexual/identifying a pansexual, nor is it unique to pansexuals. There are even bisexuals who perpetuate such stereotypes.

But you will find plenty of pansexuals, myself included, who will fucking fight for bisexuality, and who will and do fight against biphobia. Who also celebrate bisexuality.

Which brings me to your other point; that pansexuality indicates discomfort with the label bisexuality. As I just pointed out, that’s not necessarily true, and isn’t true for a great many pansexuals, myself included. After all, I would hardly be happy to celebrate a label with which I was uncomfortable.

Now, as for the difference between the two labels, and why two labels exist when, for some, they mean the same thing? Well, first I’ll point back to the post I linked previously, which was my answer to a bisexual gentleman who was asking about the difference; THIS POST HERE.

The short of it is; sexuality is a spectrum, and it isn’t easy to neatly label it and put it into ‘quaint little categories,’ as Captain Jack Harkness would say. 

One person’s definition of being ‘gay,’ for example, might not be the same as the next person’s ‘gay.’ For person A, ‘gay’ might mean they’re attracted only to the same sex, with absolutely no exceptions. For person B, being ‘gay’ might mean that they’re 99% attracted to the same sex, but they might have a 1% exception for just the right person. For person C, maybe they’re 80% attracted to the same sex, but every so often they might find themselves attracted to someone of the opposite sex, but that’s not the norm, so they still identify as ‘gay.’

Bisexuality and pansexuality are no different. One person’s self-identification as bisexual might be different from the next person’s. One person’s self-identification as pansexual might be different from the next person’s.

Person A might happily identify as bisexual and pansexual. Person B might only identify as bisexual. Person C might only identify as pansexual. Unless person C is actively perpetuating biphobic stereotypes, they are not inherently biphobic. And unless person B is actively perpetuating panphobic stereotypes, they are not inherently panphobic.

That said…. insisting that pansexuality is inherently biphobic? Is entirely hurtful and panphobic. And I, as a pansexual, have every right to request that people not perpetuate panphobia.

Especially, as was in the case of the post I responded to earlier, when the poster is actively shoving panphobia in literal dozens of pansexual tags just to rub it in the faces of any pansexual who might track the tag, or be searching it. Like, I’m not talking just tagging it with one or two pansexual tags (although that can also be upsetting), but they were tagging it with tags like fandom character specific pansexual tags that had literally nothing to do with their post.

THAT. Is harmful. Harmful and hurtful to pansexuals, harmful and hurtful to bisexuals, and harmful and hurtful to the LGBTQ+ community.

Now. If you’re interested in civil discourse beyond this, feel free to tell me your URL, and I’ll unblock you. Otherwise, I bid you farewell.

Edit: One more thing. Forcing a label on another person is just. All around wrong in general. Just. Just sayin’. People have the right to self-identify their labels.

[tarotofbadkitties]

I get tired of fandom bullshit where they say yeah, this character is bi, but it's problematic for them to be shipped with people of the opposite sex. What you're really saying is that the only acceptable bi rep is that which is indistinguishable from gay/lesbian rep. That's exactly the same thing as saying bi people don't need representation and trying to provide it is homophobic. Can you not?

I'm seeing this particularly loudly with the reactions to Shiro on Voltron. Apparently, it's not okay to ship him with a female character because he has a former lover that's male. What biphobic garbage is this? There is no law saying a man can't date a man and then date a woman if he damn well pleases. If he's exclusively attracted to men there's no reason he would want to, but nothing in-universe nor the official word of the showrunners when directly asked if he is gay indicates that's how Shiro feels about the subject. People that are not gay get into same-sex relationships too. Bi people, pan people, asexual people, questioning people, people that eschew sexual orientation labels, even some people that, bafflingly, would use the term straight to describe themselves have same-sex relationships as well.

The biphobic assumption that bi people don't really desire people of multiple genders and that their attractions to some genders (generally those that are not cis male) are not real, valid attractions is a harmful one with real negative consequences for bi people. What happens when you cast doubt on the validity of bisexual people's attractions to the opposite sex by insinuating they're gay and just don't know it is that you undermine their relationships, encourage their partners to distrust then, and invalidate their feelings. That often forces people into pretending to be gay and repressing their feelings for the opposite sex. That is forcing them into the closet and comes with all the negative emotional consequences associated with that. When you go the other direction and force a bi person to pretend to be straight and deny their feelings for people of the same sex, you're doing the same thing. The latter matches the experiences of gay/lesbian people, so they tend to have sympathy for that, but it would be nice for them to also have sympathy for things that happen to those of us in the lgbt+ community that are not shared experiences and avoid replicating those harms.

If you see Shiro as bi because you are bi and see yourself in him, that’s valid. If you see him as bi because you observe his interactions with individuals of multiple genders and interpret it as romantic interest in multiple people, that’s valid. If you just feel like there aren’t enough characters that are positive representations of bi people and it makes you feel good to claim him, that’s valid. Just because we don’t all agree on a character’s sexuality doesn’t mean that any of us are bad people for having different analyses of the same text. And just because a person ships a character with one person doesn’t mean they don’t also ship them with other people. You can multiship and/or polyship. They can ship some things in canon, others in fanon. They can like an aesthetic or potential dynamic between characters without having that be their preference for the canon resolution. How about we leave the accusing people of being homophobic to the people that are pissed he isn’t straight and simply pretending any indication to the contrary never happened.

[fandompitfalls]

Ew, Het!

Originally posted: 6/18/2021

Today we’re going to discuss a hidden secret in the fandom community; queerphobia.

Now you might be thinking, Fandom Pitfalls, you’re absolutely wrong on this one, the fandom community is utterly inclusive! And you’d be partly correct.  Fandom is inclusive, so long as you fit specific rules.  One of those rules is: “all characters are gay” (or at least, the important ones).

If there are two hot guys*, it stands to reason that they will get shipped. (*the nature of the two hot guys have been mention in other posts). And that is valid.  Shipping is personal. You ship who you love, ship what you like, and all ships are valid. Fandom is inherently queer, it had been for centuries, as long as there have been stories, there have been people secretly (or not so secretly) rearraigning characters to fit their personal head canons.  As far back as Conan Doyle, Wilde, Shelley, Stoker, the Bible, readers have taken characters and fit them in their own image. If that image was two men living together in secret domestic bliss in a set of rooms in London or a vampire having a lascivious affair with both the woman of his dreams and her fiancée, fandom has always prospered.

And until recently, everyone has stayed in their corners and lived and let live.  The invention of the internet and the ease and availability in which people from all over the world can share now share their own thoughts and theories had brought rise to not only the positive aspects of fandom, but the negative as well.  And one of those negatives is queerphobia.

Let’s just put this out there. Characters that identify as opposite sex can have a relationship and it not be a heterosexual relationship.  Let me repeat that.  Not all opposite sex relationships are heterosexual relationships.

This new knee jerk response of “Ew het!” invalidates queer and gender fluid relationships, making it sound as if the only valid relationships are gay relationships.  (When I say gay, I mean the aforementioned two hot men as wlw relationships, unless specified in the canon series, are usually ignored.)

This time around I’m going to be daring and use examples. The most godforsaken, dumpster fire triumvirate of fandom shows ever; SuperWhoLock.

The first in this fandom dumpster fire is Supernatural. On the air for fifteen seasons, there have been many minor queer characters on the show.  Some were the victim of the week, some were there to show that some couples can get out of the hunting business intact. Some, like Charlie, were major minor characters. The popular ship of Destiel ships an angel in a male body with one of the main male characters.  There is also gatekeeping in the fandom regarding a romantic relationship between Castiel and any character identifying as female.  This is one of the fandoms where “Ew het” is automatically thrown around.  Many of the women that are shipped with Castiel in fandom are immortal beings that are genderless and are merely taking on a female form.  Meg, a demon and part of another of the well-known ships in the fandom, is a demon and therefore has no form.  They have taken the form of a female host over the years, but at one time possessed the body of another of the male lead characters. Hannah, an angel that has also been shipped with Castiel, is also genderless and while they have taken the body of a female host, they have also inhabited a male host, that was received positively by Castiel in both forms. While Jimmy Novak, the body that Castiel originally inhabited and then just took the form of in later seasons, was heterosexual, it’s been noted that the angel Castiel, having no preference to gender, could be seen as pansexual or omnisexual.

The actual characters that are gay or lesbian in the shows are often forgotten or pushed aside in favor of a fan favorite ship.  All ships are valid, but automatically insisting that a male/female presenting relationship is automatically heterosexual, especially in this scope of the fandom, is erasing genderfluid queer relationships, making it inherently queerphobic. Seeing Dean Winchester as bisexual but invalidating his romantic relationships with the women in his life is biphobic. Bisexual people have relationships with people of the opposite sex.  It doesn’t make them less bisexual and it is gatekeeping at its worse to insist that only the same sex relationships count.

Continuing with the gender fluidity is Doctor Who. The last two years have brought this fandom its first female Doctor. A year or two before, Moffat paved the way by not only showing that Time Lords can willing change genders in their regenerations in the 50th anniversary episode, but also introducing Missy, the Master’s latest regeneration. The Thirteenth Doctor canonically makes the Doctor gender fluid thereby making any relationship they’ve had a queer relationship.  Their canon second wife, River Song has been acknowledged to be bisexual, making their marriage a queer relationship, despite seeing River only with the male versions of the Doctor so far.

Even other previous relationships with the Doctor, for example, the fan favorite of Ten/Rose, would be in actuality a queer relationship because Time Lords are canonically gender fluid. Even before Ten, Nine actively kissed Captain Jack Harkness, a canonical omnisexual man. The new incarnation of the show has never shied from the Doctor kissing anyone which is refreshing.

The final example in the disaster shows is Sherlock. As mentioned earlier, Conan Doyle’s beloved characters have been the subject of study since the late Nineteenth Century. Now, with the incarnations of BBC’s Sherlock, Robert Downey Jr.’s Sherlock Holmes and even Netflix’s The Irregulars, the subject of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson’s sexuality is a hot button topic for many.

At least 95% of the fandom, the Sherlock fandom, not the literary fandom, would agree that Sherlock Holmes is not 100% heterosexual.  But neither is he 100% homosexual. Most of the consensus will agree that the great detective is queer, whether it be bisexual, demisexual, ace, grey. His relationship with Irene Adler, a dominatrix who said she was gay but also was attracted to men, making her (allegedly) a bi/pan lesbian, as well as his relationship with Jim Moriarty, canonically gay, showed that Sherlock could be attracted to people, perhaps not for the attractiveness but because who they are (as also shown in the relationship between he and Molly Hooper, another gatekept ship). The popular ship, Johnlock, has Sherlock in a relationship with his roommate/friend John Watson. Watson, who was married and has a child, would at most be bisexual. Erasing the canonical women John Watson dated, slept with, and married is again bi erasure at best.

Gay, as defined in the Oxford Dictionary, is: “a homosexual person (typically referring to a man)” (Oxford.com). By this definition, women and nonbinary people cannot be gay as they are not men.  Using it as a “catch-all” in fandom is not only incorrect but queerphobic to the rest of the LGBTQ fans who also identify with these characters.

Shipping is fun. Fandom is supposed to be fun. All ships are valid, and one person’s ship does not invalidate another person’s ship. Even canonical ships don’t have to ruin other people’s ships.  But to use “canon” as a trophy, a sort of “we won, you can’t ever ship your ship anymore because it’s not canon” is horrible gatekeeping.  To insist that a person who ships a m/f relationship is “gross” or “promoting heterosexuality” or “heteronormativity” is also gatekeeping.  Not all m/f ships are heterosexual. Jumping immediately to that conclusion about both the ship and the person shipping it is not only the worst type of gatekeeping, but it is also extremely queerphobic.  Don't turn into the people other's hate, this universe is large enough for all of us.