#which was't what the study SAID but rather what some lesbophobic freaks extrapolated from it

[colorisbyshe]

As Mao pointed out, any study which doesn't control for race and class is going to be unreliable/have methodological flaws bc race is inherently tied in with class and any study which treats the experiences of (e.g) white and black lesbians as basically interchangeable is missing out on absolutely huge amounts of detail. That's a *major* glaring problem with that study, especially if you want to apply that data to, say, Latina bisexuals.

I mean, I get that. But that is true of EVERY study EVER done on LGBT issues, so I don’t know why that was being brought out just for this one study.

Like, yes, the data isn’t properly showing the nuance of how black lesbians are affected by domestic violence vs latina bisexuals, I am assuming (perhaps wrongly) that each group had a level of variety of race s if the samples were actually random.

So, like, if they had 30 people: 10 for straight, 10 for bi, and 10 for gay (which even then would be too simple and is missing gender stuff), then each of the ten would have approx the same racial breakdown. So that we can take the numbers and make a VERY generalized assumption (that of course would need more follow up for nuance) of “bisexuals of a variety of races experience more domestic violence than gay/straight people of a similar variety of races.”

It’s sort of like the wage gap. Like, I can make the blanket statement “women make less than men on the dollar.” And then we go on from there to say “well, actually compared to white women, latina and black women make less.”

Like, the blanket statement that incorporates all races is true–women of all races make less than men of the same race–and then from there we move on and recognize how white women actually make more than most men of color.

I was just making the blanket statement of “bisexuals are abused more and suffer more mental illness than straight/gay people.” OBVIOUSLY when you apply literally ANY other factor to that–cis vs trans, race, socioeconomic standing, disability, male vs female vs nb–that is going to have more nuance.

I know the basics of how intersectional identities work.

But I wasn’t talking about the specifics of how obviously a cis white bisexual man who was born into wealth is not going to face the same abuse as a black trans woman who was born below the poverty line.

Because that’d be an entirely different discussion from the one I was having. Like, we can have discussions about how there should be spaces for different LGBT people of color and programs to address poverty and all of that. Those are very important issues. I would never dismiss how race and socioeconomic standing affect lgbt issues.

I was just making the very, very simple statement of “bisexuals may need their own spaces to talk about the abuse they face and the isolation they feel” because AS A GENERAL RULE the abuse bisexuals face comes from cishets who think we’re faking it to convert them or that we’re dirty and tainted. And then we face additional isolation because we’re in these shitty and harmful relationships and we’re suddenly “too straight” for the lgbt community so we have no where else to turn but to other bi people because this is a unique struggle bi people face.

That’s it! Can these scenarios be complicated by anything from gender/gender alignment to race and ethnicity to disability to financial status to neurodivergence to literally any marginalized status ever? Of course. Of course!

But I was talking in broad strokes about the alienation bi people may experience from gay people in relation to these two very specific issues.

And Mao ASSUMED I was referencing a study that blamed lesbians for bisexual woman’s abuse (I was not and even specifically talk at length about how bisexuals need to talk about unhealthy M/F relationships in the post they responded to) and was angry about that. Which Mao admitted was a misunderstanding but is still blaming me for… for reasons.

Like? Enoughtohold’s post debunks a point I wasn’t making and made a point Mao wasn’t making either, so they were literally just throwing that at me to prove that bisexuals IN GENERAL never face higher rates of domestic violence which is patently false and biphobic to boot.

Yes, we should have conversations about how race intersects with gender and sexuality. Always. But I don’t think Mao was doing that in good faith because when I asked genuine questions out of confusion, I was blocked and told to “think about it for two weeks.”

Which isn’t having a discussion on race and sexuality and abuse, it’s leaving me with questions and literally no way to better myself because even the post Mao later linked to in a passive aggressive reblog… didn’t address race, sexuality, and abuse.

Which should also be discussed in bisexual spaces and I never said it couldn’t be.