#you’re so biphobic you’re either ashamed of liking men

[lostryu]

im a bi lesbian. i have only ever wanted to romantically date women, but i am once in awhile attracted to men sexually

i also date non binary people and my current romantic partner is nb.

i could fuck anyone, but i dont want anything to do with going on a date with or sleeping in the same bed as a man.

im curious why you have such rigid ideas of what these labels should mean and why you cant let people be whatever the fuck they want to be

Because words have meanings, and sometimes. Those meanings? The meanings that were written in the blood of lesbians? They’re not for you. Reading the beginning of your ask, it sounds like you are either Bi with a preference or suffering from serious compulsatory heterosexuality. Either way your biphobia (and enbyphobia) is showing and it’s ugly.

[skciajsnxjxjsjszh]

I only want to comment on this privately and so that’s why I’m on this junk blog. I think it’s the attracting fetishizer men thing in part.

I also think it’s…………

the confluence of being surrounded by a homophobic culture and being same sex attracted…. WHILE still being sexually attracted to and frequently involved with men.

So here you have someone who is more likely than gay women to be intimately with THE #1 beater, rapist, jealousy murder and homophobic murder demographic.

Who also grow up attracted to males and so more keyed into what they think. This isn’t meant to be a negative or like a shame — it can’t be helped. Think about getting a crush — it’s not rational. But yeah having sexual attraction as a deep seared motive to care about what men think of you is bad for your health. That also affects het women.

But then for bi women on top of all that, have the stress of living in the homophobic culture (and biphobic culture — one that depicts bisexuals as extra sexual and cheaters), with internalized homophobia and biphobia in most all cases.

Bi girls and bi boys also grow up realizing a same sex attraction, feeling confused, ashamed, threatened by it because of homophobic rhetoric and hetero centric culture. That I think drives a lot of alcoholism and drug addiction and other self harming/risk taking. Shame is very powerful as is growing up unsure of yourself. Then once you’re into all that — the spiral starts. Someone addicted and self shaming is ripe pickings to be exploited and attacked. Someone with that trauma then is more likely to go deeper drinking, harming, addicted. Then that person is even more vulnerable to attacks and manipulating. And so on and on and on and on.

Then there’s the “bisexuals cheat” and “bisexuals are hyper sexual” assumptions

Men as a whole are aggressively possessive. We see what happens when women leave.

So this is what I think biphobia at its core really is. And I call it biphobia and not homophobia-as-applying-to-bis because it’s specifically about this insecurity with bi people being attracted potentially to either sex. Being “a potential cheater” with friends and colleagues and strangers of either sex.

I am sure this affects bi men but not at all with the same level of being targeted for murder as bi women are by males.

We greatly underestimate how many het women and closeted bi women in relationships with males rely on their man not being threatened by their female friends and coworkers to have any relationships besides family and their man. How many women have to tip toe around male jealous rage. And how much harder that is for bi women and men involved with men who are extra on edge and suspicious of them, if they know or suspect they’re bi, while fetishizing at the same time and taking in even more dehumanizing tropes about bi people from porn.

So to rephrase

- among women, it’s the demographic most likely to be fetishized/feared/hated as same sex attracted AND sexually close with men

- internalized shame of homophobia and biphobia and confusion around sexuality makes drinking, drugs addiction, self harm/risk taking more likely — acting out of self hatred, anxiety

^^^^^ the above is a huge risk factor for attracting sketchy manipulative people and being taken advantage of

^^ once that starts happening the downward spiral is hard to stop

^^^ the more this happens to some bi people, particularly bi women, the more bisexuals “reinforce” the bad reputation of hyper sexuality or cheating or being flighty or extra untrustworthy etc …. Similar to how poverty pressures lead to criminality, which in turn leads to more prejudice against those in poverty, and prejudice then is part of what reinforces the poverty.

^^ the more that image of bi people is set the more abuse targeted at bi people happens, particularly from men. Abuse as in seeking to manipulate and use, like how entitled men target anyone vulnerable, and also abuse as in reactive abuse. Reacting to perceived cheating.

^ the more that happens the more internalized shame bi people have, the more fear and anxiety too, the more they grow up vulnerable

It doesn’t have to happen to every bi person to skew the demographic. It just has to happen enough to be cyclical and self-creating and get big enough show up statistically.

I know so many bi women who don’t feel comfortable being open about it widely because of being targeted. Like gay people bi people can closet and even have a more convincing closet act often — genuine m/f relationship histories for example that help blending in. But you still have to hide. You still experience that as anxiety, shame. Awareness of how your life would be worse for being open about something very fundamental about yourself. And then sometimes people seem to pick it up anyway and you get targeted despite it all. I sometimes wonder if bi children get recognized as bi and are more likely to be sexually abused due to adults sexualizing it, particularly adult male porn addict pedophiles. Then of course having child sexual abuse background is associated with all sorts of difficulties in life.

"what about being attracted to BOTH sexes makes bisexuals more prone to physical/mental health issues, violence, poverty etc?"

this wasn't @ me but I wanna tackle this anyway

idk! I really don't know. there's one theory below!

but the statistics at this point have been confirmed by multiple independent studies. even if you say that's just because bisexuals choose to be near hets more often, that still means that the context and conditions of bisexuality set us up for abuse and material decline. otherwise you might as well say well homophobia only exists because homosexuals have to be near homophobes. of course the people in our lives cause what we experience.

thats an explanation, yet people treat this as if it's a good reason to ignore or dismiss these statistics. they get as far as "well its just homophobia, biphobia doesn't exist" but never ever seem to reach "but bisexuals do suffer serious homophobia".

there's always this search to qualify and diminish the homophobia against us. it's "misdirected", "peripheral", "non-core", "not Real (TM) homophibia", whatever. endless qualifiers and excuses why when they're abandoned, abused, or assaulted it's a tragedy but when it happens to us we should stop whining about it and thinking we experience anything "real".

I also wanna know, if bisexuals can escape all homophobia so sooo easily as she claims, why are the domestic violence rates of bi women so through the roof? they should be no different than hets once het partnered according the theory she professes. if they cared about material effects all of these physical/mental health issues, domestic violence, and sexual assault rates should hold some weight on that bisexuality isn't as universally beloved and accepted as they claim... yet these statistics never seem to raise concern. they only statistic they seem to want to site is that we're all het married lol. ok well why is the homophobia these het married bisexuals you bring up to shit on the rest of us less serious anyway? fuck off.

and again. if you think bisexuals just experience homophobia, why do these people not treat their anons saying that bisexuals need to stop whining about their rape like homophobes? I mean its homophobic full stop to mock the sexual assault of survivors by homophobes, no? but they know it's different and treat it with acceptance and understanding, not anger, because they're sympathetic to the idea that bisexuals just don't suffer that much when they're abused.

and for the millionth time, I'm not saying bisexuals are more oppressed, nor that het relationships arent a privilege. of course they are. but the way people want to diminish abuse against bi people is ridiculous lol.

[barbara-gordons-glasses]

Since I’m bored, I’m going to be making a long rant about bisexuality, biphobia, inaccurate representation of bisexuality in the media, and just overall how I don’t feel accepted in my own “community”. To start off with, I’m a bisexual fifteen year-old girl who has a preference for women. I still love men, just in case any of you felt the reason to say otherwise.

Biphobia is the dislike of or prejudice against bisexual people. As you may or may not know, biphobia is everywhere, in more places than most people talk about when dealing with issues in our community and the world outside social media. What may surprise some of you is that not only are a lot of straight people biphobic, but LGBT members are as well. There are LGBT members and straight people who refuse to date bi women/men simply for the stereotypes others have pressed onto us (ex. disloyal, greedy, selfish, etc.).

While some people aren’t aware that they’re being biphobic, there are some people who are perfectly aware of what they’re saying/doing, and that’s the worst part of it. Maybe not the worst to some, but it hurts to hear one of your most loved family members say or do something hurtful and not even realize it. Or maybe they did, and just didn’t care enough to correct themselves.

Inaccurate representation of bisexuality in the media is a subject that isn’t talked about enough, because most of us are too busy about flags and who can say what slurs. Other than that, however, I’d like to talk about Glee, and the few biphobic moments that no one paid attention to. 

Kurt and Blaine were talking about when Blaine kissed Rachel the other night, and Kurt was confused when Blaine agreed to go on a date with her, claiming for him to be “leading” her on. Blaine then explains that he actually felt something when kissing her, and would like to see where it goes. Kurt waves him off when Blaine questions if he’s bi, saying “Bisexuality is a stage gay guys go through in high school to feel normal.” 

Santana Lopez and her soon-to-be girlfriend played by Demi Lovato were chatting at a restaurant about Santana’s breakup with Brittany, her bisexual ex. “I had a girlfriend - she was bi.” Santana said, and the scene I watched on YouTube cut shortly to Santana and Demi’s character as girlfriends. Demi’s character had something along the lines of, “I think you deserve a 100% Sapphic goddess,” which you may not know, but is extremely offensive towards bisexual women. Santana agreed, and then happily explained, “I finally have a girlfriend who isn’t straying for penis all the time!”

(It’s my personal opinion, but if you still like Santana and Kurt as characters after reading this, knowing they hadn’t apologized for what they said, then you’re trash. I’m not sugarcoating anything. I don’t care if Kurt or Santana were the reasons you felt comfortable being who you are. They are terrible people who only have popularity because of how awful they are to bisexuals and people from the Glee club in general.)

Other than the blatant biphobia in some shows, other media likes to cover theirs up by bringing a bi character into the show, but immediately watering down their label (ex. “I swing both ways”, “Maybe I’ll hook up with a hot guy at the party tonight! Or a girl?”). I understand that while some people don’t prefer labels, there is no reason that every bi character doesn’t like labels. Eleanor Shellstrop, for example (The Good Place). Throughout the show, she had no problem with saying bi, lesbian, pan, and gay casually. But although it’s implied that she’s bisexual, the words had never left her mouth, confirming her sexuality. There are some bisexual members of our community that don’t mind, and are simply happy for the representation, but I cannot express how long I’ve had these problems on my mind, and feel like they need to be talked about more.

If you’re looking for positive bisexual validation on websites like Tik Tok, Snapchat, or Tumblr, don’t. There are so many instances of biphobia on those websites (especially Tik Tok) that everyone ignores. Some of it is just blatant (example that I saw in a post - “I just feel like “bi” women in a heterosexual relationship shouldn’t have an opinion on our community”), while others are a little covered up by adding other common features in front of the sexuality (ex. “Oh, there go the cis white bi alt girls again!”). Because of this, I haven’t felt accepted in the community. Not since I first searched up the word ‘bisexual’ on Tik Tok and Tumblr. But the moment you search up ‘biphobia’ on either of those sites, the first videos that pop up are lesbians making posts about how “not everything is biphobic.” and then tagging the video as ‘bi’, ‘biphobic’, etc. And when they’re lesbians speaking against biphobia, the videos always have more views than actual bisexual people talking about biphobia. It’s disgusting, and the reason I hardly ever talk about bisexuality in public.

You are all free to comment or say whatever you’d like, but it will always be my opinion that there is nothing all that great about being apart of the LGBT community these days. We’re all pinned against each other, discussing who can say what slurs, complaining about flags, generalizing and stereotyping certain sexualities, and just overall showing our true colors behind the screen of a computer. There are children and teens in other countries being raped because their parents or legal guardians think it will “turn them straight”, but we’re here in America or anywhere else you live talking about meaningless things like the reasons I’d listed above. Flags, slurs, generalizations. It’s what makes me embarrassed and ashamed to be apart of such a “family” that has no real love for each other.

[malvolios-yellow-stockings]

Catch Up Tag

Last Song // Tool - Pushit or Opeth - Karma, I’m not entirely sure...

Last Movie // The Celluloid Closet (1995) - it's a documentary about the historical representation of LGBT people on film, focusing on the L and especially focusing on the G. If you want a more trans-centered counterpart, I’d recommend Disclosure: Trans Lives on Screen (2020).

Currently Reading // Lives of the Caesars by Suetonius - it's basically ancient Roman gossip and intrigue. Suetonius writes short biographies of twelve Roman emperors starting with Julius Caesar and ending with Domitian. The biographies significantly vary in length, the one of Augustus being the longest by far (Suetonius was a bit of a fanboy). Suetonius discusses their families, relationships, personalities and mostly mentions or glosses over their military success etc. Suetonius sometimes also inserts his opinions and he can be quite funny. He's most entertaining either when he loves an emperor or when he loathes an emperor. The biographies of emperors he feels lukewarm about can become a bit boring. There are mentions of rape, incest, murder, paedophilia (an exceptionally nasty part is in Tiberius 44) so if you're particularly sensitive about these topics, maybe skip this one. My edition is translated by Catharine Edwards in Oxford World's Classics, it contains notes, a glossary, a general index you can use to search certain themes (for example adultery, religion), I'd recommend it. Another one I'm currently reading is Notes of a Native Son by James Baldwin but haven't read more than 20 pages. Two other books on my immediate TBR are - A Room of One’s Own by Virginia Woolf and A Raisin in the Sun by Lorraine Hansberry.

Currently Watching // The closest I've come to "currently watching" after watching Black Sails is finishing It's A Sin a few days ago. It was horrible, honestly. Because of the show's runtime (5 episodes, each around 46 minutes) there really was no time to actually get attached to any of the characters. Even though most of the promotion shows a few characters, all of them are cast aside most of the time so Ritchie (the least interesting prick) gets more screen time. And he's not even that developed! As a main character, he's one of the most obnoxious people in the show and I know he's supposed to represent the self hatred, shame and guilt a lot of queer men felt in the 80s but he's just... not believable or sympathetic. His characterization is incredibly weak. The show also leaves no room for subtlety at all. For example, Ritchie has grown up in a very shielded majority white place, with his parents (both of whom are racist to a degree) and sister. He moves for school and takes an interest in another gay man, Ash, who's a POC. Now, obviously, having grown up the way he did, Ritchie is a bit uncomfortable to be around when he mentions race, but the scene just goes on too long. It could've been an interesting scene that organically shows us a bit of Ritchie's character and how his childhood impacted his actions but it goes on for way too long to the point I felt I was being beaten with it over the head - like, I get it, Ritchie is uneducated, ignorant on the topics of race and different cultures. And then, the show just drops that and it doesn’t really get mentioned again. Also, maybe a pet peeve, but because I'm bi myself I really would've liked if there were any actual bi characters - instead we get Ritchie telling people he's bi because he's ashamed of being gay and is overcompensating for it. That isn't in itself biphobic and I do believe a lot of gay men went through that in their lives, but that being the only mention of "bisexual" in the show leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. They could've easily removed it too, so it sticks out even more. I personally would've liked seeing Roscoe's story developed more, he was miles more interesting than Ritchie. While we're at it, Ash was more interesting, Gloria was more interesting and Colin was more interesting. Instead, I'm subjected to a petulant, insufferable Tory and his guilt. Another problem I have with It's a Sin is the relationships in general, especially between the main five (Ritchie, Ash, Jill, Colin and Roscoe) - I'm to believe they've lived together for years and have become really good friends. I didn't believe that for one second. One of the reasons is the terrible fucking pacing of the show. It spends way too much time on unimportant details while skipping years and years of relationship development. And I usually don't mind friendships that get established at the beginning of the show, but the relationships here just don't feel genuine, they feel forced for plot convenience. I was thoroughly disappointed with It's a Sin. Then I found out that the show was initially supposed to last for 8 episodes and it genuinely made me sad because expanding the show by almost doubling its runtime would've absolutely fixed most of the gripes I had with it. phew, sorry for the mini rant

Currently Craving // Motivation to study Anatomy. Jesus, my textbooks are so incredibly boring and outdated it's actually excruciating to read them.

Tagging // I basically don't know anybody here, but I'm tagging a few people whose blogs I find interesting and would like to know more about. DON'T FEEL OBLIGATED THOUGH! This is all in good fun.

@neurofancier, @culverton,��@antigorite and thanks for tagging me @vice-versa-vane!

 Also, I have no idea how tags work ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[communistsans]

Bi/pan lesbian is not a term you should use.

Let me be clear, I think the experience you're describing is real, but the term is offensive to bi, pan, and lesbian people. Bi, pan, and lesbian are separate sexualities. They cannot be put together because they are directly contradictory. And before you say "what about x sexuality and ace," that is different, because the terms bi, straight, pan, lesbian, and gay all define the romantic and sexual parts of attraction. Ace only describes a lack of sexual attraction, leaving the question of who they are romantically attracted to. So if someone says they are ace and bi, it works because from that you know that they are attracted to women/men, but only romantically. You wouldn't say, "I'm aromantic, asexual, and bi," because all those things overlap. You can't be attracted to no one romantically or sexually AND be attracted to men/women. Lesbian describes a sexuality that means women/fem aligned people who are EXCLUSIVELY attracted (romantically and/or sexually) to women/fem aligned people. Bisexual describes a sexuality that means someone attracted (romantically and/or sexually) to 2 or more genders. Pansexual describes a sexuality that means someone attracted to others (romantically and/or sexually) regardless of their sex/gender.

So that's why the term is nonsensical, but why is it offensive to lesbians and bisexuals/pansexuals? I'm bi woman, so take my lesbian commetary with a grain of salt.

I believe every sexuality has a bit of wiggle room, and also that that doesn't mean that a person can't use the term gay/lesbian. I don't think a straight man being attracted to one guy makes him gay/bi, I don't think being a lesbian and being attracted to one guy makes her bi/straight. I'm bisexual and people often ask me if they are bi because they are attracted to x obviously attracitve celebrity, and the answer is usually no. It takes more than being attracted to a couple of people of the opposite sex to be bi/pansexual. What makes you bi/pan is being able to be genuinely attracted to, date, fall in love with, and be intimate with people of the same and different sexes/genders. I think straight and gay people alike can have genuine attractions that do not align with their sexuality and still be that sexuality. However the key here is that those are exceptions. When 99% of your experiences are exclusive to one gender then yes, you are gay/lesbian. I don't think that genuinely liking your high school boyfriend because he was a sweet guy and you hadn't figured yourself out yet makes you not a lesbian. And I think to say that it does is also lesbophobic. Just to get the whole "sexuality is fluid" out of the way.

Relationships between women are so often devalued, and lesbians often suffer from people erasing their sexualities, or people assuming that somehow they must be attracted to men in some way. This is a fucked up and lesbophobic way of thinking, and it's stupid that they have to deal with that. Lesbians shouldn't be made to feel ashamed of personal experiences for fear of having their sexuality questioned/invalidated. Politically speaking, it is critical for lesbians to ensure the term lesbian means a sexuality of women exclusively being attracted to women, please do not interfere with this term. It is important to their communities that it stays that way. However I know what is politically convenient isn't always what is personally true. On a personal note, I think the distinction should be this: if you HAVE BEEN attracted to a couple of men in your life but could never see yourself being with a man and being happy, and can easily say that 95% or more of your attraction has been exclusively to women, you are a lesbian. If you ARE attracted to men and could see yourself being happy in a relationship with a man, you are bisexual or pansexual. As a bisexual person, I don't experience or see my attraction to either men or women as exceptions, they are both natural and part of my sexuality. I also want to note that it is unfair and lesbophobic to assume that because someone has liked one guy in their life it somehow discredits the rest of their experiences, especially when we dont hold gay men to the same standard. In fact, its usually the opposite! If a straight man has one experience with another guy everyone assumes he must be gay/bi, even though he has only ever been attracted to women. Ultimately, if someone says they are a lesbian, they like women and just women. End of story. Yes there could be different personal anecdotes, but lesbians are attracted to women alone. To say otherwise is lesbophobic. If you are attracted to men, you aren't a lesbian.

Implying that lesbians are attracted to men is lesbophobic, so why is the term "bi lesbian" also biphobic? Well because in addition to erasing the meaning of lesbian, it also erases the meaning of bi. Bisexuals are often believed to secretly be straight or gay. We are not gay or straight, we're bi. I get the term is trying to say that you have a strong preference for women; many bisexuals have a preference, however you are still bi. If this "preference" is that strong to the point where you basically are near exclusively attracted to women, then you are probably a lesbian. You are either a bi person with a preference for women, or you are a lesbian. You cannot be both bi and a lesbian. Substitute bi for pan here and the commentary is the same.

I've also seen people who say they call themselves bi/pan lesbians because they are attracted to women and also to nonbinary people. And okay, I see where you're coming from here, but that doesnt mean the term isn't offensive. Gender non-conforming and nonbinary lesbians are a thing and I'm not about to police nb lesbians; they have always existed and been important parts of the lesbian community. But if the only nb people you find yourself being attracted to are nb lesbians and other fem aligned people, you're still a lesbian. If you aren't comfortable with that because it erases some peoples identity, then use bi/pan, because those are the terms to describe attraction to 2 or more genders. Or use queer! I knew a couple in college who were a lesbian couple until one of them came out as trans masc. To not invalidate them, their partner said they were queer instead of lesbian.

Another person I have seen using this term is women who are basically bi/pan or even straight who for whatever reason have stopped dating men permanently, despite being attracted to them, and this actually has some historical precedent. During 2nd wave feminism these women called themselves "political lesbians," giving up dating men in order to free themselves from misogyny. If this is your experience, do what you want, but again, the term bi/pan lesbian is harmful to lesbians and bi/pansexuals and please call yourself something else. I think it's fine to call yourself a lesbian or gay for convenience sake if you really do never plan on dating men again. Please just understand that the lesbian/bi/pan communities need to have the integrity of these terms for political reasons. Lesbian is not an umbrella term the way gay or queer is. On a personal level, yes there is wiggle room, but on political level these terms need to have definitions.

Ultimately if you identify as a bi/pan lesbian, please stop using that term. It's problematic for lesbian, bi, and pan communities and frankly makes no sense. If you want a fluid term, you can always just say "queer" or "queer with a preference for women." Normally I don't care about what people identify as and I against gatekeeping, because in the end it doesn't hurt anyone. But this isn't about gatekeeping. The term bi lesbian is harmful, which is why I'm asking anyone defending that term to please reconsider. If you identify with this term, I'm not sending hate your way and I'm not trying to invalidate you. I'm just saying this term is harmful and there are plenty of other non problematic ways to describe your sexuality, like wlw, nblw, sapphic, or queer.

If I got something wrong here please tell me! I just think there is a lot of really hateful debate going on here and it's extremely unnecessary. But my final stance is that the term bi lesbian/pan lesbian is offensive, biphobic, and especially lesbophobic, and we should do better by the lesbian community, who are constantly being erased.

[lesbian-ed]

yeahsureyoudo replied to your post “What are your opinions on gay women choosing to identify as Queer...”

I actually identify as Queer, not because I'd have any shame about identifying as a lesbian but because i just feel more comfortable with Queer.

I also think the term queer is useful for trans lesbians that perhaps aren't out yet? Women that love women but are not fully identifying as female to the whole world yet. If that makes sense?

I find it both sad and amusing that you have unwillingly proven the point of one of the many issues with the word ‘queer’.

First off, lesbians don’t ‘identify as’ lesbians, we are lesbians. To imply identification, which is something immaterial and subject to constant change, tied to the whole gender-mania of ‘~~~sometimes I’m more of a boy, sometimes I’m more of a girl and sometimes I’m both!!!1!~~’ means you’ve successfully tied lesbianism to a choice, to ‘fluidity’ (to play along with the jargon) and all that hogwash that has nothing to do with what an actual female who is exclusively attracted to other actual females is. The word Lesbian is not a title, it is not a label to be given or ‘claimed’ because it has a very clear definition: as just mentioned, lesbians are females exclusively attracted to other females. No ifs, no buts, no choices, no silly little games of ‘identity’. It is for no one to use for themselves but actual lesbians; it’s not for straight women, it’s not for bisexual women and it sure as hell isn’t for any sort of man to put his greasy hands on.

If by any chance, ‘lesbian’ feels ‘restrictive’ or if it really, really doesn’t reflect your experiences (as in, if you’re not really a homosexual female), maybe you’re just bisexual -- and there’s nothing wrong with that. But, see, the problem lies not with lesbianism; the problem is with the hypothetical person in question, who just isn’t a lesbian.

To posit lesbianism as an identity is to allow anyone to take it and, among other things, this is what the ‘queer movement’ does, stripping actual lesbians from ourselves (calling us gynosexuals or something equally ridiculous, as if we needed another word, as if ‘lesbian’ didn’t express it) and handing us on a silver plate to anyone who isn’t us -- but wants to exploit us.

Secondly, ‘queer’ is something that alienates us from ourselves and pushes us towards the values of those who antagonise us. I’ll break it down for you: if a lesbian falls into ‘queer community’ and starts to absorb their values upfront instead of those which would actually benefit her as a lesbian, it becomes easy to manipulate her to act against her own interests and those of lesbians she might come in contact with. Instead of finding her own crowd, with experiences and needs that are much more akin to her own, she mingles with people who oppose these experiences and deny these needs directly -- she begins to interact with and defend, as you have just done, the interests of males masquerading as women trying to get into lesbians’ beds, for instance, without understanding just how fucking perverse that is. We find adversaries in what presents itself as a community of equals, of people who understand and sympathize with our struggles, because in fact ‘queers’ do not understand the first thing about our struggles.

‘Queer’ is a divide-and-conquer tactic. The more lesbians side with it, the more they compromise their safety and their own subjectivity, something already much beaten around by a lesbophobic society that tries at every turn to annihilate us, either by physical force or by total erasure, by conversion, by coercion, trying to get us to worship at the altar of the phallus which, by definition, we are incapable of doing because we’re gay women, for fuck’s sake. We can be mislead, as the ‘queer folks’ try to do, but we cannot truly be converted. However, this deception is highly destructive, individually and collectively.

‘Queer’ alienates us from our very selves and it alienates us from one another, it creates rifts between lesbians who could otherwise work together, live together, love together. It walks hand in hand with cries of ‘terf!!!’ because all the ‘non-queer’ lesbians end up being shunned -- we don’t want to associate with men impersonating women or lesbophobic bisexuals (or straight people who truly believe a woman using a strap-on with a man is somehow ‘queering sexuality’ and makes them in any way comparable to us homosexuals!), so we’re punished for it. Lesbians who walk away from it are deemed suspicious and bad, while the ones who accept the label and play along with delusions are the ‘good’ ones and it stunts communication between these two ‘factions’ that should never be factions in the first place. It sets us apart and it sets us against one another. Quite honestly, it’s extremely depressing to see misguided lesbians being pitted against others simply because, unlike them, we prioritise actual lesbians in our lives instead of people who think we should all just shut up and open our legs for just about anyone.

This damn term creates a divide. It’s hard for us sometimes to find authentically lesbian communities because the support for ‘inclusivity’ -- as opposed to our caring about ourselves for once in our lives, since nobody else in this godforsaken planet gives a single shit about us -- makes enemies out of women who should have the same goals. It contributes to the effacing (and worse, the self-effacing) of lesbians, it corrodes our networks, it isolates us from one another. Inclusivity in the name of what? To whose benefit? Because the effects of all of this are negative to lesbians. And I know people who aren’t lesbians couldn’t at all be bothered about us and wouldn’t care if all of us ‘transphobic, biphobic’, ‘queerphobic’ dykes up and disappeared, but that’s precisely why we must put ourselves first. It isn’t selfish, it’s self-preservation. We have a right to exist as we are, not bent and broken as people want us.

Some lesbians fall into the trap of thinking that ‘lesbian’ is just a porn category, that it’s too loaded a word, and they shy away from it. But we came before porn, are we really just going to strip ourselves of our words, silence ourselves, and hand them over to sick men just like that, in the blink of an eye? They should be ashamed of co-opting a beautiful word that holds meaning to us to tag their trash with, not us. And as for it being a ‘loaded’ word, yeah, it has history, it has weight, it has pride. It is us, us who refuse to die out, who refuse to erase ourselves to be with men just because ‘oh, poor menz, give them a chance’; it is the name of our almost unwilling resistance because honestly it should not be so hard to live in this stupid world, having to justify ourselves at every turn, having to defend ourselves from attacks on all fronts just because we were born women who commit no other crime than loving only other women.

You have given the key to understanding the problem in your own reply. That a straight male who doesn’t even go to the trouble of dressing himself up in order to disguise himself as his revolting idea of what a woman actually is should use ‘queer’ so as to access spaces to which he otherwise could not shows what the word can do. It blurs lines. It removes barriers that exist for a reason. To be ‘queer’ is to be nebulous because nowadays it means just about anything; and lesbians are not someone’s vague idea, we are women of flesh and blood who have very specific experiences that are tied to our sexuality because this lesbian-hating society despises us to the point that we are being pressured to abandon the words that define us so we don’t sound ‘outdated’, so that we are more ‘inclusive’ and politically correct, preparing the terrain ourselves so that men can try to get into our pants. Do you see? We are being deprived of even calling ourselves what we are, we are being deprived of ourselves, in a way. And, I repeat, to whose benefit? Think. And if you refuse to think, then feel -- since so many are ready to feel on behalf of transgender males, why is it that you have never and will never feel anything but contempt for lesbians? Why do they deserve your time and compassion and why do we deserve your scorn?

Lastly, because this has gone on too long, let me reiterate a very simple fact about this blog: it is for lesbians. We have stated time and again that we are open and welcoming to bisexual women in relationships with women, but ultimately our focus lies with lesbians and we shall not tolerate male-pandering, lesbophobic bullshit here. If you’re not a lesbian, if you’re not here for lesbians, if you sincerely believe that we should embrace males as ‘lesbians’ because of ‘queer fraternity’ or some equally obnoxious, ridiculous garbage argument, kindly fuck off forever from this blog and please never interact with a lesbian again.

(An addendum: Why on Earth have you capitalized ‘queer’ but not ‘lesbian’? Seriously??? Why is that? Must I dwell on that too, must I interpret it here or is that proof enough of just how little respect there is for lesbians that the word in itself is seen as lesser-than as opposed to how people use what many still consider a slur? Fuck’s sake.)

/Mod T