http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/01/06/letter-from-a-bisexual-plunged-into-invisible-darkness Comments On: Letter from a Bisexual Plunged into "Invisible Darkness" by Dominic Holden en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 22 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Wed, 22 May 2013 07:30:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Hermes]]> Thu, 15 Mar 2012 22:21:54 -0700 The Stranger
Secondly, why do you assume that because we disagree with the LW, that we put up with people saying shit like "bisexual people don't exist"? I call out biphobia all the time, and in fact, a big part of my beef with this letter is that it makes it so much harder for us to get real, genuine biphobia taken seriously when people see bis like this LW complaining about nothing and claiming to speak for the entire bi community when they do.

TL;DR - If you're such a great bisexual activist, actually read what your fellow bis have to say and stop being so fucking condescending.
Posted by Whoop Di Doo]]> Fri, 20 Jan 2012 15:19:24 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Pissed off in paradise]]> Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:06:04 -0800 The Stranger Seriously, just because you CAN post anonymous snarky witticisms doesn't mean you should. It just makes us look like the same kind of immature bullies that target gay people for being self-centered enough to whine to the other 90% of the world about how unfair it is they can't adopt or get married or whatever bullshit they think they deserve now.
...So yeah, sometimes it's hard to comment respectfully about ideas you don't believe, especially when you're in the majority. But it'd be a hell of a lot more welcoming around here if people tried writing "I don't have a problem with the semantics," instead of ganging up on someone who feels strongly about an issue that doesn't bother the rest of us.
Posted by pretty basic stuff]]> Wed, 11 Jan 2012 14:19:06 -0800 The Stranger Seriously, just because you CAN post anonymous snarky witticisms doesn't mean you should. It just makes us look like the same kind of immature bullies that target gay people for being self-centered enough to whine to the other 90% of the world about how unfair it is they can't adopt or get married or whatever bullshit they think they deserve now.
...So yeah, sometimes it's hard to comment respectfully about ideas you don't believe, especially when you're in the majority. But it'd be a hell of a lot more welcoming around here if people tried writing "I don't have a problem with the semantics," instead of ganging up on someone who feels strongly about an issue that doesn't bother the rest of us.
Posted by pretty basic stuff]]> Wed, 11 Jan 2012 13:55:29 -0800 The Stranger Posted by mr. herriman]]> Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:36:16 -0800 The Stranger
This. Yes. Abso-fucking-lutely.
Posted by EricaP]]> Mon, 09 Jan 2012 09:15:26 -0800 The Stranger
Obviously far and away the most important thing about removing the sex/gender restriction on the parties to a marriage is the equality of access to marriage for all people including same-sex couples. But as a straight woman, I will admit to enjoying it from a feminist perspective - because I am convinced that some part of the cognitive dissonance the jesus freaks have about same-sex marriage boils down to, "But if two dudes get married, which one owns the other?!??" So in that sense, state-sanctioned same-sex marriage might indeed destroy their conception of what marriage is, by redefining it as a relationship of two equal partners.

Just a little bonus.
Posted by tau]]> Mon, 09 Jan 2012 07:14:50 -0800 The Stranger
I'd say publishing this letter was worth it just to read Whoop Di Do's interesting and informed comment.
Posted by Dan Savage]]> Sun, 08 Jan 2012 18:31:39 -0800 The Stranger
I'm guessing Dan would approve too, since he's the one who pokes fun of us whenever we complain about invisibility.
Posted by doloresdaphne]]> Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:56:32 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Whoop Di Doo]]> Sun, 08 Jan 2012 13:16:33 -0800 The Stranger
And this sort of confusion really doesn't help bisexual activists at all. One big complaint that gays and lesbians have is that bisexuals don't acknowledge how society privileges us when we're in opposite-sex relationships. Even those of us in OS relationships who are very open about the fact that we're bi, not straight, and fight against bi erasure, still get our relationships recognized and celebrated by the state and society in a way they wouldn't be if they were same-sex. Acting like her opposite-sex marriage needs to be roped in with the same-sex marriage cause is the kind of myopia that rightly gets called out by LGs.

There is a good conversation to be had about how the use of GAY marriage and GAY rights excludes the bisexuals to whom it also applies. (One that particularly irks me is the tendency lately for anti-bullying activists to refer to "gay and transgender" or "gay, lesbian and transgender" students, as though specifically leaving out the B in LGBT.) But this isn't that conversation.
Posted by Whoop Di Doo]]> Sun, 08 Jan 2012 13:03:50 -0800 The Stranger
So I guess, Shaunita, that you can blame bisexual activists for the language that the governor uses. I suppose you think bi activists have not gone far enough? Frankly, the issue of bi visibility is fraught with all kinds of semantic pitfalls, sometimes without any conscious intent. In my opinion, "marriage equality" is a great statement--by implication, it includes gender variance more than "same-sex marriage"--but I still don't think that in all cases it makes gender variant bisexuals significantly more visible. Something to work on.
Posted by MaxtheCommunist]]> Sun, 08 Jan 2012 09:20:34 -0800 The Stranger Posted by sahara29]]> Sat, 07 Jan 2012 10:57:42 -0800 The Stranger Posted by suddenlyorcas]]> Sat, 07 Jan 2012 09:56:39 -0800 The Stranger

Posted by Prairie Dog]]> Sat, 07 Jan 2012 08:56:11 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Troy from IN]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:30:01 -0800 The Stranger
Please explain how the term "same-sex marriage" is not inclusive, and also say what term you'd prefer.

I'm not trying to be snarky here - I'm just bewildered that you find injury in this.

Posted by Free Lunch]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 19:15:40 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Just another Bi]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:25:58 -0800 The Stranger
"is there a way we can make this more about me? that's be great. thx."

p.s. seattleseven, @50 - LOVE IT.
Posted by mr. herriman]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:07:44 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Looking For a Better Read]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 16:49:15 -0800 The Stranger Posted by macavitykitsune]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:50:36 -0800 The Stranger
Snort. Some deviant you are.
Posted by TVDinner]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:46:51 -0800 The Stranger Posted by dennis_aaa]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:38:57 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Chris in Vancouver WA]]> Fri, 06 Jan 2012 15:31:53 -0800 The Stranger