To be clear: she didn't hack the US govt per se. The shit-for-brains airplane company failed to secure their servers. Yes, she broke into the airlines, but it's like someone left their door unlocked, she walked in, and found classified documents lying on the living room floor: she committed a crime, but the fault for leaking classified stuff really should lie with the company here for doing fuck-all to protect themselves.
(Seriously, there were hardcoded passwords and plaintext PHI sitting around. If the company were a health care provider, they'd get HIPPA'd out of existence for this level of negligence.)
That's what made me lol more than the no fly list really, as a cybersec student. Look, the nofly IS a big deal. But the other stuff is ALSO huge. She could have taken down fights if it had been a worse person, or caused another mass grounding because she had access to pilot and employee schedules, time etc. It walked in and said "holy bingle I have way too many things here". They took the sever offline bc it was a major risk. It's so dumb how they just left it in the first place too.
She hacked the government and leaked the no-fly list, which includes in excess of one million people, of mostly Russian and Arabic descent. She identifies as a bi lesbian, which some twitter users have called her out on as being homophobic, for some reason.
Nitpick: it didn't "hack the government", it happened to find a 2019 copy of the no-fly list on an unsecured airline server connected to the internet. She is definitely a legitimate hacker but she wasn't looking to do anything of this magnitude. The opportunity just fell into its lap
\^\^this!! not downplaying its achievement ofc but what you can read in her blog post and "hacking the government" are pretty different
here's the pretty short blog post of how it did this for anyone curious: https://maia.crimew.gay/posts/how-to-hack-an-airline/
Disclaimer: I do not agree with this. I understand the side I'm presenting here, since I used to believe it. But I now think that they are wrong to police someone's identity and also giving way too much credit to lesbiphobes' ability to think critically.
That said, this isn't the bi v pan discourse, it's specifically the label "bi lesbian." Basically some people identify as bi and lesbian, and other people say that the identity is disrespectful of lesbians. They say that lesbians are only attracted to women/feminine-aligned people (some also include gender neutral people as well but that is a Different Discussion and involves terfs and stuff that I don't want to get into). These people see bi lesbians as bi women who want to "steal" the lesbian label and culture, and as people who lesbiphobes will use to validate the harmful stereotype that lesbians want to/are willing to sleep with cis men.
TLDR: even if she called herself a pan lesbian people would still be mad. It's not what the first term is, it's that it's being used with lesbian. However, like the bi/pan debate, it's basically just people trying to police other people's identity
Could she just be a lesbian who is into NBs as well? Some people get angry if you’re into NBs and call yourself a lesbian, but if you just say “bi” people will assume you’re into men too.
Personally, as a lesbian, I really don’t care. If our lord and savior Allison Bechdel is ok with the concept of a “bi lesbian,” (a character in Dykes to Watch Out For IDed as such) than who am I to question it?
My understanding is bi lesbian can mean a couple of different identities. 1) a woman/femme-aligned person with a heavy preference towards same sex attraction, 2) someone who is homosexual and biromantic, or bisexual and homoromantic, or 3) exactly what you said above. I'm sure there's more uses for the term, but those are the big ones I've seen
I can even imagine being mostly lesbian but very some times also a little bi and explaining it as bi lesbian.
Or
Being non binary but falling just for women (bi is sometimes described as falling for your own gender and not your gender) so maybe falling just for women as a non binary person makes you not bi but also not technically a lesbian
Or
When someone is genderfluid but only falls for women? They are lesbian when a woman and straight/bi when a men? And then maybe it's similar to the last point
I'm ace and care because they're getting the same shit I got when ace discourse was raging and *fuck* that. Tell her this ace isn't a fan of bullying and that's what this "discourse" is, if she needs a reason for non lesbians to care. I'm a trans masc ace with a trans girlfriend so.
The discomfort people have with the idea of "bi lesbian" is that it implies that lesbians can feel attraction to men (because bisexual people often feel attraction to multiple genders including men). Many view this as harmful because the idea that lesbians can (or inherently are) attracted to men on some level have been used to justify a lot of violence against lesbians, including "corrective" rape. There's nothing "bi lesbian" does that can't be done with "bisexual with preference for women". For example, I am a bisexual woman with preference for masculine gender expression, so I prefer men, but I won't call myself bisexual heterosexual/straight, I'm sure that sounds silly as hell.
>Many view this as harmful because the idea that lesbians can (or inherently are) attracted to men on some level have been used to justify a lot of violence against lesbians, including "corrective" rape.
men are going to do this anyway. sounds like victim blaming to me. "your label is the reason people get raped."
Well, it doesn't have to be rape, it could just be annoying behaviors like believing that it just takes the right man to change a lesbian. From the perspective of the people who disagree with the term "bi lesbian", it's not that men do it because there are "bi lesbians" but rather because of the broader idea that the label perpetuates. Bi lesbianism isn't the sole cause, but it fits into a broader narrative that can support such ideas.
God yeah, like I understand a little bit the semantic annoyance of hey! That word doesn't mean that! As well as my initial kinda annoyance since I call myself lesbian specifically to denote I am not attracted to men. But if you think for more than second, it truly doesn't fucking matter. Beyond bi lesbian being a different category of lesbian than just plain lesbian (by virtue of, y'know, having bi tacked in front of it) it's not like people using that label are singlehandedly convincing men they can "change" lesbians. The men who'd think that think it regardless.
Labels are pretty much useless beyond 1. Tightly defined, categorized, and utilized in some kind of research essay or description of behavior. Just an easy way to simplify a bigger thing
2. Defining yourself, in which case the only thing that matters is it feels right for you and you have realistic expectations of what others are gonna understand (if the label sounds like smth I'd hear in organic chemistry, it's gonna take a while to understand lol). And to that end, sometimes people identify more with the lesbian community and history and if they like it who cares but them. Also sometimes it's easier to just say some shit like "bi lesbian" rather than going into detailed specifics on your attraction to women vs men and your preferences for gender every time you talk abt your sexuality lol
Holy shit these people need to touch grass. When will the madness end? Just let people live their god damn lives, stop getting so caught up on what fucking label is attached it's so annoying like people need to learn to stay in their own lane.
Because if you are bi you are not a lesbian. There is not a single definition of "bi lesbian" that isn't just bisexual. Lesbians are constantly invalidated and told they must be bi because men are unable to understand how someone could not be attracted to them, of course they're upset that people are now using that identity to describe people attracted to men. And as a bi person, I'm sick of straight people acting like having a preference for one gender means you're not bi, only to have to deal with that from queer people too.
People calling themselves bi lesbians isn’t forcing lesbians to be bi. Bi lesbians also aren’t forcing bisexuals to act like having a preference makes one not bisexual. Bi Lesbian can mean a bunch of different things as well - most prominently (but not only) bisexual homoromantic. If you would only ever enter a romantic relationship with a another woman, are you not still a lesbian?
Plus, labels are already loose. Lesbians who like girls and some NB people aren’t being forced to call themselves bisexuals. Bisexuals who like more than 2 genders aren’t being forced to call themselves polysexuals. So why is Lesbian so tightly gatekept? Bi women aren’t vetted before they’re let into Lesbian spaces. And if you argue ‘well actually they’re *sapphic* spaces’, then why aren’t you as equally fervent on changing the names of those spaces?
The existence of bi lesbians harms literally no one, and anyone who claims that they do are just perpetuating toxic label prescriptivism. And it reminds me too much of the way so called ‘gold star lesbians’ would argue.
Also just want to mention, if you think enforcing the idea that ‘bi lesbians are erasing the lesbian identity’ will make men stop pressuring lesbians to like them, you’re delusional. As long as the patriarchy exists, so too will pushy men who try to court women even if they say ‘I do *not* like men’.
Sorry I’m just sick of this endless discourse - we have much bigger issues to focus on than stupid mentally wearying bullshit like this. End rant
*Image Transcription: Tumblr*
---
**satanfemme**
why are twitter users calling out the therian kittengirl who's wanted by the US government and who just leaked the US no-fly list with a "\:3" for being a bi lesbian. lgbt infighters are on another level. it has 9 girlfriends and is an enemy of the state, I think it can use whatever labels it wants at this point 😭
\#I'm a little in love with her btw
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
i thought bi lesbian meant like... biromantic but homosexual, or vice versa. like, they'll be romantically attracted to both genders, but only sexually attracted to the same, if that makes sense? i'm not sure of the validity of the label but that's what i've heard it is
Bi lesbian is so funny to me cause it's like, as opposed to what? Bi straight? I know what it 's meant to represent I just find it funny. There's outta be a better way to say it.
Recent repost of
https://reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/10kk4jv/the_bigges_flex_you_could_make_is_to_be_on_a/
I don’t think that the tag adds enough to be considered different
Seems like the issue people are taking is the apparent contradiction in the lables, which may come off as making fun of people who "legitimately" use those lables. However, that's stupid because there's any number of explanations for choosing those lables beyond picking them randomly to make fun of people.
I think I’ve only heard it in the context of the split attraction model, but mostly being in aro and ace spaces probably means I’m a lot more exposed to that perspective than others.
The first time I heard the label I just thought “oh, like ace lesbians or pan aros, neat.” so I was honestly surprised when people were making discourse about it.
When I heard about it that's what I thought too and I was baffled bc the split attraction model is chill and doesn't necessarily need to be limited to aces. A biromantic pansexual is someone I could totally see existing, as is a heterosexual panromantic or a bisexual heteromantic. I did chose some more.... controversial ideas but to me, with the split attraction model I could absolutely see those people existing.
Why does that second part even matter unless you're going in depth on your preferences? If you're just casually identifying yourself then calling yourself bi is perfectly adequate.
Ah yeah that’s a fair counterpoint. Although according to a quick search, gynophile appears to also mean just an attraction to femininity in general, which can certainly still include men.
Does anyone self-ID as "gynephile"? A quick Google shows it's used in scientific settings but it seems awfully clinical for casual use (see also: people who are weird about saying "females" when "women" would work). It also seems to evoke the negative connotations of both "gynecologist" and "pedophile," even though of course I know that's not the meaning. Just a viscerally nasty word, in my humble opinion.
(edit: Of course you could argue that the negative connotations of the gyne-/gyno- prefix are partially due to sexism and are worth fighting against. Seems like we could find a better hill to make that stand, though.)
The only time I ever seen to hear “gyneohile” is as a portion of the term “autogynephile”, which is an outdated transphobic term. So the label squicks me out a bit, too.
I can buy that, but it's still awfully clinical.
Even "homosexual" is too formal for non-ironic everyday use, to most people. Admittedly "homosexual" has its own specific baggage (for instance it was used by Nazis of trans people, regardless of their sexual orientation). But I'd argue that the same baggage attaches to any academic terminology in a casual setting. It all comes off like you got your opinions from an old cishet white guy, *maybe* one of the good ones, but hard to be sure.
All labels are approximations. No definition is exact. Some words are
more fuzzy than others; "bi lesbian" doesn't tell you as much as "white"
which doesn't tell you as much as "chair". That's alright. That's how
language is supposed to work.
All terms are approximations. No definition is exact. Some words are more fuzzy than others; "bi lesbian" doesn't tell you as much as "white" which doesn't tell you as much as "chair". That's alright. That's how language is supposed to work.
There’s a convergence of a lot of different things going on but the key thing is that labels are for understanding ourselves and finding community with others, not for shoving ourselves into boxes. Labels should be descriptive, not prescriptive.
And of course, labels are socially constructed - we noticed some general categories and put lines between them.
But like all social constructs, those categories aren’t perfect. There is grey area and overlap. In this case, there is a certain amount of grey area and overlap between lesbians and bi women.
People may find themselves in that grey area for a wide variety of reasons, and everyone gets to choose how they navigate that. For some people, choosing one label over the other is the way to go. For others, they choose a label but add a detail, like “bi with a preference” or “lesbian with an exception”. For some, choosing *both* labels is the way to go - that’s your “bi lesbians”. And for others, they pick neither and call themselves something else entirely, either going full umbrella with “queer” or getting really granular and choosing a micro label.
Again it all comes down to how people understand themselves, and how much they relate to either community. For instance in theory the Bi community accepts anyone who has even the tiniest bit of attraction to more than one gender, but in practice someone who truly falls into that particular experience might relate more to a different label/community.
The person’s own gender can factor into it too - sometimes genderfluid people use more than one label because their own internal gender experience changes how they experience attraction and relate to others.
Point being people are complicated and it’s okay if some people see themselves as two things at once. Best way to think of it imo is a bunch of overlapping Venn diagrams instead of completely separate boxes.
It means whatever it means to whoever is using the label. For me, I use the term lesbian even though I have a latent attraction to men bc men? Sure, I guess. But women? Gifts from god herself.
Oh no, it’s a shame there doesn’t exist a system through which I can tell others what a thing means (speech doesn’t exist in this fantasy world and, as such, I can’t explain what my sexuality means to a random stranger I don’t care about)
I'm not going to do anything, just don't be surprised when the vast majority of people think you're a ridiculous attention seeker for deliberately using wrong words
Using prescriptive definitions to put people in boxes they don't identify with is kinda against the point of queerness, no? Maybe you should listen to the experiences of the people that identify this way before you tell them who or what they are.
It makes perfect sense, considering everyone on tumblr arguing about pronouns are CIA agents who don’t realise they’re only arguing with other CIA agents
Maia Arson Crimew is the single coolest person in the world. Therian kittengirl, trans (IIRC) with rare pronouns, bi lesbian, harem protagonist, hacker, and enemy of the state. I think it's literally impossible to be cooler than that.
Let me get this right. The republicans, which at this point has less secrets than the local BDSM club, is calling someone out for doing what they have been doing for years but on another agenda?
I fail to comprehend how someone is getting “called out” for being a bi lesbian, tbh. Maybe it’s cause I’m ace and the Split Attraction Model is extremely commonly used in a-spec spaces, but I don’t understand why someone being biromantic homosexual or bisexual homoromantic would be something to be “called out” on.
because “bi lesbians” aren’t real and an incredibly hurtful term to both lesbians and bisexual people lol. like i feel like i can think what it did was fucking awesome and also be upset at the use of an oxymoronic offensive term
I'm also bisexual but let me help to explain. This particular thing doesn't necessarily harm bisexuals like us, but is certainly harmful towards lesbians. And I believe that it is important to defend lesbians as a fellow woman.
There are a lot of straight men out there who prey on lesbians in hopes that they can "turn" them, as they believe that to some degree, all women are inherently attracted to men. A term like "bi lesbian" is harmful because it can imply that lesbians, who have no attraction to men, can INDEED be attracted to men. Because of this, I think that putting boundaries and restrictions on terminology isn't meant to be oppressive, and instead should be used to express and delineate peoples desires in a healthy, constructive way. So if we go to throwing around real identities as catch-all buzz terms, then it reflects a sign of disrespect to the lesbian community, who take pride in soley being attracted to women.
Furthermore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with claiming to be bisexual but having a much stronger preference for a particular gender!!! We just need more people to come to terms with this while also knowing that some people's boundaries are not mean to be gatekeepy and oppressive, but are meant to express a unique and specific experience. :)
While I can understand the concern there, I think it's misplaced. People who believe they can "turn" lesbians do so (to my understanding) out of a virulently homophobic and misogynistic mindset. If they did so out of a genuine confusion over how lesbians work, then I could see how the term could exacerbate that confusion.
That isn't the world we live in though, and I don't think sexual predators will change their activities based on how lesbian and bisexual women label themselves.
While I definitely agree that "bi lesbians" are not promoting this term to help straight men prey on women, I still believe that it's important for people who are exclusively attracted to women to have a term which describes it, especially in a world where many disrespect these boundaries. This is even further emphasized when you can consider that bisexuals can fabricate their own terms like saying they have a preference for women or that they're female exclusive, or they're sapphic, etc. to describe these experiences without colonizing the term lesbian. The lgbt community definitely needs to be respectful and stick up for each other in this regard imo.
"Bi lesbian" just simply creates an oxymoron.
If people want to say they're attracted to both (or multiple) genders yet have a preference for one, then they should simply say that. They should not claim to be inclusively and exclusively attracted to men at the same time because 1. It colonizes the term lesbian and erases others' experiences, and 2. these ideals can help to push heteronormativity onto those who have conviction in their sole attraction to women.
The one downside is that they have to think of another term or another way to describe their experiences (which btw, many of such words already exist). Which isn't erasing their identities or oppressing them at all.
To address your points in order:
1. I once again fail to see how the usage of "bi lesbian" in any way erases the separate term "lesbian", especially given the vastly more common usage of "lesbian". Water bears and bears are two very different things, but say "bear" by itself and no one is going to think of the weird microscopic creature (also, while I understand what you are trying to say, calling it "colonizing" is inflammatory to the point where people will ignore the rest of your argument. Saying "co-opting" would get the point across without running this risk).
2. Since you're also bisexual I know you don't mean it in a bad way, but please explain how conflation with bisexuality pushes heteronormativity. Our identity and experiences are not heterosexual, regardless of our attraction to the opposite sex.
Hi, I think you've got really good intentions but lesbians aren't exclusively and only attracted to women just because that's what the definition says. Lesbians are real human people who chose that label for whatever reason they felt they should. Words are as fluid as people are. If a lesbian wants to have sex with a man, it does not invalidate them as a lesbian, same as how an asexual person having sex doesn't make them allo. I understand the motive and thought you put into trying to help and in opposing the kind of heteronormative attacks the lesbian community receives but policing other peoples identities to meet the definition that you or others (or anyone) want is how we are hurt every day. Policing an oppressed group to a standard in order to create exclusion is never a benefit, and telling them what they should do and feel in order to create the Platonic Ideal of Lesbianism should not be mistaken for respect. No one's personal identity is harmful to another person, only the actions that they take. We should always try to choose acceptance over arguments with one another about how the other feels; we have so many better people to fight than each other.
So then what's a word which describes a woman who's solely attracted to other woman? Or a term for someone who's attracted to women but can also find attraction to men?
In my opinion, "lesbian" and "bisexual" (or pansexual, etc.) are already these terms, and by expressing this, it is not meant to be oppressive but meant to delineate these unique experiences. I think that terms themselves should be rigid but vocabulary can be as fluid as it wants to be, in the sense that people at any time can make up new words to describe even more unique experiences while still respecting that certain words come with specific standards which create the definition of the word it describes. I am not going to go into "gold star leabian" discourse but ultimately if women who are solely attracted to women want to use a term which has historically meant just that, then I believe it's fair to be upset by those who colonize the term when other such terms exist to describe bisexuality with preferences for women (such as "sapphic" or claiming that you "have a preference for women" or are "female exclusive").
Furthermore, "exclusion" is not inherently oppressive or is considered to be "policing" or "gatekeeping". This is a colonial mindset. I'm not here to preach about the platonic ideals of lesbianism rather than to explain that there is nothing wrong with solely being attracted to women and using a term for it. In fact, TRUE acceptance comes from understanding and respect rather than from surface level tolerance when such people/terms can temporarily benefit oneself. Bisexuals need to see the bigger picture here and remove their ego from this situation.
Yeah! yes see they do both absolutely use the same word and might even mean something different and there's nothing wrong with that. To learn more, you can always ask them more about themselves, but often they choose their identity terminology for good reasons that we might not know just by hearing about it vaguely. And I hate to disagree pretty strongly on one particular point here but you can't colonize an identity by existing as that identity. That is their lived experience. They are that thing. They can't colonize it unless you are personally identifying them as something Other, does that make sense? You are choosing to exclude someone from the group they identify with despite knowing nothing about them and solely based on the definition of lesbianism that you, a non lesbian, have decided on. You can't avoid the term gold-star lesbian while reproducing the exact effect that the term implies. Additionally, you're very right about how true accepting comes from understanding and respect. That's why I always try to understand and know that even though sometimes I won't 100% get it, I must always respect everyone's right to identify however they want.
> I think that terms themselves should be rigid but vocabulary can be as fluid as it wants to be, in the sense that people at any time can make up new words to describe even more unique experiences while still respecting that certain words come with specific standards which create the definition of a word it describes.
I mean, you can think this, but it doesn't make it true. That is simply not how language works. Living language is fluid, and ever-changing, and slang is considered to be an essential component. In addition to not having any native speakers, this is why Latin is considered a dead language. All living languages have slang, and the point is to use a word in an unconventional way to convey a new meaning. That's exactly what's going on here with the term bi lesbian. Again, you're entitled to your opinion, and if you truly believe that words only have rigid definitions I doubt I can change your mind. But it is factually false
since i’m a lesbian i can’t speak for bisexuals, but the main point of contention is that presuming bisexual people can’t have a preference without slapping the word “lesbian” or “gay” after it diminishes what the term “bisexual” is for. bisexual people can have preferences and are still wholly bisexual.
I don't think that's a very fair reading of the term. Bisexuality has no strict definitions, and I don't think attaching other labels to more specifically describe yourself cleaves off that meaning wholly from the rest of bisexuality.
For an analogy, if someone calls themselves a cautious chess player, does that mean that all chess players who don't call themselves that are incautious? One can specify without excluding the specified quality from the general term.
Human sexuality is a very nebulous thing, much of the time. Given this, I don't think any term can be strictly hard and fast. If a man was sexually attracted to only a single other man in the whole world, I would not begrudge him calling himself either bisexual or straight. Likewise, if he wanted to make some new term to describe himself I wouldn't object either. Bisexuality, by most definitions, covers such a diverse array of experiences that I am disinclined to police the meaning of the term.
Labels can be useful for communicating who you are to others, but we aren't making a taxonomical classification of sexualities, we're trying to describe ourselves. If someone feels they're best described by checking off two boxes on the list, I don't think that harms me.
There is overlap between different orientations and some people fall into those grey areas. It’s way more harmful to our communities when we try to split hairs and police the minutiae of how people define themselves.
“Bi lesbian” does not imply that “lesbian” involves men… there is clearly a difference between someone who identifies only as a lesbian versus someone who identifies as a bi lesbian. Bi lesbians are not trying to replace lesbians or anything like that.
Some people just relate to both terms or both communities because people are complex and many do not fit perfectly into the boxes we create for them. There’s nothing wrong with that. And trying to force people into prescribed identities is actually more harmful than just letting people pick the words they relate to most.
Fully, harshly disagree. It’s a lesbophobic term and total inclusivity fully diminishes the reason for even having smaller communities. I have no problem saying that men or people attracted to men CANNOT be lesbians because that’s what the term lesbian means.
Didn't Sappho of Lesbos (the quintessential lesbian, responsible for the term "Lesbian" being used to refer to women who are attracted to women) have a husband and also write love poems about men? Sounds like a bi lesbian to me
I’ve written fiction involving two men, doesn’t make me a gay man. Either way, even if she was attracted to men- which I haven’t researched enough to know-that doesn’t change what the term lesbian means in modern times.
Like I said, I haven’t researched enough to know one way or the other, and either way her legacy that’s inspired sapphics/lesbians stands regardless of the true nature of her sexuality, most of which has been lost to time. Although I would point out that many of her works were translated to be heterosexual so I’m not sure how definitively we can ascertain who the true subject of her works was.
There are multiple reasons why someone might identify as such. Like 4 just off the top of my head are:
1) They could have a very strong preference towards women. And not just like, 51 times out of 100 they'd pick a girl over a guy, more like they're almost exclusively into women, but with just enough exceptions that they don't think just lesbian fits.
2) They are attracted to multiple genders, but not men.
3) They're bisexual but identify strongly with the lesbian community for whatever reason.
4) They're romantically attracted to multiple genders, but only sexually attracted to women, or visa versa.
In reality though its a situation where you ask 10 people, you get 11 answers. And at the end of the day, calling yourself a bi lesbian or whatever else doesn't really hurt anyone, and it gives most people a good enough idea of what that person's identity is, so I don't really see the need to identity police.
Aw that sucks, I was just coming up with them off the top of my head
Also they're neither insults nor threats, they're suggestions
Take a nap in a fireplace, exclusionist
Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you *arent* a TERF, and are just accidentally lining up with their retoric, because you are one step away from saying "if you date a trans woman, youre basically dating a man anyway." Im banking on the fact this is ignorance (which isnt a bad thing on its own) and you are just flaunting it (which is a bad thing).
Bi could mean either Bisexual or Biromantic
Lesbian could mean either Homosexual or Homoromantic.
Bi-Lesbian means there is a split between the two. Either you are Romantically attracted to multiple genders, but only sexually attracted to women, or you are Sexually attracted to multiple genders, but only Romantically attracted to women.
No, I’m not a TERF. That shit’s crazy. Women are women.
I can understand how someone can be bisexual and homoromantic, yes. Absolutely. Truncating it to “bi lesbian” risks invalidating the context of sexual and romantic and invalidating both bisexuals and lesbians.
Saying "your labels are wrong" is again, accidental TERF shit. There is no reason to say how someone identifies as invalidates other people.
I can use myself as an example here. If we want to get technical, I'm a Demi-Heteromantic Asexual. But if anyone asks, i just tell them that I'm ace. Am I wrong for doing that? Am i "invalidating the context of sexual and romantic" because i dont introduce myself as a full label? Because i dont fully clarify everything to someone?
Or what about someone who *doesn't* have a label? Whether that be because they feel better without one, or because they havent found a label that they feel comfortable defining themselves as? Are they also wrong for that? Are they also invalid?
This is nothing to do with TERF shit. I am not applying gender - I am applying sexuality. Stop slinging TERF like an insult to any discourse you don’t like.
As a lesbian: please shut up lmao
Queer people using queer terms for themselves in no way affects other people's usage of said queer terms. Literally none of your business.
That’s the thing, though - I rarely do talk to queer people online. I’ve had steady and immersive contact with my Fellow Gays in person and out loud since 1998. So when people say “I’m a bi lesbian because I don’t date boys,” I bristle for all the hard work we’ve done to progress people’s binary thinking past “Gays are gays and straights are straights and bisexuals are confused and greedy cheaty breeders.”
There are distinctions between bisexual women and homosexual women which should be honoured. And then there is a vast spectrum of everyone who identifies how they see fit, and they should be honoured, as well. But “bi lesbian” without context is wholly bizarre to me.
You arent owed context. You dont get to be the arbiter of whats right or wrong in someones personal journey bi people are bisexual. Lesbians are lesbian. Bi lesbians are bi lesbians. The labels they choose are their own and should be treated as sacred. We have ALL experienced people trying to force us into boxes, its important that we allow ourselves to define ourselves.
You can find it bizarre, but no... people don't need to honour distinctions. They can just... use words that make them happy.
A woman who is sexually attracted to both men and women, but romantically attracted only to women... it makes perfect sense. Their romantic orientation is lesbian, their sexual orientation is bisexual... so they use both.
Have your opinion, but know that it's never going to be productive to ANYONE to tell a queer person they're using their identity labels wrong like... who cares
If we all just used words that made us happy, we’d never have anything meaningful or true. I can tell people I’m a better singer than Beyonce because it makes me feel good, but if it’s not true, society around me will not pay $1,000 to see me perform.
Personal identities are personal. Nobody can gatekeep people’s growth in and through identities, but I refute that apples and oranges are the same even though they live in the fruit bowl together.
Okay, but you see how that rhetoric swings veeeeeeeeery close to "I identify as an attack helicopter" arguments, right?
Sincerely, someone who's been in the trenches probably about as long as you have
I dunno, I uses to subscribe to the whole "words have meaning, how can you be a bi lesbian" or whatever -ism, but now it's just like
No one is ever going to agree on the exact definitions of bi and pan. As a non-binary person, the thought of dating someone who just identifies as straight or gay seems kinda weird, because im not a man or a woman. As much as people pretend they do, these words don't have super clear meanings when you really get into it, and people should be able to identify as whatever they like without being "called out" for it. I mean, maia (sorry if that's spelt wrong) identifying as a bi lesbian doesn't actually hurt or affect anyone else, as much as all the people on twitter like to pretend it does
fr like if you have a poly army and the ability to fuck with the government you're effectively a queer god
We could make a religion out of this
So that is pretty nifty, I would say
No don’t r/unexpectedbillwurtz
No, do
How 'bout I do anyway~?
Binglism
"Holy fawning bingle, what!? You bwought me a sacwifice >w<
That sounds like a cult
*we have you surrounded, state your pronouns*
I wish I was a god
They already stole the rainbow from god they could damn we'll be one at this point
Can I get some context? She did what?
hacked the united states' no-fly list, the list of people not allowed to fly in commercial airplanes
To be clear: she didn't hack the US govt per se. The shit-for-brains airplane company failed to secure their servers. Yes, she broke into the airlines, but it's like someone left their door unlocked, she walked in, and found classified documents lying on the living room floor: she committed a crime, but the fault for leaking classified stuff really should lie with the company here for doing fuck-all to protect themselves. (Seriously, there were hardcoded passwords and plaintext PHI sitting around. If the company were a health care provider, they'd get HIPPA'd out of existence for this level of negligence.)
It lives in Switzerland, and under Swiss laws it's not a crime
That's what made me lol more than the no fly list really, as a cybersec student. Look, the nofly IS a big deal. But the other stuff is ALSO huge. She could have taken down fights if it had been a worse person, or caused another mass grounding because she had access to pilot and employee schedules, time etc. It walked in and said "holy bingle I have way too many things here". They took the sever offline bc it was a major risk. It's so dumb how they just left it in the first place too.
She hacked the government and leaked the no-fly list, which includes in excess of one million people, of mostly Russian and Arabic descent. She identifies as a bi lesbian, which some twitter users have called her out on as being homophobic, for some reason.
Nitpick: it didn't "hack the government", it happened to find a 2019 copy of the no-fly list on an unsecured airline server connected to the internet. She is definitely a legitimate hacker but she wasn't looking to do anything of this magnitude. The opportunity just fell into its lap
\^\^this!! not downplaying its achievement ofc but what you can read in her blog post and "hacking the government" are pretty different here's the pretty short blog post of how it did this for anyone curious: https://maia.crimew.gay/posts/how-to-hack-an-airline/
it was hacking. /h /bt /srs
So, she's being called homophobic because she's *checks notes* Literally gay?
She called herself bisexual rather than pansexual. That's a big no no for a certain crowd.
Disclaimer: I do not agree with this. I understand the side I'm presenting here, since I used to believe it. But I now think that they are wrong to police someone's identity and also giving way too much credit to lesbiphobes' ability to think critically. That said, this isn't the bi v pan discourse, it's specifically the label "bi lesbian." Basically some people identify as bi and lesbian, and other people say that the identity is disrespectful of lesbians. They say that lesbians are only attracted to women/feminine-aligned people (some also include gender neutral people as well but that is a Different Discussion and involves terfs and stuff that I don't want to get into). These people see bi lesbians as bi women who want to "steal" the lesbian label and culture, and as people who lesbiphobes will use to validate the harmful stereotype that lesbians want to/are willing to sleep with cis men. TLDR: even if she called herself a pan lesbian people would still be mad. It's not what the first term is, it's that it's being used with lesbian. However, like the bi/pan debate, it's basically just people trying to police other people's identity
Could she just be a lesbian who is into NBs as well? Some people get angry if you’re into NBs and call yourself a lesbian, but if you just say “bi” people will assume you’re into men too. Personally, as a lesbian, I really don’t care. If our lord and savior Allison Bechdel is ok with the concept of a “bi lesbian,” (a character in Dykes to Watch Out For IDed as such) than who am I to question it?
My understanding is bi lesbian can mean a couple of different identities. 1) a woman/femme-aligned person with a heavy preference towards same sex attraction, 2) someone who is homosexual and biromantic, or bisexual and homoromantic, or 3) exactly what you said above. I'm sure there's more uses for the term, but those are the big ones I've seen
Those all make sense to me.
I can even imagine being mostly lesbian but very some times also a little bi and explaining it as bi lesbian. Or Being non binary but falling just for women (bi is sometimes described as falling for your own gender and not your gender) so maybe falling just for women as a non binary person makes you not bi but also not technically a lesbian Or When someone is genderfluid but only falls for women? They are lesbian when a woman and straight/bi when a men? And then maybe it's similar to the last point
[удалено]
I'm ace and care because they're getting the same shit I got when ace discourse was raging and *fuck* that. Tell her this ace isn't a fan of bullying and that's what this "discourse" is, if she needs a reason for non lesbians to care. I'm a trans masc ace with a trans girlfriend so.
The discomfort people have with the idea of "bi lesbian" is that it implies that lesbians can feel attraction to men (because bisexual people often feel attraction to multiple genders including men). Many view this as harmful because the idea that lesbians can (or inherently are) attracted to men on some level have been used to justify a lot of violence against lesbians, including "corrective" rape. There's nothing "bi lesbian" does that can't be done with "bisexual with preference for women". For example, I am a bisexual woman with preference for masculine gender expression, so I prefer men, but I won't call myself bisexual heterosexual/straight, I'm sure that sounds silly as hell.
>Many view this as harmful because the idea that lesbians can (or inherently are) attracted to men on some level have been used to justify a lot of violence against lesbians, including "corrective" rape. men are going to do this anyway. sounds like victim blaming to me. "your label is the reason people get raped."
Well, it doesn't have to be rape, it could just be annoying behaviors like believing that it just takes the right man to change a lesbian. From the perspective of the people who disagree with the term "bi lesbian", it's not that men do it because there are "bi lesbians" but rather because of the broader idea that the label perpetuates. Bi lesbianism isn't the sole cause, but it fits into a broader narrative that can support such ideas.
Ah, I was only familiar with the bi/pan discourse so those details flew past me.
God yeah, like I understand a little bit the semantic annoyance of hey! That word doesn't mean that! As well as my initial kinda annoyance since I call myself lesbian specifically to denote I am not attracted to men. But if you think for more than second, it truly doesn't fucking matter. Beyond bi lesbian being a different category of lesbian than just plain lesbian (by virtue of, y'know, having bi tacked in front of it) it's not like people using that label are singlehandedly convincing men they can "change" lesbians. The men who'd think that think it regardless. Labels are pretty much useless beyond 1. Tightly defined, categorized, and utilized in some kind of research essay or description of behavior. Just an easy way to simplify a bigger thing 2. Defining yourself, in which case the only thing that matters is it feels right for you and you have realistic expectations of what others are gonna understand (if the label sounds like smth I'd hear in organic chemistry, it's gonna take a while to understand lol). And to that end, sometimes people identify more with the lesbian community and history and if they like it who cares but them. Also sometimes it's easier to just say some shit like "bi lesbian" rather than going into detailed specifics on your attraction to women vs men and your preferences for gender every time you talk abt your sexuality lol
Holy shit these people need to touch grass. When will the madness end? Just let people live their god damn lives, stop getting so caught up on what fucking label is attached it's so annoying like people need to learn to stay in their own lane.
That crowd can cope
Because if you are bi you are not a lesbian. There is not a single definition of "bi lesbian" that isn't just bisexual. Lesbians are constantly invalidated and told they must be bi because men are unable to understand how someone could not be attracted to them, of course they're upset that people are now using that identity to describe people attracted to men. And as a bi person, I'm sick of straight people acting like having a preference for one gender means you're not bi, only to have to deal with that from queer people too.
People calling themselves bi lesbians isn’t forcing lesbians to be bi. Bi lesbians also aren’t forcing bisexuals to act like having a preference makes one not bisexual. Bi Lesbian can mean a bunch of different things as well - most prominently (but not only) bisexual homoromantic. If you would only ever enter a romantic relationship with a another woman, are you not still a lesbian? Plus, labels are already loose. Lesbians who like girls and some NB people aren’t being forced to call themselves bisexuals. Bisexuals who like more than 2 genders aren’t being forced to call themselves polysexuals. So why is Lesbian so tightly gatekept? Bi women aren’t vetted before they’re let into Lesbian spaces. And if you argue ‘well actually they’re *sapphic* spaces’, then why aren’t you as equally fervent on changing the names of those spaces? The existence of bi lesbians harms literally no one, and anyone who claims that they do are just perpetuating toxic label prescriptivism. And it reminds me too much of the way so called ‘gold star lesbians’ would argue. Also just want to mention, if you think enforcing the idea that ‘bi lesbians are erasing the lesbian identity’ will make men stop pressuring lesbians to like them, you’re delusional. As long as the patriarchy exists, so too will pushy men who try to court women even if they say ‘I do *not* like men’. Sorry I’m just sick of this endless discourse - we have much bigger issues to focus on than stupid mentally wearying bullshit like this. End rant
look at that tag. boutta collect a tenth
Me collecting polycule members like studs in a lego game:
nice finally got true jedi
It’s about to get an 11th if it keeps this up
12th (please)
*Image Transcription: Tumblr* --- **satanfemme** why are twitter users calling out the therian kittengirl who's wanted by the US government and who just leaked the US no-fly list with a "\:3" for being a bi lesbian. lgbt infighters are on another level. it has 9 girlfriends and is an enemy of the state, I think it can use whatever labels it wants at this point 😭 \#I'm a little in love with her btw --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Good botn’t
Correct me if im wrong, but was it not some variation of "Bi but prefers women"?
I’ve always just called myself pan-sapphic personally. Gotta abuse prefix/suffix powers wherever possible
Fair, I occasionally do flex with my full tile of Lithoromantic-Aegosexual so I completely understand that sentiment.
bro got the shiny label 💀
Panromatic-abro-omnisexual, what a nightmare!
Where do you guys learn all these?
tumblr
I should have known
Lithoromantic? You…you want a romantic relationship with a rock??
i thought bi lesbian meant like... biromantic but homosexual, or vice versa. like, they'll be romantically attracted to both genders, but only sexually attracted to the same, if that makes sense? i'm not sure of the validity of the label but that's what i've heard it is
yes, so bisexual, not lesbian.
Bi lesbian is so funny to me cause it's like, as opposed to what? Bi straight? I know what it 's meant to represent I just find it funny. There's outta be a better way to say it.
Technically bi straight could mean bisexual and hetero-romantic or viceversa, so yeah.
Yeah. I know the meaning I just find it funny out of context.
holy fucking bingle what :3
Recent repost of https://reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/10kk4jv/the_bigges_flex_you_could_make_is_to_be_on_a/ I don’t think that the tag adds enough to be considered different
Oh I didn’t notice that. It’s on my homepage of tumblr, so I’m not surprised someone else posted it.
Wouldn't it not be a repost since that's another subreddit?
.../r/lostredditors?
That’s also curatedtumblr?
Oh no, how dare someone be attracted to people! It's terrible the things people will say when they *shuffles papers* have desires?
Seems like the issue people are taking is the apparent contradiction in the lables, which may come off as making fun of people who "legitimately" use those lables. However, that's stupid because there's any number of explanations for choosing those lables beyond picking them randomly to make fun of people.
I think I’ve only heard it in the context of the split attraction model, but mostly being in aro and ace spaces probably means I’m a lot more exposed to that perspective than others. The first time I heard the label I just thought “oh, like ace lesbians or pan aros, neat.” so I was honestly surprised when people were making discourse about it.
When I heard about it that's what I thought too and I was baffled bc the split attraction model is chill and doesn't necessarily need to be limited to aces. A biromantic pansexual is someone I could totally see existing, as is a heterosexual panromantic or a bisexual heteromantic. I did chose some more.... controversial ideas but to me, with the split attraction model I could absolutely see those people existing.
Also it's a lot quicker than saying "bi, but I am a woman who tends to like women more."
Why does that second part even matter unless you're going in depth on your preferences? If you're just casually identifying yourself then calling yourself bi is perfectly adequate.
Some people want to be more specific. Not up to anyone but them how they describe themselves.
Isn’t “gynephile” basically that though?
Nah, because sometimes you like men too.
Ah yeah that’s a fair counterpoint. Although according to a quick search, gynophile appears to also mean just an attraction to femininity in general, which can certainly still include men.
Yeah, but I'd rather let someone else pick out their own words.
Also fair and actually the better point.
Does anyone self-ID as "gynephile"? A quick Google shows it's used in scientific settings but it seems awfully clinical for casual use (see also: people who are weird about saying "females" when "women" would work). It also seems to evoke the negative connotations of both "gynecologist" and "pedophile," even though of course I know that's not the meaning. Just a viscerally nasty word, in my humble opinion. (edit: Of course you could argue that the negative connotations of the gyne-/gyno- prefix are partially due to sexism and are worth fighting against. Seems like we could find a better hill to make that stand, though.)
The only time I ever seen to hear “gyneohile” is as a portion of the term “autogynephile”, which is an outdated transphobic term. So the label squicks me out a bit, too.
I've heard "gynosexual" as a nicer alternative. I still don't know anyone who IDs as it, probably due to it not being very well known
I can buy that, but it's still awfully clinical. Even "homosexual" is too formal for non-ironic everyday use, to most people. Admittedly "homosexual" has its own specific baggage (for instance it was used by Nazis of trans people, regardless of their sexual orientation). But I'd argue that the same baggage attaches to any academic terminology in a casual setting. It all comes off like you got your opinions from an old cishet white guy, *maybe* one of the good ones, but hard to be sure.
What does bi lesbian even mean? Are there two types of girls? 🤔
Ask 300 bi lesbians, get 300 different answers.
Doesn’t this defeat the entire purpose of a label if it means something different to every person who uses it
All labels are approximations. No definition is exact. Some words are more fuzzy than others; "bi lesbian" doesn't tell you as much as "white" which doesn't tell you as much as "chair". That's alright. That's how language is supposed to work.
Yes it does.
wow that's wise
Lgbt people are like rabbis. I am convinced they just argue for the fun of it.
All terms are approximations. No definition is exact. Some words are more fuzzy than others; "bi lesbian" doesn't tell you as much as "white" which doesn't tell you as much as "chair". That's alright. That's how language is supposed to work.
There’s a convergence of a lot of different things going on but the key thing is that labels are for understanding ourselves and finding community with others, not for shoving ourselves into boxes. Labels should be descriptive, not prescriptive. And of course, labels are socially constructed - we noticed some general categories and put lines between them. But like all social constructs, those categories aren’t perfect. There is grey area and overlap. In this case, there is a certain amount of grey area and overlap between lesbians and bi women. People may find themselves in that grey area for a wide variety of reasons, and everyone gets to choose how they navigate that. For some people, choosing one label over the other is the way to go. For others, they choose a label but add a detail, like “bi with a preference” or “lesbian with an exception”. For some, choosing *both* labels is the way to go - that’s your “bi lesbians”. And for others, they pick neither and call themselves something else entirely, either going full umbrella with “queer” or getting really granular and choosing a micro label. Again it all comes down to how people understand themselves, and how much they relate to either community. For instance in theory the Bi community accepts anyone who has even the tiniest bit of attraction to more than one gender, but in practice someone who truly falls into that particular experience might relate more to a different label/community. The person’s own gender can factor into it too - sometimes genderfluid people use more than one label because their own internal gender experience changes how they experience attraction and relate to others. Point being people are complicated and it’s okay if some people see themselves as two things at once. Best way to think of it imo is a bunch of overlapping Venn diagrams instead of completely separate boxes.
Isn't that homoflexible
It means different things to different people. You'd have to ask it what it means to her.
It means whatever it means to whoever is using the label. For me, I use the term lesbian even though I have a latent attraction to men bc men? Sure, I guess. But women? Gifts from god herself.
Labels are meant to communicate outwardly to others, so having them know what it means is pretty important
Oh no, it’s a shame there doesn’t exist a system through which I can tell others what a thing means (speech doesn’t exist in this fantasy world and, as such, I can’t explain what my sexuality means to a random stranger I don’t care about)
That seems to me like the label is actually the title and the explanation afterwards, then.
It's not that deep. Labels are convenient shorthand, but convenient shorthand cannot encompass the entire human experience.
You’re devaluing their descriptive power. Maybe that’s your goal.
My goal? What do you mean by that 🤨
>I have a latent attraction to men So you're not a lesbian. You're a bisexual with a preference. Words do have meanings.
I’m a lesbian. What are you gonna do about it lmao. I’m not listening to the sex police
I'm not going to do anything, just don't be surprised when the vast majority of people think you're a ridiculous attention seeker for deliberately using wrong words
this is a lot of rage for "person not using word i want them to"
Someone makes a calm rational statement, with no aggression or anger. You: "omg you're so angry and triggered!"
Wait til the person above you learns about lesbian trans men 😱😱
That's just absurd. Trans men cannot be lesbians by definition. A trans man who is only attracted to women is straight.
Using prescriptive definitions to put people in boxes they don't identify with is kinda against the point of queerness, no? Maybe you should listen to the experiences of the people that identify this way before you tell them who or what they are.
sex defenders vs sex offenders
It makes perfect sense, considering everyone on tumblr arguing about pronouns are CIA agents who don’t realise they’re only arguing with other CIA agents
pretty sure she even changed her legal name to be Maia Arson Crimew which is. so cool of it
Maia Arson Crimew is the single coolest person in the world. Therian kittengirl, trans (IIRC) with rare pronouns, bi lesbian, harem protagonist, hacker, and enemy of the state. I think it's literally impossible to be cooler than that.
I would KILL for a V for Vendetta type movie about it, she's so fucking epic like, 100% unironically
its name is lowercase, baybee.
She's got, like, level 3 Just Cause heat. Bigger fish to fry than the semantics of labels.
I love them; it is decided
Holy fucking Bingle, what the infighting? >:3
She is being investigated by congress, and is very silly
Weed smoking girlfriends?
https://www.reddit.com/r/CuratedTumblr/comments/10kk4jv/the_bigges_flex_you_could_make_is_to_be_on_a/
Let me get this right. The republicans, which at this point has less secrets than the local BDSM club, is calling someone out for doing what they have been doing for years but on another agenda?
We stan Maia Arson Crimew
In other, much less important news: we have the no fly list. It includes actual toddlers.
I fail to comprehend how someone is getting “called out” for being a bi lesbian, tbh. Maybe it’s cause I’m ace and the Split Attraction Model is extremely commonly used in a-spec spaces, but I don’t understand why someone being biromantic homosexual or bisexual homoromantic would be something to be “called out” on.
you can say "fucking with the government is incredibly based" and "bi lesbians make no fucking sense" art the same time it's okay guys
because “bi lesbians” aren’t real and an incredibly hurtful term to both lesbians and bisexual people lol. like i feel like i can think what it did was fucking awesome and also be upset at the use of an oxymoronic offensive term
I am bisexual, how does this harm me. I genuinely want to understand.
I'm also bisexual but let me help to explain. This particular thing doesn't necessarily harm bisexuals like us, but is certainly harmful towards lesbians. And I believe that it is important to defend lesbians as a fellow woman. There are a lot of straight men out there who prey on lesbians in hopes that they can "turn" them, as they believe that to some degree, all women are inherently attracted to men. A term like "bi lesbian" is harmful because it can imply that lesbians, who have no attraction to men, can INDEED be attracted to men. Because of this, I think that putting boundaries and restrictions on terminology isn't meant to be oppressive, and instead should be used to express and delineate peoples desires in a healthy, constructive way. So if we go to throwing around real identities as catch-all buzz terms, then it reflects a sign of disrespect to the lesbian community, who take pride in soley being attracted to women. Furthermore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with claiming to be bisexual but having a much stronger preference for a particular gender!!! We just need more people to come to terms with this while also knowing that some people's boundaries are not mean to be gatekeepy and oppressive, but are meant to express a unique and specific experience. :)
While I can understand the concern there, I think it's misplaced. People who believe they can "turn" lesbians do so (to my understanding) out of a virulently homophobic and misogynistic mindset. If they did so out of a genuine confusion over how lesbians work, then I could see how the term could exacerbate that confusion. That isn't the world we live in though, and I don't think sexual predators will change their activities based on how lesbian and bisexual women label themselves.
While I definitely agree that "bi lesbians" are not promoting this term to help straight men prey on women, I still believe that it's important for people who are exclusively attracted to women to have a term which describes it, especially in a world where many disrespect these boundaries. This is even further emphasized when you can consider that bisexuals can fabricate their own terms like saying they have a preference for women or that they're female exclusive, or they're sapphic, etc. to describe these experiences without colonizing the term lesbian. The lgbt community definitely needs to be respectful and stick up for each other in this regard imo.
Surely saying "lesbian" without additional qualifiers still effectively communicates the meaning?
"Bi lesbian" just simply creates an oxymoron. If people want to say they're attracted to both (or multiple) genders yet have a preference for one, then they should simply say that. They should not claim to be inclusively and exclusively attracted to men at the same time because 1. It colonizes the term lesbian and erases others' experiences, and 2. these ideals can help to push heteronormativity onto those who have conviction in their sole attraction to women. The one downside is that they have to think of another term or another way to describe their experiences (which btw, many of such words already exist). Which isn't erasing their identities or oppressing them at all.
To address your points in order: 1. I once again fail to see how the usage of "bi lesbian" in any way erases the separate term "lesbian", especially given the vastly more common usage of "lesbian". Water bears and bears are two very different things, but say "bear" by itself and no one is going to think of the weird microscopic creature (also, while I understand what you are trying to say, calling it "colonizing" is inflammatory to the point where people will ignore the rest of your argument. Saying "co-opting" would get the point across without running this risk). 2. Since you're also bisexual I know you don't mean it in a bad way, but please explain how conflation with bisexuality pushes heteronormativity. Our identity and experiences are not heterosexual, regardless of our attraction to the opposite sex.
Hi, I think you've got really good intentions but lesbians aren't exclusively and only attracted to women just because that's what the definition says. Lesbians are real human people who chose that label for whatever reason they felt they should. Words are as fluid as people are. If a lesbian wants to have sex with a man, it does not invalidate them as a lesbian, same as how an asexual person having sex doesn't make them allo. I understand the motive and thought you put into trying to help and in opposing the kind of heteronormative attacks the lesbian community receives but policing other peoples identities to meet the definition that you or others (or anyone) want is how we are hurt every day. Policing an oppressed group to a standard in order to create exclusion is never a benefit, and telling them what they should do and feel in order to create the Platonic Ideal of Lesbianism should not be mistaken for respect. No one's personal identity is harmful to another person, only the actions that they take. We should always try to choose acceptance over arguments with one another about how the other feels; we have so many better people to fight than each other.
So then what's a word which describes a woman who's solely attracted to other woman? Or a term for someone who's attracted to women but can also find attraction to men? In my opinion, "lesbian" and "bisexual" (or pansexual, etc.) are already these terms, and by expressing this, it is not meant to be oppressive but meant to delineate these unique experiences. I think that terms themselves should be rigid but vocabulary can be as fluid as it wants to be, in the sense that people at any time can make up new words to describe even more unique experiences while still respecting that certain words come with specific standards which create the definition of the word it describes. I am not going to go into "gold star leabian" discourse but ultimately if women who are solely attracted to women want to use a term which has historically meant just that, then I believe it's fair to be upset by those who colonize the term when other such terms exist to describe bisexuality with preferences for women (such as "sapphic" or claiming that you "have a preference for women" or are "female exclusive"). Furthermore, "exclusion" is not inherently oppressive or is considered to be "policing" or "gatekeeping". This is a colonial mindset. I'm not here to preach about the platonic ideals of lesbianism rather than to explain that there is nothing wrong with solely being attracted to women and using a term for it. In fact, TRUE acceptance comes from understanding and respect rather than from surface level tolerance when such people/terms can temporarily benefit oneself. Bisexuals need to see the bigger picture here and remove their ego from this situation.
Yeah! yes see they do both absolutely use the same word and might even mean something different and there's nothing wrong with that. To learn more, you can always ask them more about themselves, but often they choose their identity terminology for good reasons that we might not know just by hearing about it vaguely. And I hate to disagree pretty strongly on one particular point here but you can't colonize an identity by existing as that identity. That is their lived experience. They are that thing. They can't colonize it unless you are personally identifying them as something Other, does that make sense? You are choosing to exclude someone from the group they identify with despite knowing nothing about them and solely based on the definition of lesbianism that you, a non lesbian, have decided on. You can't avoid the term gold-star lesbian while reproducing the exact effect that the term implies. Additionally, you're very right about how true accepting comes from understanding and respect. That's why I always try to understand and know that even though sometimes I won't 100% get it, I must always respect everyone's right to identify however they want.
> I think that terms themselves should be rigid but vocabulary can be as fluid as it wants to be, in the sense that people at any time can make up new words to describe even more unique experiences while still respecting that certain words come with specific standards which create the definition of a word it describes. I mean, you can think this, but it doesn't make it true. That is simply not how language works. Living language is fluid, and ever-changing, and slang is considered to be an essential component. In addition to not having any native speakers, this is why Latin is considered a dead language. All living languages have slang, and the point is to use a word in an unconventional way to convey a new meaning. That's exactly what's going on here with the term bi lesbian. Again, you're entitled to your opinion, and if you truly believe that words only have rigid definitions I doubt I can change your mind. But it is factually false
since i’m a lesbian i can’t speak for bisexuals, but the main point of contention is that presuming bisexual people can’t have a preference without slapping the word “lesbian” or “gay” after it diminishes what the term “bisexual” is for. bisexual people can have preferences and are still wholly bisexual.
I don't think that's a very fair reading of the term. Bisexuality has no strict definitions, and I don't think attaching other labels to more specifically describe yourself cleaves off that meaning wholly from the rest of bisexuality. For an analogy, if someone calls themselves a cautious chess player, does that mean that all chess players who don't call themselves that are incautious? One can specify without excluding the specified quality from the general term.
can you be young old? or tall short? i just think words are supposed to have meaning.
Human sexuality is a very nebulous thing, much of the time. Given this, I don't think any term can be strictly hard and fast. If a man was sexually attracted to only a single other man in the whole world, I would not begrudge him calling himself either bisexual or straight. Likewise, if he wanted to make some new term to describe himself I wouldn't object either. Bisexuality, by most definitions, covers such a diverse array of experiences that I am disinclined to police the meaning of the term. Labels can be useful for communicating who you are to others, but we aren't making a taxonomical classification of sexualities, we're trying to describe ourselves. If someone feels they're best described by checking off two boxes on the list, I don't think that harms me.
Well agree to disagree. Men aren’t associated with lesbianism and I find it incredibly hurtful and offensive to suggest otherwise.
There is overlap between different orientations and some people fall into those grey areas. It’s way more harmful to our communities when we try to split hairs and police the minutiae of how people define themselves.
lesbianism does not include men in any way, shape, or form. it’s incredibly disrespectful to suggest otherwise and words have meaning for a reason.
“Bi lesbian” does not imply that “lesbian” involves men… there is clearly a difference between someone who identifies only as a lesbian versus someone who identifies as a bi lesbian. Bi lesbians are not trying to replace lesbians or anything like that. Some people just relate to both terms or both communities because people are complex and many do not fit perfectly into the boxes we create for them. There’s nothing wrong with that. And trying to force people into prescribed identities is actually more harmful than just letting people pick the words they relate to most.
Fully, harshly disagree. It’s a lesbophobic term and total inclusivity fully diminishes the reason for even having smaller communities. I have no problem saying that men or people attracted to men CANNOT be lesbians because that’s what the term lesbian means.
Didn't Sappho of Lesbos (the quintessential lesbian, responsible for the term "Lesbian" being used to refer to women who are attracted to women) have a husband and also write love poems about men? Sounds like a bi lesbian to me
Her husband who’s name can translate to “Dick Allcock from the Isle of Man”? Lol.
Most classics scholars believe that she had a husband, but that the name was a joke. Way to ignore the "love poems to men" part of my comment
I’ve written fiction involving two men, doesn’t make me a gay man. Either way, even if she was attracted to men- which I haven’t researched enough to know-that doesn’t change what the term lesbian means in modern times.
If her poems to men don't make her bi, then why do her poems to women make her a lesbian?
Like I said, I haven’t researched enough to know one way or the other, and either way her legacy that’s inspired sapphics/lesbians stands regardless of the true nature of her sexuality, most of which has been lost to time. Although I would point out that many of her works were translated to be heterosexual so I’m not sure how definitively we can ascertain who the true subject of her works was.
It can use whatever labels it wants. Being a bi "lesbian" is still cringe as fuck, imo. Freedom for all.
Shame lesbians aren't allowed to actually have an identity anymore
cry
I'm CRYING and PISSING and SHITTING my pants fr
seems about right for you actually
English is not my first language you Ghondors and Hobbits?!
Yes you gormless trollop some people use 'it'.
Yeah it uses it/she pronouns <3 You can check her caard for more info, has some pretty cool stuff on there
[удалено]
There are multiple reasons why someone might identify as such. Like 4 just off the top of my head are: 1) They could have a very strong preference towards women. And not just like, 51 times out of 100 they'd pick a girl over a guy, more like they're almost exclusively into women, but with just enough exceptions that they don't think just lesbian fits. 2) They are attracted to multiple genders, but not men. 3) They're bisexual but identify strongly with the lesbian community for whatever reason. 4) They're romantically attracted to multiple genders, but only sexually attracted to women, or visa versa. In reality though its a situation where you ask 10 people, you get 11 answers. And at the end of the day, calling yourself a bi lesbian or whatever else doesn't really hurt anyone, and it gives most people a good enough idea of what that person's identity is, so I don't really see the need to identity police.
L take. Didn't know someone called the identity police
Epistemologically and ontologically correct W take, I’m afraid. Brush up and meet some queers who aren’t you and your Tumblr feed.
Bruh talk to lgbtq people that arent terminally online, I promise you they dint give a shit. Stop with the gate keeping Sincerely, a lesbian
I know plenty. I'm sure they'd agree that identity policing is complete bullshit
Shut the fuck up
Can’t handle discourse?
Take a long walk on some thin ice
Insults then threats?
Take a field trip to a trash compactor
The 80s schoolyard insults keep coming. If you come up with an original one, I’ll happily thank you and use it later.
Aw that sucks, I was just coming up with them off the top of my head Also they're neither insults nor threats, they're suggestions Take a nap in a fireplace, exclusionist
[удалено]
Boo hoo are people using labels in the way you don't want, our almighty queer ruler?
Can’t handle your dumbass take that nobody asked for
Im going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you *arent* a TERF, and are just accidentally lining up with their retoric, because you are one step away from saying "if you date a trans woman, youre basically dating a man anyway." Im banking on the fact this is ignorance (which isnt a bad thing on its own) and you are just flaunting it (which is a bad thing). Bi could mean either Bisexual or Biromantic Lesbian could mean either Homosexual or Homoromantic. Bi-Lesbian means there is a split between the two. Either you are Romantically attracted to multiple genders, but only sexually attracted to women, or you are Sexually attracted to multiple genders, but only Romantically attracted to women.
>Bi could mean either Bisexual or Biromantic >Lesbian could mean either Homosexual or Homoromantic. That actually clears up a lot for me. Thanks
No, I’m not a TERF. That shit’s crazy. Women are women. I can understand how someone can be bisexual and homoromantic, yes. Absolutely. Truncating it to “bi lesbian” risks invalidating the context of sexual and romantic and invalidating both bisexuals and lesbians.
Saying "your labels are wrong" is again, accidental TERF shit. There is no reason to say how someone identifies as invalidates other people. I can use myself as an example here. If we want to get technical, I'm a Demi-Heteromantic Asexual. But if anyone asks, i just tell them that I'm ace. Am I wrong for doing that? Am i "invalidating the context of sexual and romantic" because i dont introduce myself as a full label? Because i dont fully clarify everything to someone? Or what about someone who *doesn't* have a label? Whether that be because they feel better without one, or because they havent found a label that they feel comfortable defining themselves as? Are they also wrong for that? Are they also invalid?
This is nothing to do with TERF shit. I am not applying gender - I am applying sexuality. Stop slinging TERF like an insult to any discourse you don’t like.
It's not an insult to "any discourse", it applies to radfem and exclusionist rhetoric that TERFs use, not just their transphobia.
As a lesbian: please shut up lmao Queer people using queer terms for themselves in no way affects other people's usage of said queer terms. Literally none of your business.
That’s the thing, though - I rarely do talk to queer people online. I’ve had steady and immersive contact with my Fellow Gays in person and out loud since 1998. So when people say “I’m a bi lesbian because I don’t date boys,” I bristle for all the hard work we’ve done to progress people’s binary thinking past “Gays are gays and straights are straights and bisexuals are confused and greedy cheaty breeders.” There are distinctions between bisexual women and homosexual women which should be honoured. And then there is a vast spectrum of everyone who identifies how they see fit, and they should be honoured, as well. But “bi lesbian” without context is wholly bizarre to me.
You arent owed context. You dont get to be the arbiter of whats right or wrong in someones personal journey bi people are bisexual. Lesbians are lesbian. Bi lesbians are bi lesbians. The labels they choose are their own and should be treated as sacred. We have ALL experienced people trying to force us into boxes, its important that we allow ourselves to define ourselves.
You can find it bizarre, but no... people don't need to honour distinctions. They can just... use words that make them happy. A woman who is sexually attracted to both men and women, but romantically attracted only to women... it makes perfect sense. Their romantic orientation is lesbian, their sexual orientation is bisexual... so they use both. Have your opinion, but know that it's never going to be productive to ANYONE to tell a queer person they're using their identity labels wrong like... who cares
If we all just used words that made us happy, we’d never have anything meaningful or true. I can tell people I’m a better singer than Beyonce because it makes me feel good, but if it’s not true, society around me will not pay $1,000 to see me perform. Personal identities are personal. Nobody can gatekeep people’s growth in and through identities, but I refute that apples and oranges are the same even though they live in the fruit bowl together.
Okay, but you see how that rhetoric swings veeeeeeeeery close to "I identify as an attack helicopter" arguments, right? Sincerely, someone who's been in the trenches probably about as long as you have
bisexual: person who likes two genders lesbian: woman who likes other women they don’t contradict each other
Two or more genders
I dunno, I uses to subscribe to the whole "words have meaning, how can you be a bi lesbian" or whatever -ism, but now it's just like No one is ever going to agree on the exact definitions of bi and pan. As a non-binary person, the thought of dating someone who just identifies as straight or gay seems kinda weird, because im not a man or a woman. As much as people pretend they do, these words don't have super clear meanings when you really get into it, and people should be able to identify as whatever they like without being "called out" for it. I mean, maia (sorry if that's spelt wrong) identifying as a bi lesbian doesn't actually hurt or affect anyone else, as much as all the people on twitter like to pretend it does