Weird Question But Since You're Bi And Not Dating Men, Do You Still Allow Yourself To Fancy Them?

I think that it's because asexuality is to sexuality as gender identity is to sex.

There's no consensus on what asexuality even is.

If it's a sexuality, then it would be the simple state of not being attracted to either sex, the direct opposite to bisexuality, and then it's fair to discuss oppression, invisibility etc.

If it's a spectrum of whether someone is sex repulsed to someone who only enjoys sex after having a deep connection with someone else, then the real issues here are misogyny and pornification, since women tend to be the ones that claim some form of asexuality over men, and the idea of "I'm asexual because I need to form a connection to someone else emotionally before desiring sex and can't just fuck a stranger at a club like everyone else" is the definition of a pornified society. That also means that it's not a sexuality and it's wrong to conflate it with sexuality.

I personally can't see how asexuality can be both, but hearing "asexuality and aspec identities" does sound just like a sexuality version of people calling themselves "nonbinary."

I really dislike radfems hating on asexuals. Not desiring sex is deviant from what is expected of society, whether among the right or the left (yes, even among radfems and it's quite obvious). There's a level of sex negativity that is encouraged in these spaces (don't have sex with men), but people taking it further upsets you (because you're a woman with the same desire for sex as the men you dislike). I will always support asexuality and acespec identities. If you want sex positivity in any form and don't want those "annoying asexuals" to bother you, just go outside. Stop acting like your stance on sex is not a mainstream opinion

This is exactly what I mean.

There isn't an either/or choice that has to be made here. It is entirely possible to criticise that socialisation, explain the risks and strongly encourage women not to partner with men, as well as be there for them if they make that choice anyway, because we're supposed to be feminists and support all women, even if the choices that they make are anti-feminist.

Pretending that me basically saying "let's actually be feminists and remember just how strong a drug female socialisation is, so maybe don't be misogynistic and victim-blame women that get abused" is the same as "never speak against that harmful socialisation" is just ridiculous.

It's reasonable to feel frustrated sometimes when it comes to women still partnering with men, but the rush there is to attack them and blame them for patriarchy grinding them down enough to partner with men despite knowing feminist theory personally sickens me.

And I don't want to hear any version of "but you shouldn't be criticising women when men do..." because if feminists don't keep our house in order and can't even show the basics of compassion over that, the cornerstone of what patriarchy wants, then we may as well roll over and show men the white flag. There's no hope for women if feminists can't even be kind and offer grace to other women.

I love how the concept of female socialisation and patriarchy completely disappears out of the window for some feminists as soon as straight (and some bisexual) women cave into getting into relationships with men.

Like Velvet...

Bristol, Vermont

Ironically, I think that it's the modern evolution of political lesbianism, just without the (historically accidental, because back then it was encouraged by some actual lesbians too) lesbophobia.

There has been the idea from at least 1970 that to be a lesbian is to be an inherently better feminist, because lesbians are supposedly magically better at seeing through patriarchy, they're so pro-woman that they even centre other women romantically, and they reject male supremacy so much that they would never be attracted to a man. It's a strange fetishisation of what is (or at least should be) a neutral sexuality that a woman happens to be born with.

It makes lesbians the top-tier of feminists that all other women should emulate and aspire to be, but also be separated from. It then allows the smaller number of misogynistic lesbians that claim to be "feminists" to feel entitled attack bisexual and straight women under the guise of "feminism," and then when called out for that misogyny and biphobia, claim that they're doing nothing but speaking out about their oppressors, and accusing others of lesbophobia for demanding that lesbians centre their oppressors after that criticism.

In reality, no lesbian ever has to centre straight women. It's understandable if they don't. The problem is that the smaller number of lesbian "feminists" who behave like that like the idea that they are the peak feminists that can speak for everyone, and they enjoy wielding power over women that they like to deem as lesser. If they didn't, if they genuinely wanted to stay focused only on lesbian issues and lesbian support networks and other lesbians (which is entirely reasonable!) then they wouldn't cling to call themselves "feminists" while spouting misogyny and trying to make certain types of misogyny "acceptable" in feminism.

The fact is, to be feminist is to support all women. The vast majority of women are straight. The vast majority of those women have been socialised to get married and have children or be seen as a failure, where it's drummed into their heads so much that they fear dying alone and unloved and unwanted. That's even before the anon's facts that love can happen whenever and wherever, and it is hard to stop it from happening.

That doesn't mean that straight women need to be front and centre of everything, fuck us bisexual women and fuck lesbian women too, but it does mean that their struggles are equally important because freedom for all women is important, and to ignore them or dismiss them is inherently anti-feminist.

I really appreciate your response to the post victim blaming straight women. I was astonished when wanting a life partner was compared to "hitting a hornet's nest". That's like. Not remotely the same thing. Or calling a desire for a partner simple "socialization". No. It's an *instinct* that most people have. And romantic love can be an absolutely incredible and lovely experience. Some of the most beautiful experiences of my life involved romance. Saying that forgoing it is a simple and easy thing and you're just stupid if you don't is massively simplistic. I especially hate this when it comes from lesbians. You're asking straight women to give up something amazing that you aren't at all expected to give up. It is indeed true that most men are terrible and getting into a relationship with them is a big risk, because repeatedly men have shown that they have the ability to be deceptive about the truth of who they are until marriage and/or children have tied their female partner to them. But that doesn't somehow make straight women simply stupid or pathetic for getting into relationships with men. It makes them human beings with human desires. I'm lucky enough to be bisexual, so I'm not inherently going to be deprived of romantic love if I want to keep myself safe from men. But I have fallen in love with men before. Not because I went on dating sites looking for them--I actually select only looking for women on them--but because I've met men at work and school, and fallen for them. Resisting the urge to act upon those desires is massively difficult if not impossible. It's not going out of your way to kick a hornet's nest. It's trying to ignore the call of something primal and potentially beautiful. Sneering at straight women is unempathetic and disgusting, and I would expect better from women who purport to be feminists.

It's because those "feminists" are just lesbians with a superiority complex.

I am also fortunately bisexual, honestly I'm finding that the only people I can trust to be Normal about women is bisexual women.

What makes it even funnier is if you DON'T think straight women are helpless dumb dick addicts swatting at a hornet's nest, you MUST support dating men. Like. No I have a whole ass tag of reasons to never date men, because based on the data it is my belief that it is not beneficial to women. But I do not view women as inherently lesser for giving in to biology.

Prunus persica

Can reddit user "lesbianwithabeard" leave bisexuals out of their homophobic fetish?

Those fucks were the ones that pushed back any idea of bisexual confidence by screeching that bisexuality as a sexuality was automatically transphobic. They always latch on to actually oppressed groups to try and force others to feel sorry for them - and then immediately attack them afterwards for not grovelling enough at their feet.

No one owes anyone else dates or sex at any point ever. To claim otherwise is to be pro-rape. That's it.

Lesbians are more trans accepting than gay males yet I don't see tifs complain about "transphobic preferences" as much as tims do. I suspect it's because lesbians are more pressurized to be accepting than gay males are, and you know why.

As an indigenous person, every time a white trans person talks about their “genocide” I’m gonna just start posting facts about an actual genocide that happened in America.

My familiar 🖤

This is exactly why TRAs are always homophobic and biphobic.

A lesbian, trying to be as kind as possible, has twisted herself into knots to convince herself that she's bisexual because she believes in the gender cult.

Their ideology harms every LGB person, because it says that no real sexualities exist. There are only labels that affirm TIMs and TIFs while lesbians, bisexuals and gay men are supposed to hate ourselves some more and get back into closets and question ourselves even more painfully. We're nothing but objects to be used and abused by them.

"I wish I wasn't that way" honey you're a lesbian and you have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of. You're surrounded by conversion therapy rhetoric and it's wrong. You aren't having a "genital preference" - you like women. The entire female form. You're a female homosexual. It's okay to be a lesbian.

There is nothing wrong with you. You shouldn't have to hide in order to pacify a mans ego.

Pedro pascal calling JK Rowling a loser fucking pissed me off so bad and people were praising him (majority women!!!!!). I hate that dude so bad, he's only at this level of fame because he's a man.

I AGREE ‼️‼️🔥🔥🗣🗣🗣

Men have to do the barest minimum of "oho yes people I ALSO think bad thing of the month is bad ☝️" and men as a whole will get the benefit of women screaming and crying and saying he's just so smol and squishable and matureeee (read: father figure).

Honestly whenever a man leans into his public image of being... all of that, I get suspicious 😒 genuinely never failed me yet.