"Vanilla Wife Syndrome"

[Safe_Bet]

I agree with the people who say that bisexual folk have to justify themselves to the heteros AND the gay/lesbians.

And its very true for many bisexuals that they come into the realisation in middle age-- well after they've made their commitments to an opposite sex partner.

We do not always feel that our new self-knowledge is more important than the promises we've made to another person, to the plans and life we;ve built.

There is a huge difference between "men who love cock but don't like men" and "folk who have realised that they might, in fact, love another person of their own sex despite their hetero marriage."

I can dig that, Stella.

I don't know as if I believe that Bi's have it harder than anyone, else but I do thing that their experiences are different.

My biggest points of contention are when somebody tells me that EVERYBODY is Bi. That ain't the case. I can well believe that a truly bi person's sexuality can move up and down the scale over the course of their lives, but that doesn't mean ALL of us feel the same way. But, hey, maybe I'll feel differently someday, but for now (and my entirely life to this point) the concept of every letting a guy touch me is abhorrent.

The other thing I have issues with is the "stealth" Bisexuals. I can dig it if a chick wants to kiss me, kiss some guy (or even kiss me AND some guy). What I can't grok is when I am used by some "stealth bi chick" who is just horny and is "settling" for me because her preferred "dick" is either not available or has grown to fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald/etc. I would imagine that there are gay guys who feel the same way I do about the "I like your cock, but I don't like you" fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald guys whose wives have cut off and are trying to get their kinky little rocks off.

To ME (Just MY opinion, mind you) the "men who love cock but don't like men" and the "women who love pussy, but don't like women" stealth bisexuals are just indulging in their preferred fetish. (and quite frankly piss me off, because I'm nobody's fetish toy)

 

[Safe_Bet]

Safe_Bet

Everyone can see that you're so pissed off you've lost the plot. It's your outrage and your intolerance that stand out, not your actual points of concern, which if they had been expressed rationally are perfectly valid observations worthy of consideration.

What is there to be angry about?

Your intolerance of bisexuality is juvenile and self-righteous. I stand by those statements and have attempted to make an argument for the inclusion of all levels of queerness, from the most timid to the most proud into our GLBT community. Without discrimination.

Of course, you are totally free to disagree with the argument for GLBT inclusiveness. But if you do so, understand that you align yourself with same spirit that animates reactionary social conservatism and sexual intolerance where ever it exists in the world.

Let me see if I understand safe_bet's core argument:

You claim that you "understand TRUE bisexual." They're the ones who can love either gender. But then there is the rest of the bisexual community who live as "cowards" in "movable closets." These bisexuals are "cheating scumbags" and treat others as "cum receptacles."

Well, that's a very scholarly and sensitive approach to bisexuality and I totally respect your right to express your opinion forcefully. I would have described the extremely complex socio-political and psychological interface between gay and straight cultures a bit differently, but whatever.

In fact, just as you could have made a case that the VWS post belonged on another board, but utterly failed to do so by revealing how bisexuality threatens you - for reasons unknown - thus elevating this post to a highly topical debate to the GBLT community, you have now failed to make what also could have been a perfectly reasonable case for an ethics of transparency in presenting your sexual identity.

If you deplore the fact that men as they are exploring their bisexual or gay nature often can not be honest with either their lovers or even themselves sometimes about their sexual identity, then you have a perfectly valid point.

It is good advice to all bisexual men to as quickly as possible resolve their sexuality and be honest with all their lovers, male and female. Obviously, it is morally reprehensible to cheat on your lovers or to hide your true sexuality from them.

That said, queerness is a vast city with a thousand different approaches and many of them wander circuitously in the sexual wilderness many a mile before (if ever) arriving at the destination.

I would simply council a bit more tolerance, kindness and patience on the part of Safe_bet for those who timidly attempt to work out their identity on the fringes of our community.

I'd be pleased to continue this debate with Safe_bet. The fact is that our ethical positions aren't really that far apart. Honesty and transparency in sexual identity politics is highly desirable. So is empathy, tolerance and a kind heart.

Uh yeah, whatever, dude.

Can I take this LONG diatribe to mean that you've got nothing????

(P.S. If you are trying to prove that you are a better arguer than I am or are more 'verbose", you win, K? You ramble on like a freakin lawyer or a politician, so I have no desire to go further on the subject with you.)

 

[Stella_Omega]

I can dig that, Stella.

I don't know as if I believe that Bi's have it harder than anyone, else but I do thing that their experiences are different.

My biggest points of contention are when somebody tells me that EVERYBODY is Bi. That ain't the case. I can well believe that a truly bi person's sexuality can move up and down the scale over the course of their lives, but that doesn't mean ALL of us feel the same way. But, hey, maybe I'll feel differently someday, but for now (and my entirely life to this point) the concept of every letting a guy touch me is abhorrent.

I agree. But then-- when someone tells me EVERYONE is whatever, or EVERY WOMAN is whatever-- or indulges in sweeping generalization of any sort-- I tend to get geeky and start demanding an explanation.

The other thing I have issues with is the "stealth" Bisexuals. I can dig it if a chick wants to kiss me, kiss some guy (or even kiss me AND some guy). What I can't grok is when I am used by some "stealth bi chick" who is just horny and is "settling" for me because her preferred "dick" is either not available or has grown to fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald/etc. I would imagine that there are gay guys who feel the same way I do about the "I like your cock, but I don't like you" fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald guys whose wives have cut off and are trying to get their kinky little rocks off.

To ME (Just MY opinion, mind you) the "men who love cock but don't like men" and the "women who love pussy, but don't like women" stealth bisexuals are just indulging in their preferred fetish. (and quite frankly piss me off, because I'm nobody's fetish toy)

Quite so.

And you know, I am married to a man-- my primary partner. It's a basic tenet of poly ettiquete that you tell anyone you might hook up with, and even more important amongst women, IMO-- because we form attachments and we take them seriously. And I could really hurt someone who expected me to be a lesbian. I'm not-- I'm queer. I had to make a decision.

 

[janeyruth]

Is "vanilla" always a bad thing to you people? If you referred to someone's wife as vanilla, would it be meant as an insult?

Note: I mean "you people" in its worst connotation...

 

[Safe_Bet]

Is "vanilla" always a bad thing to you people? If you referred to someone's wife as vanilla, would it be meant as an insult?

Note: I mean "you people" in its worst connotation...

 

[lustatopia]

Just to make an abstract argument very personal, let me use the example of my own life. I’m an openly bisexual married man, age 50-something.

I always knew I was bisexual, even before I knew about sex at all.

But by the time I actually had a homosexual relationship it was completely out of the question to reveal it to anyone. I’m talking about high school reality in the 1970’s. I wasn’t a "lying scumbag", just a young guy extremely aware that to public admit you like sex with guys was to commit social suicide. Besides, I liked sex with girls too.

I dated girls and formed very good sexual and loving relations with several girls. As a popular, good-looking kid, good at sports and school I was a typical straight guy. Just that a few tight friends and I had found that we could get high and suck/jack each other off, you know, just because we didn’t score with the chicks.(wink, wink) We certainly did not identity as homosexuals. No way. Even though we perfectly understood that sucking cock was queer. Of course this is a huge cognitive dissonance, but it occurs millions of times every day across America as young men explore their sexuality.

We should admit that what I have described is an almost universal condition for young men exploring queer sex. And almost 40% of men will have some kind of homosexual encounter under similar situations. You may deplore the oppressive social conditions which make it so much "safer" for some men to hide in the closet, but it's less than charitable to condemn those that do without seeking to understand the circumstances.

Studying the arts at university I found a much more conducive environment for sexual freedom and came out to my fellow art students about my bisexuality... Being openly bisexual in 1980 at an art school was totally cool. Nevertheless, there were still identity tension issues for bisexuals that didn’t plague gay or straight identities.

As Stella-Omega said “bisexual folk have to justify themselves to the heteros AND the gay/lesbians.” I found that I often fell in between two monolithic social orthodoxies and so was perpetually the outsider (which wasn't a a problem for an art student, really.)

The general consensus among my gay friends (in 1980) was that bisexuality was a way station on the road to full admission into the gay community. You know, just like smoking dope leads to heroin addiction. Of course, to truly straight guys there is no distinction between bisexuality and homosexuality, it's simply degrees of queerdom.

I agree with the straight community - Bisexual is queerness. But not with the gay 1980 consensus that bisexuality usually leads to monosexual gay lifestyle. That’s nonsense and it's no longer the position of the gay community today.

I had further sexual tensions with gay men that I had sexual relationships with. They tended to want to have a loving boyfriend relationship with me, you know, walking hand and hand in the park, send each other flowers, get an apartment together and be a gay couple.

Of course as a bisexual guy I was into the chicks too. They were arty punk chicks, often bisexual themselves, but I only ever wanted to form “loving couple” relationships with members of the opposite sex. This is what Safe_bet decries as "guys that like cock, but hate men" and use others as "cum receptacles." But is it really a "fetish" to live with a woman but also desire to share your sex life with men?

It seems the real threat that bisexuals present to some people is the fact that bisexuality is explicitly non-monogamous. After all, true bisexual sex can only occur in a threeway. MMF or FFM. Many bisexuals never want to have a sexually exclusive relationship with one person. For instance, my wife and I share our sex life with a small group of friends, both male and female.

The solutions to the dilemmas presented by bisexuality are as numerous as the number of bisexuals and I would never presume that my way is the right way or the only way to do anything.

Demeaning characterizations of bisexuality makes it impossible to understand anything beyond the stereotypes you have created.

We should all well remember that there are bigoted reactionary elements in our society which would use exactly the same sort of defamatory language to condemn ALL our lifestyles.

 

[TallOne]

The other thing I have issues with is the "stealth" Bisexuals. I can dig it if a chick wants to kiss me, kiss some guy (or even kiss me AND some guy). What I can't grok is when I am used by some "stealth bi chick" who is just horny and is "settling" for me because her preferred "dick" is either not available or has grown to fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald/etc. I would imagine that there are gay guys who feel the same way I do about the "I like your cock, but I don't like you" fat/stupid/smelly/wrinkled/bald guys whose wives have cut off and are trying to get their kinky little rocks off.

To ME (Just MY opinion, mind you) the "men who love cock but don't like men" and the "women who love pussy, but don't like women" stealth bisexuals are just indulging in their preferred fetish. (and quite frankly piss me off, because I'm nobody's fetish toy)

Sounds like you just have a problem with one night stands regardless of the sexuality involved. That's what those are, using another person for a one time or short term physical fling without really caring about the core person.

 

[lustatopia]

In 1983 I was in a sexual relationship with a young married couple I’ll call Kev and Jane. Jane was an artist and Kev an asshole.

It all started when Kev hit me up one afternoon in an empty art studio on campus and we made out, then he gave me head. I had no idea Kev was bisexual, since he was married; I just assumed he was straight. While he was sucking me off I whispered to him all the dirty things I’d like to do to his young wife Jane, who was a pretty hot little redhead.

A week later, Kev and Jane had me over for dinner. It was a night of total seduction but very playful. They didn’t lead me by the hand into their bedroom til well after midnight. It was the beginning of a special kind of sexual friendship that lasted for a couple of years until they moved to LA. I was their bisexual boytoy. Not only was I brutally used as a “cum receptacle” but my cock was objectified almost like a “fetish.”

My relationship with Kev and Jane was“stealthy,” we never announce it publicly or went to parties and made out together in public.

At the same time I was seeing Kev and Jane I had this strange ongoing friendship with a “straight” art student name Tony. Tony was a mad painter who lived in rat-infested warehouse surrounded by his canvases, paints, beer bottles, girlie mags and rubbish, but he was a genius and he had a great body and a huge cock. He was using me as his “cum receptacle” while maintaining his straightness. What a “scumbag.” He never reciprocated oral or any other kind of sex with me. We related entirely as two straight guys - weird bohemians - but straight. You know, unless I was on my knees teasing his erection towards ejaculation.

I was also seeing a couple of other guys. Jack was cool. He was bisexual and had a girlfriend interstate, who he was dying to tell he was bi, but couldn’t bring himself to do it. Jack was no problem sexually, a nice suck and fuck and he’d go home.

But then there was Ted. It was a mistake to have sex with sweet Ted. I knew he had a crush on me. But I was a horny “scumbag” looking for someone to “use as a cum receptacle” so one night it happened. I lived to regret that night. Ted wanted to be my boyfriend. He just hung out all the time, even stealthy deleted messages from answering machine, anything so it would be just Ted and me.

But I’m one of those bisexuals who “love cock, but hate men” so I had to pull the plug on Ted. He made a huge stink about it. But later we remained close friends for a decade. Ted died of AIDS in 1992. I miss Ted. A lot.

Anyway, Jane and Kev saw that my sex life was drifting so they took me to a really punk/alt culture party one night and Jane acted as my match maker setting me up with this really cute young punk girl covered in pins, piercing and way too much face paint. We hit it off big time and she moved in with me. We had a foursome with Kevin and Jane. Threeways with Jack and I took her over to pose for a nude portrait with Tony the “straight” artist. He let me serve as the oral sex slave (cum receptacle) as he coupled with my girlfriend. The punk girl and I didn’t last more than six months before she dumped me for some guy who had a job. I was heartbroken for a couple of days.

Then I met Kelly, she was a stunning married woman twice my age, an art collector interested not only in my art but my cock. She and her wealthy husband were swingers. He was 50 years old, like a grandpa, totally “straight” but loved to watch studs fuck his wife. At age 22 I became their “boytoy” in tow as they did their swapping and partying around town…

And so life went on and on....

Just thought I’d drop this in here to illustrate that the bisexual lifestyle is far more nuanced then the stereotypes that are often presented.

 

[Safe_Bet]

...After all, true bisexual sex can only occur in a threeway. MMF or FFM. ...

Uh, no. Bisexuality is the ability to love either a man OR a woman, regardless of their gender. It is quite possible for a Bi person to have a boyfriend one month and then find a woman that attracts them even more and have a girlfriend the next month.

There is NOTHING is there about multiple partners at the same time. Polyamory is multiple sex partners. It is quite possible to be polyamorous and be gay, bi or straight, so it has no relationship to a persons orientation.

The fact that you seem to have your terms confused leads me to believe that you might be making your orientation up and are in fact a troll.

In 1983 I was in a sexual relationship with a young married couple I’ll call Kev and Jane blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

Jesus, dude! You REALLY like the sound of your own voice, don'tcha?

 

[Pirate_Guy]

Enough is Enough...

I just spent 20 minutes digesting what's been said here in my absence (yikes!) and writing a lengthy post explaining that I merely wanted to generate some honest discussion about ONE of the reasons men and women explore their bisexual urges (or genetic predisposition or whatever), but I apparently pushed the wrong button and sent my brilliant missive to god-knows-where in cyberspace. Oops.

Perhaps that glitch was for the best, because upon further consideration I now realize that rational response is futile. Trust me, I'm perfectly capable of defending my beliefs and happy to do so whenever there's a good reason. This ain't one of those times.

Sadly, I am reminded that Lit is just like every other online forum -- clearly dedicated to free speech but often "patrolled" by a small number of people who don't understand the concept. Like dogs, they self-importantly stake out their territory by pissing around the perimeter and growling at any other cur who dares to set a paw upon their turf.

A wise man once told me that the only thing that happens when you get into a pissing match is that you both end up smelling like piss. I, for one, don't much enjoy that smell and take pains to avoid it.

So, with that, I bid you farewell...

 

[Helen_CD_UK]

...Jesus, dude! You REALLY like the sound of your own voice, don'tcha?

Ever heard the phrase "pot calling the kettle black"?

And as for accusing others of trollism, may I refer you to my sentence above.

This looked like it could become an interesting topic until you and your usual barrage of ill-thought-out, potty-mouthed, judgemental, hate-filled, militant trash came along and infected yet another thread.

Sadly, I am reminded that Lit is just like every other online forum -- clearly dedicated to free speech but often "patrolled" by a small number of people who don't understand the concept. Like dogs, they self-importantly stake out their territory by pissing around the perimeter and growling at any other cur who dares to set a paw upon their turf.

( ^ I must admit, I do like this metaphor. )

Pirate_Guy, you have my sympathy. I too fail to see why you should have to waste precious time and energy defending everything you say against this type of vicious, pointless, vitriolic attack. I just hope this one "undesirable" hasn't driven you away from Lit altogether, the vast majority here are happy, friendly people who are capable of making a positive contribution to a discussion and having a little fun along the way.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I have remarks and answers to Lustatopia's posts but no time to write them out right now.

I want to say just quick, that I really appreciate all the things he's said, his honesty, and willingness to speak up. it's difficult to marshall one's thoughts on this forum and people often mistake brevity for wit-- not always true.

Not only does he "like the sound of his voice" but other people do too. Put him on iggy, S_B, if he bothers you that much.

And Pirate guy, just-- yanno, keep on keeping on.

 

[Safe_Bet]

I have remarks and answers to Lustatopia's posts but no time to write them out right now.

I want to say just quick, that I really appreciate all the things he's said, his honesty, and willingness to speak up. it's difficult to marshall one's thoughts on this forum and people often mistake brevity for wit-- not always true.

Not only does he "like the sound of his voice" but other people do too. Put him on iggy, S_B, if he bothers you that much.

And Pirate guy, just-- yanno, keep on keeping on.

Nope. Not gonna be told to STFU in our own forum, nor am I going to let somebody take shots at me without responding. EVERYONE can get their say if they want it, but what they DON'T get is a free pass to make "absolute" all encompassing statements without being called on it (at least by me).

It that means that I get attacked by uber defensive and self righteous bis and by the CDs who are pissy about having their shit moved then so be it.

The bottom line is that if I AM going to comment when I see a thread that reeks of misogyny and/or is inappropriate for THIS forum, I AM going to call bullshit on people who state their opinions as if they are god given facts and I AM NOT going to let somebody go all snarky and condescending about me and mine.

This is the LGBT related forum on Lit. I don't give a fuck if every pompous bi asshole or panty wearing cum eating dude on this site dislikes me, they STILL don't get to tell me to shut the fuck up or to make their little snarky comments without challenge.

Can you dig that?

 

[HerLittlePiggy]

Uh, no. Bisexuality is the ability to love either a man OR a woman, regardless of their gender. It is quite possible for a Bi person to have a boyfriend one month and then find a woman that attracts them even more and have a girlfriend the next month.

There is NOTHING is there about multiple partners at the same time. Polyamory is multiple sex partners. It is quite possible to be polyamorous and be gay, bi or straight, so it has no relationship to a persons orientation.

Is this the only acceptable definition of bisexuality or is it your definition and we, as mere bisexuals, are forced to adhere to your definition and your alone?

I ask because I am quite certain that I could never date nor fall in romantic love with another man, but sexually I can be attracted to both sexes. So by your definition I am not in fact bisexual but merely hetroflexible. I don't particularly care for labels to begin with but I was hoping to find a place where my open mindedness would not be condemned but rather it would be embraced. I was hoping to find a place where I could discuss and explore my sexuality and get answers to questions I have from open minded people who understand what I am going through. For a long time I felt that this was such a place and I have enjoyed it here.

Sadly, now I find that my sexuality is merely a fetish to some, who obviously hold their labels in much higher regard than I do, and I have been bannished from the once comfortable setting of GLBT to the fetish world if I am to discuss my questions on sexuality unless they involve love and long term samesex relationships

The fact that you seem to have your terms confused leads me to believe that you might be making your orientation up and are in fact a troll.

So those who do not agree with your narrow definition of bisexuality are trolls?

Jesus, dude! You REALLY like the sound of your own voice, don'tcha?

Why do you feel the need to make personal attacks and more importantly, why do the mods allow such personal attacks?

 

[girlsmiley]

I'm curious about how many guys who visit the GLBT forum are victims of what I have officially named "Vanilla Wife Syndrome"?

VWS seems to most commonly afflict mature men whose libidos have stayed the same (or grown) while their wife's has dwindled. Specifically, the typical VWS sufferer is a 40- or 50-something guy whose fantasies and sex drive are stronger than ever but who believes that his spouse is barely interested in anything beyond obligatory, once-a-month, "just stick it in, get it over with and let me watch Leno" intercourse in the good-old missionary position.

Oral? No way. Sexy lingerie? Forget it. Tie each other up? Get out of here you pervert! Whatever floats your love boat, she won't do it. Or at least you think she won't do it.

It seems like I've seen hundreds of references by guys who characterize their wives as "vanilla" because they're seemingly sexually disinterested. A few secretly turn to bisexuality or at least bicuriousity to fill the gap between an unsatisfying reality and very vivid fantasy. I know I did at one point in my life.

Uhm, are you really surprised that your wife doesn't want to give you oral after describing her like that? What woman would? You come across like a really shitty, loveless, disrespectful husband. Grow some balls and talk to your wife about it. And please don't act surprised that lesbian women have an opinion about you on an open forum. You don't seem to know women at all LOL!

You could have been a gentleman knowing that there are women present (durr) and said, "My marriage is failing and I've gone off pussy and now I like cock." Not, "oh my wife won't do it. Oral NO WAY. Missionary position. Stick it in.

What's wrong with you?

And what got me is the "At least you THINK she won't do it" OMG dude?!

You're offensive and frankly, I would never, EVER make statements like that about my partner. Shame.

 

[Mr. Briggs]

Wow this shit took a nasty turn. Nice try pirate guy too bad it got crazy

 

[tonethebone]

I consider my wife "vanilla". Not because she's lost interest. She wants it as much as I do. But because she's not into anything kinky like I am.

And as far as I'm concerned. I could care less if I'm called "hetroflexable" LOL

I know what I like. And it's just the dick, and nothing but the dick. So help me GOD

 

[lustatopia]

Nope. Not gonna be told to STFU in our own forum, nor am I going to let somebody take shots at me without responding. EVERYONE can get their say if they want it, but what they DON'T get is a free pass to make "absolute" all encompassing statements without being called on it (at least by me).

It that means that I get attacked by uber defensive and self righteous bis and by the CDs who are pissy about having their shit moved then so be it.

The bottom line is that if I AM going to comment when I see a thread that reeks of misogyny and/or is inappropriate for THIS forum, I AM going to call bullshit on people who state their opinions as if they are god given facts and I AM NOT going to let somebody go all snarky and condescending about me and mine.

This is the LGBT related forum on Lit. I don't give a fuck if every pompous bi asshole or panty wearing cum eating dude on this site dislikes me, they STILL don't get to tell me to shut the fuck up or to make their little snarky comments without challenge.

Can you dig that?

No one has asked you to STFU, Safe-bet. Please explain more!

I don't dislike you, because I don't know you. Perhaps we just got off on the wrong foot ;-)

I do believe that your comments here are irrational and exhibit a kind of intolerance and self-righteous outrage usually associated with conservative reactionary elements within our society. Ironically, you claim to be a full fledged member of the LGBT community. The great paradox for me is that you would seek to impose your own brand of orthodoxy upon the community in an attempt to exclude those you fail to understand. I find that a fascinating dissonance, because the GLBT community is based upon tolerance and inclusion, yet herewithin we have identified an extremely angry person using precisely the same kind of rhetoric one might expect from a reactionary social conservative. Why?

Far from wishing you to STFU, I would beseech you to more clearly and at length articulate your position for the community to analyze. Moreover, I am not seeking to censor you or exclude you from the GLBT community but to embrace and understand your position, which to date you have not communicated effectively, imo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx0Shn5Hvpc

 

[Stella_Omega]

Um.

The woman posting as Safe_Bet is, without a doubt a member of the GLBT community, as lesbian as it's possible to get. This is something many of us know, and you, lustatopia, are now discovering. Don't condescend unless you know you can get away with it.

Sure, she's acidic and abrasive. She gets to be. She's earned a lot of honor and respect. Her anger is not irrational. Her reactions are based on a long lifetime of living in a homophobic, anti-feminist world.

She's paid dues, dude, that you haven't ever been asked to consider. You wouldn't last a mile in her shoes, I can guarantee you that.

 

[lustatopia]

Um.

The woman posting as Safe_Bet is, without a doubt a member of the GLBT community, as lesbian as it's possible to get. This is something many of us know, and you, lustatopia, are now discovering. Don't condescend unless you know you can get away with it.

Sure, she's acidic and abrasive. She gets to be. She's earned a lot of honor and respect. Her anger is not irrational. Her reactions are based on a long lifetime of living in a homophobic, anti-feminist world.

She's paid dues, dude, that you haven't ever been asked to consider. You wouldn't last a mile in her shoes, I can guarantee you that.

Come on, Stella, you think I'm condescending? I am who I am.

I've put my life on display in this thread and I have repeatedly offered to respect and listen to Safe_Bet's POV, assuming she can bring herself to cogently express it. I have in every comment argued for inclusiveness and tolerance of the entire rainbow of alt sexuality. And as far as I can tell she has argued in every comment against extending the same courtesy to bisexual men. Worse, she now appears to be posing as the victim of bullying, when actually it's exactly the opposite case. Safe-Bet waltzed into this thread denouncing bisexuality as a mere fetish deserving ejection from the GLBT community's board and continued hound on until her very last comment.

Obviously, we have a failure to communicate. I'm certainly willing to shoulder my burden of the blame for that. Can Safe-bet offer the same gesture of good will?

We've all lived in the same homophobic world, but isn't that a reason for solidarity and empathy rather than discrimination and yet more vilification? While I won't pretend to understand the depth of anti-feminist prejudice anyone has suffered (since I am a male), I'm baffled at how being discriminated against by reactionary societal forces justifies inflicting precisely the same sort of intolerance and hate-filled language against those one refuses to listen to and understand.

Anyone want to explain to me why one social injustice justifies the perpetuation of the very same kind of social injustice upon another group?

 

[Stella_Omega]

Can Safe-bet offer the same gesture of good will?

actually, the question is-- will she? And the answer is probably not. Sorry. You just can't win them all.

I wish there were a rainbow community, dude, but there isn't. There are a bunch of people with differing needs-- some of them completely opposite needs. You can't enforce tolerance amongst them. You can try-- but it doesn't really work.

Anyone want to explain to me why one social injustice justifies the perpetuation of the very same kind of social injustice upon another group?

I'm not a saint just because I'm queer.

Want to explain to me why being a minority automatically infers perfect morality upon its members?

 

[lustatopia]

Well, I'm no Saint either, Stella. In fact, my friends think I'm very competitive type A (for asshole) personality, I confess. Still, I can be lovable. ;-)

I guess those who at least fantasize about living in a Mies van der Rohe glass house should pack up the stones and go home now. We've all made our points.

I sincerely do hope that at least we can be friends.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Well, I'm no Saint either, Stella. In fact, my friends think I'm very competitive type A (for asshole) personality, I confess. Still, I can be lovable. ;-)

I guess those who at least fantasize about living in a Mies van der Rohe glass house should pack up the stones and go home now. We've all made our points.

I sincerely do hope that at least we can be friends.

¿Si, porque no?
Just-- watch the passive agressive, and stuff.

 

[girlsmiley]

I can dig that, Stella.

My biggest points of contention are when somebody tells me that EVERYBODY is Bi. That ain't the case. I can well believe that a truly bi person's sexuality can move up and down the scale over the course of their lives, but that doesn't mean ALL of us feel the same way. But, hey, maybe I'll feel differently someday, but for now (and my entirely life to this point) the concept of every letting a guy touch me is abhorrent.

To ME (Just MY opinion, mind you) the "men who love cock but don't like men" and the "women who love pussy, but don't like women" stealth bisexuals are just indulging in their preferred fetish. (and quite frankly piss me off, because I'm nobody's fetish toy)

I agree with this. I am not a fan of straight/curious girls who all of a sudden want to borrow my body for a few hours because I am a lesbian and they think it would be cool.

How would a man feel if I just fucked him and left? “Thanks mate, bye.”
That would make me a slut, wouldn’t it? The answer is, AHYEAH.

It pissed me off when people say, “I don’t LOVE him it’s just sex, so all you gay people don’t judge me because I’m bisexual and you don’t know anything about being bisexual.”

Bitch please.

Sounds like SLUT to me. Nothing to do with GLBT, just some slut/abuser who is trying to use a label to justify their slutty behaviour.

Yeah.

 

[Stella_Omega]

As a promiscuous bisexual dyke, let me just say that I've fucked a lot of people the once and never seen them again. Some of those have been men, some bi-curious girls, and more than you might expect have been lesbians. Who didn't love me, and didn't have to pretend they did, but we had a wonderful time in spite of that.

YOU might not like casual sex yourself, and that's your call. I do-- almost as much as I like deep and meaningful sex. With either sex, for that matter.

I don't think much of the word "Slut." It means "someone (A woman by default) who has more sex than I think is right."

Having said that... Here's one of the points where women and men tend to differ.

In gay male society, casual fucking around is, or used to be, okay in a way that it has never been in lesbian society-- with a few little pockets of exception-- and guys don't, or didn't, care what other men thought about their promiscuity.

I get a bit butthurt when I hear dudes talk about fucking people they actually don't like. I have no problem telling the world how offensive I think that is. I'm not that masculine.