If you read this blog with any regularity, you know I'm bi (though pan is the more politically correct term and truly means the same for my personal intents and purposes, bi just feels comfortable for me). I've known since probably sixth grade, but growing up in Pennsyltucky, didn't exactly have the discourse or safe space available to me to explain what that meant for me and as such am out to almost everyone except for my family. I've been romantically and sexually involved with both men and women, though thanks to my overwhelmingly femme hetero appearance, it's mostly been the menfolk. I've had my share of threesomes of all combinations, and in fact rung in the New Year and Christmas with them (they can be awesome...perhaps a post of that to follow).
But despite the threesome perks, bisexuality has a tendency to bring out reactions in people that, for lack of a better word, SUCK. The two that come to mind most prominently for me are the hardcore Smithies and unfortunately many hetero men (not all, mind you, but a lot!).
SLUG is one of those many acronyms common to the Smith vernacular, and gets tossed around constantly, especially first year. It stands for Smith Lesbian Until Graduation, which is what many people identifying as bi (especially if you don't come out as soon as you are accepted into Smith) are often brushed off as. But that's absolutely RIDICULOUS. I know much of Smith is composed of uber-wealthy people from liberal accepting metropolitan areas, but for many of the rest of us, coming out at home (whether as gay, bi, trans, whatever) wasn't necessarily a great choice, either for social cohesion or actual safety.
Brushing off bisexuality as "SLUG-ing" because it's the only option around takes away a person's agency to experiment sexually. I'm of the opinion, like Kinsey, that very few people are TOTALLY gay or straight, that we're all shades of grey bisexuality (that sounds like a hipster band...), and that everyone varies to the extent at which they feel comfortable acknowledging or feeling or acting on those desires. Smith, with its tolerant and gay happy vibe, is the perfect venue in which to experiment with those desires and feelings. I've known many "straight" women here who fell in love with a woman here, though they might never love another female again. Does that make them gay? Bi? Bored? Can they "pass" as straight more easily, and thus not experience gay discrimination? WHO CARES. I will probably never know what it's like to face real discrimination for my sexuality (I did the queer haircut waaay back in 8th grade and concluded it was not for me...my girl J writes here about gay/femmes/hair), but that doesn't make my feelings and sexuality arbitrary. By cutting these people out of the gay culture and rights movement, we undermine only ourselves and our progress. IT'S WHAT THE CONSERVATIVES WANT.
Now. Onto men. I could save myself the time typing a rant about men and how their perceive bisexuality as something that's theirs to manipulate and enjoy for their sexual entertainment by just posting the lyrics to Usher's "Lil Freak" (featuring Niki Minaj, a real live bisexual!), but I'd like to flesh it out myself.
Nearly every het man I've ever met who I've talked to about my sexuality is immediately at least twice as interested and suddenly full of questions (it has crossed my mind to simply NOT share that about myself, but that's ridiculous. Why should I hide a chunk of who I am so as to not be harassed? Perhaps you could STOP harassing? Idealistic, I know). I met a fella at a house party last night who participated in this exact phenomenon. Oh, you're a bisexual (A bisexual? What the fuck? Are you A hetero?). You like threesomes?
Yes, yes I do. But not with anyone so vile as to ask me about them prior to knowing any proper information about who I am. Many (again, not all) hetero men immediately see this as a golden opportunity, as if I'm (and most bi women) their "lil freak" as Usher would say, ready and eager to please him and letting him dictate the moves. They try to take something that is mine, my sexuality, and make it theirs for their own pleasure. It's just another thing for them to dominate. Even men I've been in relationships with have occasionally seen it as something to brag about, as if they'd achieved something important in finding a woman with long hair who liked both pussy and cock. If I volunteer that information or readily pursue a threesome, wonderful. But I fuck who I want, when I want. And if you're acting vulgar about it the minute we meet, count yourself out.
Much love,
The Albright Sheriff
I've had similar gross experiences when cis guys find out I also date women ("You like girls?? Cooool!!"). My old boss, upon finding out, felt it was appropriate to ask me if I had ever tried fisting. For some reason identifying as one who is attracted to people of more than one gender translates to "I will sleep with you and probably a girl of your choosing at the same time."
ReplyDeleteMy one quibble with the post is the characterization of pan[sexual] as being the politically correct equivalent of bisexual. In my understanding and usage (I identify as pan, if pushed to identify as anything at all), pansexual means that one is attracted to/has sex with people of all genders or no fixed gender, while bisexual means one is attracted to/has sex with both "men" and "women" (whatever those terms mean to you). For me personally, being pansexual means that gender identity, gender expression, and the shape of one's genitalia are not factors that determine whether I am attracted to a person. When I used to identify as bi, it was because I was not aware of the range of gender identities and expressions nor the complexities of genitalia and other markers of sex. Identifying as bi implies to me that one is not attracted to, for example, genderqueer people, intersex people, nor trans people in many circumstances. Which is fine, but it is different than being pan.
I'd love to hear your thoughts.
I understand that bisexual generally has the connotation of like men and women, with none of the in betweens. I have found myself attracted to genderqueer individuals, as well as trans people, but pansexual had a bad vibe for me simply because (and I know this is a lame reason) when I first came out to a friend as bi, she immediately corrected me and said, "Oh no, you're pan." And while that is probably a more accurate description of my sexuality, the word just left a bad feeling in my mouth since it was used by someone who was trying to tell ME what MY sexuality was.
ReplyDelete--Sheriff
Thanks for responding and clarifying. Oh, sexuality police. I have no intention of telling you what word to use to describe yourself, just to make that clear.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what kind of reaction one is likely to get from typical cis hetero men if one identifies oneself as pan rather than bi. Though I identify as pan, I don't actually have experience with this because my switch from "bi" to "pan" roughly corresponded with my no longer conversing with the type of cis hetero dudes who have these terrible ogle-y reactions. I wonder if it would eliminate some of the problems you name (not for you specifically, since you're not comfortable with the term, but in general). I have found that, since many people are unfamiliar with the term, using it can be a great way to start a conversation about the gender binary and the fact that many people don't conform to it. This opportunity has arisen for me when someone says, off-handedly, "Oh, you're bi, right?" and I correct them. From there we often launch into a lengthy conversation about terminology, genitalia, gender identity vs gender expression, etc.
While we're on the subject of language, here's a post from FWD:Feminists With Disabilities regarding the ableist nature of the word "lame": http://disabledfeminists.com/2009/10/12/ableist-word-profile-lame/.
Thanks again for the response.