bestiasono: Science Icon (Default)

[personal profile] bestiasono 2011-12-02 20:00 (UTC)(link)
I'm saying that however it's defined, bisexuality still covers it. And yes, you do just pick how something is labeled. All labels are picked by people. But the point is that it doesn't matter how anybody choses to label themselves in this case... all possible labels have the same result.

And I'm not dismissing anyone's sexual orientation. I'm saying that a label has been made with a definition that fits within another label's definition... just as "airplane" is a label that fits within "vehicle" or "is attracted to short, athletic, blonde women" is a subset of "is attracted to women."

But I admit, I'm not a fan of people redefining bisexuality to mean something it didn't mean before, then claiming that they're enforcing gender binaries because of that exact redefinition, and thus are somehow "wrong" for doing so (and yes, I've seen that exact behavior). Bisexuals get told what they are by enough people already (straight people telling them they're just unable to get enough action in one sex, gays telling them they're just gay but afraid to go all the way, lots of people telling them they're just nymphomaniacs who are unable to have a stable relationship, a others telling them they are all poly, etc). They don't need yet another group trying to tell them they're reenforcing gender binaries too, or that they have to be attracted to masculine manly males and feminine girly females.

Bisexual just means you're attracted to members of the same sex and members of a different sex (or sexes, depending on how many sexes you think there are). That's it.
salinea: (Default)

[personal profile] salinea 2011-12-02 20:05 (UTC)(link)
Hmm, fair enough for the bisexual vs pansexual thing; but I think the way you were talking about intersexual people was still just plain weird and seemed rather ignorant.
bestiasono: Science Icon (Default)

[personal profile] bestiasono 2011-12-02 20:26 (UTC)(link)
Okay, so how is it ignorant? I've seen some people try to define "intersex" as being "a person who is a member of both sexes", and others try to define "intersex" as a third sex, distinct from the other two... a person who cannot be classified as male or female. Both of these definitions have their advantages and disadvantages, their proponents and opponents. So how is it ignorant to say that whichever way someone wants to define intersex, attraction to intersex folks is still covered within bisexuality?

This is an honest question, if I'm being ignorant I'd like to know how. I try to only make a fool of myself no more than once for any given topic.
salinea: (geek power)

[personal profile] salinea 2011-12-02 20:40 (UTC)(link)
Err, I'm not sure I'm quite knowledgeable enough to talk about intersexuality in an... educating manner to other people. I'm only a little bit familiar with it myself. So sorry if I'm misspeaking. It's just... "Intersex" can describe a whole spectrum of medical conditions that cause people to have a body that doesn't quite fall into the sex binary easily. Given that variety it feels pretty weird to have someone come and label it as "third sex" or "neither sex" (or "both sex", something which I don't believe you really addressed); as if someone could come and make it simple like that. And i know you were emphatically talking about sex and not gender, so the whole issue of self-identity wasn't put on the forefront, but I'm not entirely sure that it is a topic on which you can safely rely on a gender vs sex duality either.

So, no, I wasn't really talking about the point you were trying to make about bisexuality, and whether or not it encompasses intersex people, as such.