• djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Idk but I feel like a lot of the distinction is really trans-exclusionary. I so frequently see it defined as bisexuals date “biological men and women”, whatever that means, whereas pansexuals also date trans men and women. My issue is that I just see trans men as men and trans women as women, so why should I need an extra descriptor for my love. It feels like it’s othering them, as though bisexuals shouldn’t love trans folk by default, and that feels like total bullshit to me.

    • fracture@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      sobbing by how common this take is

      bisexuality isn’t inherently transphobic!

      it’s a general stereotype which, while it can be true on an individual level, certainly isn’t when taken as a whole

      here’s the bisexual manifesto, also, since it goes hard: https://bitheway.carrd.co/#manifesto

      regardless of where we fall in the bi vs pan argument, i think it’s really important we don’t let reactionaries define bisexuality for us!

    • skisnow@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I’ve been around a while and I never heard this interpretation up until very recently.

      Ever since same-sex marriage passed, certain well-funded bigot groups have been explicitly and deliberately engaging in a “divide and conquer” strategy for taking down progressive movements. First they pushed transphobia as a Feminist quality. Now I guess the whispers are that bisexuals are trans-exclusionary, which in turn is stoking biphobia too? Don’t fall for it.