some food for thought mate: i seldom ever refer to heterosexuals as "straight". while everyone knows what the word 'straight' means, and it does not imply a disparagement of heterosexuals, the word itself has multiple connotations, which include: true, correct, normal, and undeviating (among other connotations), and to my mind therefore indirectly implies those who are not straight are not any of those things. now, some in your audience will insist that such a concern is too PC. maybe so. everyone's entitled to make up their own mind. from my POV, the extra syllables are not too cumbersome, and 'heterosexual' is not an absolute term, even when it is accurate.
***** think about it this way - if you don't apply the word 'straight' to sexuality, it becomes obvious that according to every other connotation of the word, NO ONE is actually straight. straight is an absolute term.
***** don't get me wrong, its not like i wince when i hear people use it, nor think it implies bigotry, cos that would be absurd. just sharing why i tend not to use it.
THANK YOU STEVE! My husband and I are both Bisexual. But since we married people now just consider us straight instead of what we are before and after marriage. Our bisexuality isn't negated because we married, we're still bisexual even though we married opposite gender. Bisexuals get written off if they marry opposite genders. No.. we just fell in love like everyone else, to us, gender was and is irrelevant. We still would have married if we had been same gender. Neither of us were promiscuous before marriage and we don't cheat on each other either. Bisexual are basically just gender blind in relationships. The PERSON we partner with matters, not the genitalia they have.
One of the hardest things I found in coming to terms with my own bisexuality was dealing with a facet of myself that, 40 years ago, wasn't accepted in general society. Gay behavior was "sinful" (whatever that means), and the stigma associated with it was not easy to get over. Luckily for me, with the advent of electronic Bulletin Board Services (remember THOSE???) in the early 90s, I was able to meet and talk online with people who were gay, Lesbian, "straight but not narrow" and other bisexuals who helped with that process and allowed me to become more at home with myself and my sexuality. That kind of openness has a tendency to help deal with multiple problems like biphobia ... and I can't help but notice that yet one more thing that too many religions cannot countenance.
My current closest friend is bi and closeted and terrified of facing issues from both lesbian and straight sides. I'm trans and don't have an orientation (not necessarily ace, but I can't process my feelings well enough to know what label to use), and just being trans alone can fuck up the ways in which you can approach the dating world. I think it's fucking stupid that someone who is bi has to limit their chances at happiness because of biphobia prompting a lot of L&G people to turn them down. Idk if I'm bi or not but I can understand it from a trans perspective, having to face discrimination from all sides. I think one issue the LGBT community faces, and that should be resolved from within the LGBT community without the "allies" stepping on us, is this whole militaristic attitude towards LGBT progress. Some people are just trying to find their own place of comfort within a hostile environment, and being so militaristic about it just creates more hostility. I've known trans women who are wanting to over-throw the government and establish a lesbian utopia. Then I've known trans women who just want to blend in and be like any other girl and not be spotted as trans. And I've known everyone in between. I've known bi people who emphasize that fact about them and others who prefer to keep away from making it a big deal. And it's fucked when any group of people has to face discrimination from within their own safe space. Please do a video on TERFs. They're the MRAs of "feminism" and they're shady as fuck.
Knock it off, Steve, some of us ENJOY our invisibility powers! I, for example, have used my invisibility from bi erasure to pull off 7 heists this month.
+Hostile Shadow yeah, no need to actually expand upon that point or have a proper conversation. being an insulting jerk works fine in persuading others.
Hostile Shadow you seem to be missing the aspect of gender identity. you forget those who are gender fluid, transgender, and transsexual. what do you call someone, let's say a cis man, who is attracted to females, but is emotionally and sexually attracted to a transwoman (i.e. a man who has undergone the process of transitioning to a female)? what of the flipside? a cis woman who's into men, yet is attracted to a transman. let's not forget those who socially and privately identify as androgynous or genderqueer-- these people are fine with any and all pronouns. i'm not going to sound high and mighty by proclaiming what you say has no merit-- this is a complex and yet-developing issue. human identity is something that may yet be explored for ages to come. however, if you are unable to discuss this issue without talking down others, you only serve to display your lack of respect for your fellow man and, indeed, for yourself.
Hostile Shadow you say that gender identity is uninteresting (not at all relevant to the discussion, to be honest) and illogical. would you care to explain how so and why it should be considered invalid? also, the concept of transsexualism is very much real. "The condition of crossing over to live full-time in the role of the other sex, with hormonal and surgical sex reassignment. The term signifies a method of treatment and rehabilitation rather than a diagnostic entity." - "health dictionary" goo.gl/lMXXk4 you'll find that those who suffer from gender dysphoria often seek gender reassignment via hormonal therapy and/or surgery to deal with it. after time goes on, it has shown that going through gender reassignment is the most effective method of dealing with their gender issues. - "journal of sexual medicine" goo.gl/8JdSLa; "sex, gender, and culture" goo.gl/r1XMJc; "standards of care for the health of transsexual, transgender, and gender-nonconforming people" goo.gl/qUprMg and for the record, you were acting decently until the last bit. whatever your stance on pronoun preference, just going "fuck it" adds nothing to the conversation.
Hostile Shadow [Fuck it, let's see where this conversation goes.] - i really hope you're going to be earnest about this. [Regarding gender identity; why should we classify people based on the culturally normal roles of which sex they follow, if any? It seems arbitrary, more so than sex as that at least tells you whether you can sexually reproduce with the person which can in some cases be relevant.] - indeed, it is arbitrary, in the grand scale of things. but that also applies to many other things like, for example, a person's name. we tend to refer to people with whom we have familiarity by their name. there's no need (key word) in most contexts to use a persons name, outside of sorting particulars in a crowd-- a simple "hey, you!" with an accompanying gaze tends to be sufficient. however, we find ourselves using the names because, for most people, names are an important aspect of their identity. even when we're not familiar with a person, if we know their name, we will use it to denote them and call then to attention. it's commonly seen as a basic level courtesy. on a further note of the arbitrariness of pronouns, why even connect them to a person's genitalia? it's because we often link our identity to our bodies, which is why it's normal for people to see an offense when called something contrary to that. this is true for both cis- and trans-gendered people. humans are funny like that: something that is objectively arbitrary can still hold significance to us on a personal level. it would be remiss of you to forget that. [If pronouns are based on whether you engage in some behaviour, why should it be this "gender" concept? If we are to base it on something which isn't immediately visually apparent(and "gender" clearly is not), why not base it on something more specific, like occupation or somesuch? However, whatever they are based on they will increase in number beyond reason, making them useless.] - as i said earlier, it's because of the issue of one's identity. it's scarcely more complex than that. and to be sure, this only appears to be the issue that it is because of the make-up of our language and its adoption of pronoun usage. i would think that you probably wouldn't have such an issue with preferred pronouns if the english language (and the culture of that language) wasn't so hetero-normative. for one example, in the estonian langauge, 'te' (or 'tema') is gender-neutral and means both "she" and "he". it also has the distiction of being used to refer to a person. this is unlike the english 'it', which is used primarily to refer to inanimate objects. [This transexuality concept is however more a biological question. "Reassignment" surgery changes only appearance and hormone treatments at most change behaviour. Neither of these things constitutes sex, which cannot be changed at this time. If it was possible, those who have undergone such surgery would be able to reproduce with members of their new opposite sex as they would produce the reproductive cells of their new sex.] - you are mostly correct. however, you're missing the fact that because we link our identities to our bodies, how we perceive ourselves matters a great deal to our psychological well-being. in the case of those with gender dysphoria, they have to content with existing in a body that does not feel like their own. indeed, while we can only change a person's physical make-up to a limited degree, it is mostly done in an attempt to treat a person's mental health-- that is the most important thing to keep in mind.
Hostile Shadow [I am not inclined to accept this line of argument as I find that names are simply a more individual identification of people. There is no reason whatever why these should be linked to identity, and I do not think they are to any great extent.] - i'm sorry, but i'm having a hard time following what you're trying to say. you accept that names a more individual form of identification, but don't see how people can link them to their identity? why is it difficult to see how something mostly unique to a person can be taken as an aspect of their character? it just seems like you're being purposely obtuse, so you'll have to explain how you're able to rationalize that. [The reason for sexual classification is more immediate than identity. As I said, it is simply a classification of the groups that can sexually procreate within a species. However little interest this may be of, and it is possible that it is very little indeed to many, it is surely of more interest than "gender identity" as that at most tells you something about a small set of behaviour patterns.I simply do not see why gender should ever be taken into account as anything more than the mind's perception of ones sex, which is relevant only to things like gender dysphoria.] - that problem with that is behavioral patterns aren't exclusively linked to one's sex. they're dependent on many factors, particularly environmental factors-- not every man will display the same measure of masculine traits and not every woman will display the same measure of feminine traits. and many without gender dysphoria display the various levels of traits that can be deemed counter to their assumed gender. linking sexual classification to what a person might act like appears to be unnecessarily presumptuous. [The language is not hetero-normative. It says nothing whatever about what ought be the case, it is however based on objective facts about people.] - then you'll have to kindly point out a one thing for me: what sort of english pronoun(s) not primarily used for objects can be used to refer to a single person, in the third-person, that is neither 'he' nor 'she'? 'he' and 'she' are largely used to refer to the male and female gender, respectively-- a glowing example of hetero-normativity (i.e. the acknowledgement of only two sexes/genders). [It is as I stated a largely irrelevant fact and I agree that a neutral pronoun would make little difference at most, but changing it would upset people sufficiently that it is not worth it.] - you've lost me on this part. my stance is that it would make a fair difference to certain people, particularly those who identify as genderqueer. and upon what basis do you presume that making changes to develop gender-neutral pronouns would not be worth it to other people? [Presumably because I do not, which means I have limited understanding of those who do.] - in that case, i implore you to look more deeply into this subject. [Gender dysphoria could be treated by therapy as other similar disorders where one finds ones body does not match the mind in some way. If they are to be treated with cosmetic surgery, however, the fact remains that their sex cannot be changed.] - i think you missed the point i was trying to make. i'll reiterate the last line of my previous post. "indeed, while we can only change a person's physical make-up to a limited degree, it is mostly done in an attempt to treat a person's mental health-- that is the most important thing to keep in mind." currently, gender reassignment surgery is the best way to treat those with gender dysphoria. there is positive coorelation between those who undergo the process of transition and the state of their mental health. if medical science had to means to treat the mental issue directly, it's likely that more would prefer that option (especially given the expensive state american healthcare). not every psychological issue is approached in the same way: some require more counseling, others require more medicine. this is further complicated by the fact that treatment plans are very often developed on a case by case basis.
Awesome video, Steve. I applaud you for mentioning so many sexualities, including asexuality. Will you do "Five Stupid Things About A-phobia" (And phobias against the other orientations that you mentioned?) sometime in the future?
+Inka Halme (Goosey) Good luck, if there's anything that confuses your standard every person it's asexuality, I'd say it will be AFTER Trans, and us Bi folk get recognized. Asexuality is almost it's own separate scale.
Hijuel Well, there is the asexual scale. Asexual, greysexual, demisexual. But yeah. I'd like it if we'd get some more recognition, no one can talk about trans and bisexual people 24/7.
I defriended a famous harmonica player because she was venomously bi-phobic, despite being a gender assigned hermaphrodite lesbian atheist. (She is out of the closet so I'm not outing her or anything.) I don't get how someone can be anti-bigotry in one case and pro-bigotry in others. (Assuming at least that there is an underlying reason for the anti-bigotry stance- I'm straight, but for me it's, 'as long as it's two consenting adults' I'm more or less fine with it if that's what people want to do. That leaves room for me to disapprove of the sexual choices of active pedophiles but let's me be fine with anyone who isn't hurting people- well, except other consenting adults, if that's what you are into.)
I appreciate this one, Steve! I myself am bisexual, though I had also never heard the term "Biphobia" nor had I heard of "Bisexuality Day." I myself have never been marginalized in any big way, but I can understand that it may happen to some. I also have the luxury of appearing heterosexual at first glance, as my current romantic relationships are with women (we're also polyamorous; unrelated), so I have a lot of respect for those who those who have done the hard work for all of us, LGBT or otherwise.
THANK YOU!!! Just... I can't thank you enough for bringing this up. You have brought to light the struggles of myself and most other bifolk. Maybe people will get some clue about how we feel. One can only hope.
>Says bisexuals shouldn't be ignored >Ignores most of my question for You Had To Ask You're a hypocrite, Steve, and I'll have you know, I don't even find you attractive!
Not that I want to deny the legitimacy or importance of specific LGBT identities to people, but from a purely rational defintion perspective (rarely the most helpful perspective on these issues I know) really everyone, literally EVERYONE, including straight people, asexuals, and everyone else. should recognize to some extent that they fall under the 'Q' part of the LGBQT spectrum, i.e. Queer, and are flexible (at least in theory) about their sexual preferences and gender identity. Ultimately, everyone is to some extent capable of all kinds of different forms of attraction, self-identification, and feeling in the fields of gender and sexuality, and we should embrace that more.
Can you please PLEASE! Do five stupid things about *flat earth conspiracy theorists* I'm arguing with one and I have answered all of his questions and he is now reduced to saying "NASA is using composites!" With no sources, no evidence and no citations.They're a messy bunch
I think this is a classic example of taking one's own personal experiance as universal truth. Many LGBT folks (especially in older generations) used bisexuality as a "steping stone," so to speak, to coming out fully as gay. Even notice the terminology I just used: "fully as gay," as if bisexuality was some hybrid, mongrel form. You mentioned the fear of being left for another partner. I think this fear pretty much effects everyone at some point; someone richer, better looking, younger, etc., is going to come along. For gay people, a partner leaving you for a straight relationship can often create the same kind of fear.
Love the movie reference bro! Pansexual here! Never heard it described as Biphobia before, but the slights against the various polysexualities are all too real to deny. And why? Because our love is not restricted to a single gender identity? It really is a shame because bifolk can relate to, yet tend to be quickly dismissed by hetero and homosexuals alike. Power to bifolk and polysexuals of all types, we need more recognition. Thanks for the vid Steve
Love the video, it is very needed. That being said, you did make a common mistake about Bisexuality the contributes to bi--erasle. Bisexuals do not have to be equally interested in both sexes. That is actually kinda rare, mush like a purely gay or straight person. I have identified as a Bisexual from the minute I learned of the label. I have not been 50/50 in my sexual attraction at any point in my life, though my tastes did change rather dramatically, from being mostly attracted to women in my teens to mostly attracted to men in twenties. Just a little note for you. Love your videos, keep them coming. :)
I will say I haven't noticed any discrimination or dismissal from my gay friends yet, but I haven't been out long or talked about it much. Also that's just my anecdotal experience, so I know some other bi people aren't taken seriously by all kinds of people which is frustrating. I do think it's slightly easier for me because I'm already married to a woman. (She's bi too). So as far as anyone else can tell I'm straight.
Your chart reminded me that people often misstate being gay as the opposite of straight, but "not straight" is the opposite of "straight" not gay. Just one of those default settings in our minds that needs to overruled by thinking thingy we do sometimes. Only four fingers to type with. Once my leg heals and I can use my left hand again I am coming after you Toby Benson. You baseball bat wheedling plush maniac, I am coming for you. It will be deja vu all over again. RIP Yogi Berra.
It gets better. My wife and sister are both open about their bisexuality. I know a few guys who are open and bi. They rarely if ever encounter biphobia. I'm european, the USA tends to lag behind on moral issues but you have caught up on marriage equality and you'll catch up on this too.
So good to hear about this from someone intelligent and prepared to say it as it is. I know a number of bi people and have heard about the crap aimed at them by both sides of the sexuality fence. It is easier to see how straight people can misunderstand, even if they're not inherently anti-LGBT, it's just something they don't "get" (it doesn't excuse intolerance by any stretch of the imagination) but gay people who themselves face hate and discrimination should know better. Good work, and I hope this message gets spread more widely.
I accidentally watched this video today, and only from it I found out that today is Celebrate Bisexuality Day! I can't believe in such coincident and I'm so glad that it happened this way! Thank you a lot for this video
Sooo, the only time I ever got shit for being bisexual was from a drunk acquaintance who is retarded when he is sober. Its really only positive for me, as in both my gay and straight friends treat me as part of their group...
People think rigidly when they believe they have the world all figured out, and put up resistance when new perspectives threaten that normative comfort zone. People need to stop doing that.
Just pointing out that you say your last graphic demonstrates that "bi people make up more than half of the lgbt community," but it also has no section for any thing other than gay, straight, and bi, which is demonstrating basically the same problem this video is trying to fight against.
I'll never be accepted as bi. My mom knows but if my dad ever found outbid be out of the fucking house. My mom doesn't accept it either but she's more passive about it. I wish I could celebrate myself but I just can't
+ReviewTube2012 Someday you'll be out of your parents place and while I can't say that they'll change... you'll probably find plenty of friends and a couple romantic partners who'll be comfortable with that part of you. Don't say never.
As a bisexual one thing made me chortle....those "gay" people who have sexual relationships with the opposite sex are the only "biphobes" I know of, so afraid of the label they claim to be gay when they are clearly not. I'm bisexual and have never heard the word biphobia before. I hate to ask, but is anyone afraid of us? Yes, we're made out to not exist which is frustrating, but that's just plain ol' ignorance, not fear.
