Showing posts with label Bisexuality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bisexuality. Show all posts

Monday, November 2, 2009

Weep, Weep For Future Generations...


Here's a short list of some of my favourite quotes from the atrociously spelt and narrated Harry Potter fan-fic 'My Immortal' by Tara 'Ebony Dark’ness Dementia Raven Way.' You can find the full hilarious story at http://myimmortalrehost.webs.com/chapters122.htm Just for a bit of context, Ebony/Enoby/Eboby is a vampire goth in Slytherin House at Hogwarts, her bisexual vampire goth boyfriend is Draco/Drak/Darko Malfoy, Harry Potter has changed his name to Vampire and... yes, he's a bisexual vampire goth... noticing a trend? A good third of the story is actually incredibly detailed descriptions of vitually indistinguishable black outfits and identical emo concerts, there's sex, drugs, murder and bad grammar. My Immortal also has perhaps the biggest fanbase of any internet fan-fic - nobody can quite decide if it's serious or a vicious parody. So without further ado (and without any editing)....

Dumbledore: "WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING YOU MOTHERFUKERS!"

Snake and Loopin were in da middle of da empty hall, doin it, and Dobby was watching!

"STOP IT NOW YOU HORNY SIMPLETONS!" shouted Professor McGoggle who was watching us and so was everyone else.

"I MAY BE A HOGWARTS STUDENT"" Hargirid paused angrily. "BUT I AM ALSO A SATANIST!"

"Hey bitch you look kawaii."

"The Dark Lord shall kill all of you. Then you must submit to him!!!!" Snape ejaculated menacingly. "You fucking preppy fags!" Serious shouted angrily.

"Volfemort has him bondage!"

"You fucking bustard!" yelled Draco at Vampire. "I want to shit next to her!1"

"VAMPIRE POTTER, YOU MOTHERFUCKER!" I yelled.

"Why did you do such a thing, you mediocre dunces?" asked Professor McGonagall.

"YOU ARE NOT FIT TO BE THE PRINCIPAL ANY LONGER!" yelled Rumbridge. "YOU ARE TOO OLD AND YOUR ALZHEIMERS IS DANGEROUS! YOU MUST RETRY OR VOLDEMORT WILL KILL YOUR STUDENTS!"

"CUM NOW!1!" Preacher McGongel yielded. We did guiltily.

"Suddenly an idea I had. I clozd my eyes and using my vampire powers I sent a telepathetic massage to Drako and Vampire so they would destruct Snape."

"THE BARK LORD IS PLANNING TO KILL THE STUDENTS!" yelled Cornelia Fudge.

"Crosio!" I shited pointing my wound. Snoop scremed and started running around da room screming.

"OMFS, letz have a groop kutting session!11" said Profesor Trevolry.

A chapter after Loopin "masticates" outside of Enoby's window, Tara took a second stab at it: "You saved me from getting a Paris Hilton p- video made from your shower scene and being vued by Snap and Loopin." Who MASTABATED (c is dat speld rong) to it he added silently.

"Abra Kedavra!" he yelled at Snape and Loopin pointing his womb.

"Noooooo!11" she screamed. All the preps in da theater screamed but everyone else crapped koz Satan and I loked so cute 2gether.

I smelled happily.

"Hey haz aneone fuking seen Draco?" I asked gothikally.
"No Draco told me he wood be watching Hoes of Wax." said Profesor Trevolry.

Dracola used to be called Navel but it tuned out dat he was kidnapped at birth and his real family were vampires. They dyed in a car crash.

"Rid my sight you despicable preps!"

Snoop laughed meanly. He polled down his pants. I gasped- there was a Dork Mark on his you-know-wut!11!

"But it was to late. I knew what I herd. I ran to the bathroom angrily, cring. Draco banged on the door. I whipped and whepped as my blody eyeliner streammed down my cheeks and made cool tears down my feces like Benji in the video for Girls and Bois (raven that is soo our video!). I TOOOK OUT A CIGARETE END STARTED TO smoke pot."

"I laffed statistically."

"We went sexily to Potionz class. But Snap wasn't there. Instead there was…………………………………………Cornelio Fuck!11111"

"“OMFG!!! Im back in Tim again!!!!111” I screamed loudly."
"“Oh my fukking god!!!! Voldimort! Voldimort!” screamed Hedwig as his glock touched Voldemort’s."

"then suddenlyn………………. the floor opened. “OMFG NO I SCEAMED AS I FEEL DOWN. everyone looked At ME weirdly.”"

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Pornocalypse Now

(stolen from AdBusters at http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/83/pornocalypse_now.html)

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”—George Orwell

Now that Gitmo is basically kaput and Bush’s war on the future has been replaced with Obama’s strategy for the present, is Orwell’s forewarning still relevant? Or has the real-world manifestation of the Orwellian already reached its peak and entered into decline?

Let me entertain you with a fantastic scenario – If Orwell had been born in 1984 rather than 1903, he would be a member of a subset of young men whose lives have been framed by two critical shifts in the mental landscape: the collapse of the global superpowers (USSR/US) and the rise of the pornography industry. Obviously there are countless events that have shaped the world in the past quarter century, but in terms of timing and impact, none have had such a profound effect on the average G8 20-something as the reshaping of conflict and sexual narratives. Just as the war on terror mainstreamed the notion of war without actual war, the pornography industry has successfully popularized sex without sex. So what would this bizarro Orwell be getting up to while the world totters on the brink of depression? Plumbing the depths of the English language or playing Call of Duty in his underwear? As newspapers are dying off quicker than Mexican salamanders, our young Orwell would probably not be a down-and-out journalist, but more likely a disengaged copywriter – his dystopian prose taking on an entirely different shape and form:

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a woman’s face. Now zoom out, it’s a slutty blonde bitch getting her ass hammered by two monster cocks. Coming soon to DVD, Nazi Sluts 9: Invasion of the Schwarzkommando!”

It’s the early ’90s, sometime during the beginning of the Clinton era, around the time that the Democrats put an end to the Republican war on porn that raged throughout the Reagan/Bush years. The Berlin Wall has crumbled and East Germans are no longer forced to smuggle in their contraband pornos from the liberated West. Gorbachev’s perestroika reforms have made it possible for Moscovites to get their hands on Japanese camcorders, the first small steps towards the production of Soviet smut.

History is so, like, over. Western liberal democracy has proven itself to be the superior form of human governance and capitalism is set to conquer the remaining holdouts by the end of the decade. This ideological evolution is made consummate by the image of a barrel-chested David Hasslehoff, running in slow motion down a sunbathed beach with nothing but tits ’n ass heat-waving in the periphery. This is, in the words of Slavoj Žižek, the true utopia.

“Professional ethics … I’m not just a doctor, I’m a man!”

I’m sitting in a rumpus room with some friends, surrounded by a pastiche of half-empty bottles of Crystal Pepsi, Cherry Coke, miscellaneous snack standards and bits and pieces of Super Nintendo paraphernalia.

The tips of my fingers are stickied with thousands, if not millions, of microscopic junk particles that have joined to create a thin, coagulated coating of Cheetos-brand neon magic cheese dust.

I let the plastic Cheetos bag fall onto the epically-outdated shag carpet and I’m licking my fingers one by one – lapping up the Sunset Yellow FCF (CI 15985 or Yellow No. 6), the disodium-based colorant that gives Cheetos their trademark hue. My eyes are glued to the TV. It’s a newer Japanese model that’s connected by an analog umbilical of tangled black wires to an oversized VCR that loads chunky VHS tapes from the top.

Beyond the faint hum of the machinery, my mates’ chuckles and gasps and the crunching sound of cheesy poofs, my ears are keenly attuned to the dialogue of the “film” that’s got us so transfixed.

“Fuck my pussy doctor!” the nurse commands, putting an end to the corndog foreplay that I thought would never cease. She then lays herself out on the examination table and spreads her milky thighs wide open as the shot dissolves into a close-up of a mustachioed physician’s abstractly penetrating gaze.

And so it began. My virgin eyes were submerged into an ocean of luma-chroma sex acts and the outrageous poetics of consumerist eros: turgid hard-ons mechanically harpooning seeping vaginal canals and gracefully spraying sperm streams atop mountainous titties with their omnipresent nipple peaks.

But my encounters with the world of adult home videos were rare. Like Playboy or Hustler, skin flicks had to be obtained indirectly, usually through an older bro who would just end up taking your money and keeping the booty for himself.

And then everything changed, drastically. The nightly news told a story about some hicks in Oklahoma City who had detonated their imaginary Death Star with a truck full of ammonium nitrate fertilizer. Boom: disconnected body parts strewn about and a federal building torn into shreds within seconds. Pundits and experts alike labeled the attack as an act of domestic terrorism. But the tasseography of the news ticker was of no interest, the television had become redundant and outdated. I was 14 and a friend had just gotten a 14.4 US Robotics dial-up modem – our ticket to unchecked informational freedom and, more importantly, thousands of pictures of naked women.

In tune with my demographic dropping its collective nutsack, pornography transformed from a primarily physical medium into a limitless stream of easily accessible imagery. Production costs bottomed out, profits exploded and a booming transnational porno industry came into its own.

The mass appeal of Deep Throat,-era sex cinema hits was resurrected in the form of downloadable masturbation resources. Only now, rather than experiencing sex media in a gender-inclusive mainstream setting, Internet pornography catered primarily to the individual male’s niche desires. Jerk-off fantasies were the dominant leitmotifs of the early Internet – its raison d’être. The Internet was, and still is, for porn. In the ever-expanding webiverse, pornographic imagery supplied the perfect vacuum in which blogs, social networking and YouTube could come into existence. Buoyed by this exponential growth and the backing of media conglomerates like News Corp, the production of hard-core video increased by 700 percent from 1992 to 2005, with worldwide revenues clocking in at nearly $100 billion. Porn had officially arrived, and its enviable profit margins forced “legit” mass media to gradually conform to the aesthetic of its fleshy contours.

It was as if the white noise of consumerism had turned a shade of hot pink. All of a sudden the leader of the free world was evoking Peter North via René Magritte à la “this is not a blow job.” Soon after, the world gasped as two giant metal phalluses penetrated the twin monoliths of capitalist civilization. A blockbuster snuff film to ring in the new century, the “I can’t look but I must” sensation of the 9/11 tape loop would go on to serve as the stylistic precursor for 2 Girls 1 Cup.

-$-

Fast-forward to the summer of 2007. I’m 26 and I’ve been tapped by a bro to do a shoot for a website that specializes in “gangsta porn” – tattooed bad-girls tricked out with sawed-off shotguns and a “fuck the world” attitude.

I walk into the makeshift studio and there are a number of naked and semi-naked porn “stars” (white dwarfs really) floating around like wandering livestock. After drilling back a couple vodka tonics, I follow the girls over to a cheap white-paper backdrop and we get to into it. “Spread your legs,” I say. “Eat her pussy out, yeah, that’s it, oh fuck yeah.” I’m just regurgitating tired clichés but it feels natural, like swinging a bat or popping a jump shot. Hostile facial contortions and faux cunnilingus ensue. The producer is up to his eyeballs in blow, pacing back and forth, his teeth chattering up and down like a wind-up toy.

Around the same time that I’m snapping snatch for a hundred bucks an hour, a fellow that goes by the nom de guerre of Max Hardcore is on his way to prison for obscenity offences, the first victim of the Bush administration’s reignition of the Bible Belt’s anti-porn crusades.

An infamous character even within the industry, Mr. Hardcore is a noteworthy pioneer of the gonzo subgenre – a grimy lo-fi POV style that champions a depraved and misogynistic approach to adult video. The typical Hardcore film features female performers who are made to look like prepubescent teens, schoolgirls who skip class to get brutalized by Mr. Hardcore himself.

A Wisconsin-born, cowboy hat-wearing opportunist, Hardcore took advantage of the mid ’90s amateur boom and has steadily pushed the limit ever since. His work foreshadows the style of video (no plot and little pretense) that now dominates Internet upload sites: an increasingly violent performance style dubbed “abuse porn.”

I’m browsing a porn upload site, watching a scene from a Hardcore compilation vid, and writing the sentence you are reading right now, my MacBook on my lap nuking any possibility of future offspring. The video features a performer dressed up to appear as if she were 13, she’s sucking off Hardcore in the most hard-core of manners, so forcefully that she begins to vomit through her nose. Hardcore responds by urinating into her mouth and onto her face and with urine in her eyes and mascara running down her cheeks, she starts looking like a battered clown. In the next clip Hardcore is pulling on her hair and shoving a dildo down her esophagus and she begins to fake cry, which turns out to be more disturbing than if she were to shed real tears.

Not my cup of tea. I continue to surf, looking for a video that features Sasha Grey, who should be calling me for an interview at any moment. Grey, 21, is the porno industry’s public relations wet dream come true. She has already performed in over 100 adult films and stars in Steven Soderbergh’s arthouse feature The Girlfriend Experience. She’s slated to be the “next Jenna Jameson,” and might be the first porn star to successfully convert her adult video (AV) celebrity into a legit acting career. What interests me about Grey is that she represents a notable shift in the pornographic ideal – she doesn’t project the typical persona that we’ve come to accept as the standard AV schtick. She’s young and calculated and delivers performances that are provocatively masculine. A quick Google reveals that her personal brand is rooted in the alternative. She’s done an American Apparel advertising campaign, promotes herself as a quasi-postfeminist intellectual and frequently name-drops the likes of Jean-Luc Godard and Jean-Paul Sartre.

The first video that pops up is titled Sasha Grey Anal. I click play figuring it will provide a good warm-up for our phoner. It starts with a close-up of Grey’s lips and she is directly addressing the viewer:

“I want to be your sex slave, I want you to hurt me, I want you to make me cry. I’ll do anything, anything at all, whatever you want, I’m such a fucking whore, I need to train, I need to be broken, I want you to fucking hurt me.”

A couple of minutes later some dude is holding the camera and staring down at Grey, who is staring up at us while giving one of her trademark ‘throat fuck’ blowjobs. She sounds like she’s choking, and the dude starts to drag her by the hair with his cock still in her mouth.

Then the phone rings, not in the video, but in my apartment. It’s her, the real Sasha Grey, as opposed to the porno-world Sasha Grey flickering on my laptop.

“What does the word pornographic mean to you?”

“To me it’s not just people having sexual encounters, or pictures of people having sex in magazines. More than half of the news we see on television today is pornographic because it’s not real news. It’s pure junk for the mind…They are manipulating the audience to feel a certain way. It’s all encompassing. American Idol is pornographic, completely exploiting people’s talent or lack of talent for television ratings.”

On screen, Sasha is gagging on a dildo that the dude has just pulled out of her ass. “Choke yourself on it” he says. I skip ahead a few minutes and Sasha is presenting to the viewer a rather apt existential dilemma:

“Is that what you fucking want? You want this filthy whore’s tight little asshole?"

The real Sasha Grey says in my left ear:

“… I think we’re still very repressed, especially in America. It comes back to what does pornography mean. In Europe there are more films that have to do with sexuality than violence and here in America it is the opposite. And I think we can sell sex all day on television, in magazines and on billboards but when it comes down to it people are still afraid to talk about their sexuality …”

“So are we lacking an important dialogue?”

“Definitely, It’s still embarrassing. If you try to speak with a Midwest housewife, or a young 20-something from the Midwest and say cunt or pussy she is going to freak out, even if you say vagina – for some of them, the word vagina is a disgusting, vile word. You have to say ‘down there.’ It’s really bizarre.”

The calm, thoughtful tone of her voice creates an unsettling sensual cocktail when mixed with the vacancy of her pixilated hazel eyes, an oasis of “the real” in a desert of unreality. Or perhaps it’s just a mirage or a “lovemark,” as marketing guru Kevin Roberts might say. The Sasha Grey brand is an ideal vehicle for the normalization of porn because she’s a willing industry activist who genuinely believes that the consumption of her videos promotes a positive understanding of sexual health.

But has our outlook on sex become so pornofied that we’re willing to accept 20 minutes of vacuous anal sex as sex-positive edutainment? Although porn has been embraced by feminists looking to shrug off the failures of the Dworkin era, the discussion that predominates current analysis of the medium tends to ignore the nature of the industry’s core demographic: males, aged 18-29.

If the average porn consumer – a male North American, Japanese or European 20-something – were to walk into a doctor’s office and receive a virility exam, the results would be abysmal. Due to our toxic living standards and the prevalence of untested chemicals in the social environment, the male gender has recently entered into rapid physiological and genetic decline.

In affluent, industrialized nations, the birth of males has dropped every year for the past 30 years. Genital defects, learning disabilities, autism, ADD and a variety of other afflictions have all skyrocketed in males while remaining comparatively low in females. But perhaps the most telling indicator of the male plight comes down to that which is essentially synonymous with the pornographic: sperm. The average Gen Y bro has a sperm count that is 50 percent lower than his father’s and, of the few spermazoids he does have, 85 percent of them are genetically damaged. According to Dr. Fernando Marina, fertility expert at Barcelona’s CEFER Reproduction Institute, if this trend continues, all men will be infertile within 60 years.

On a genetic level, the male gender is crumbling, which almost seems natural when one considers the fragmented state of modern masculinity.

On the other end of the feminist spectrum of opinion from Sasha Grey is Virginie Depentes, who initially gained notoriety (and infamy) with the release of her book/film Baise Moi (Fuck Me), which follows the story of a part-time prostitute and a part-time porn actress as they go on a hyper-sexual, murderous rampage against the rape-prone patriarchal society that oppresses and humiliates them. In her latest book, King Kong Theory, Despentes states:

“Pornography hits the blind corner of reason. It directly addresses our primitive fantasies, bypassing words and thought. The hard-on or wetness comes first, wondering why follows behind. Self-censorship reactions are shaken. Porn images don’t give us any choice: here’s what turns you on, here’s what makes you respond.”

I recently had a discussion with Despentes on the subject of porn and masculinity, during which she commented:

“In front of climate change or economic crisis, men and women are equal. We are being confronted with something very big … I don’t think men are trying to understand what masculinity is like women did with femininity in the ’70s. Lots of women asked themselves ‘what was femininity?’ Men seem to think masculinity is so natural. It’s not.”

In her work, Despentes raises two very interesting points pertaining to the pornographic dialogue. First, that the traditional anti-porn stance on how violent and misogynistic material incites rape and violence towards women is false due to an inaccurate analysis: pornography actually subdues rather than provokes. Consuming pornography does not lead to more sex, it leads to more porn. Much like eating McDonalds everyday will accustom you to food that (although enjoyable) is essentially not food, pornography conditions the consumer to being satisfied with an impression of extreme sex rather than the real.

Second, unlike women, men have largely failed to re-evaluate their sense of purpose in the 21st century. Feminism as a social revolution resulted in the emancipation of the female and the displacement of traditional male roles. Rather than making a conscious effort to resituate “the masculine” in the context of rising gender equality, heterosexual men have in many ways fallen into a subconscious, anti-feminine counterrevolution.

And this takes us back to our imaginary Orwell. Picture him sitting on a couch, in his underwear, at 2:00 a.m. His naked profile lit by the warm glow of a laptop screen. He’s surfing the net, reading about how Hitler invented the first sex doll, which prompts him to play a quick round of Call of Duty. He’s tossing grenades and sniping Nazis, but then he gets bored so he pops in a bukkake DVD and tosses off to the image of a female performer being submerged in seminal fluid. He’s satiated and disconnected but in the virtual world he’s still a dominant, violent, virulent alpha male.

The porn industry, now bigger than Hollywood and pro sports combined, has facilitated the transformation of sex into a liquid consumer good. There is nothing left to separate the individual from the market and the industry’s success has also produced a feedback loop that results in its own intensification. In order to compete with porn, the mainstream media appropriates the pornographic, which in turn forces porn producers and websites to create more vicious and chaotic content. The mainstream becomes porn and porn gradually edges closer to snuff.

Of course very little of this sexual media reflects reality in any way. When watching hard-core porn, one is struck by the message it so desperately attempts to communicate: sex is boring. And the more violent the porn, it seems, the more anti-sex its message. But could anything be further from the truth? Isn’t having sex with another living, human being the one thing that provides the most intense connection with the present moment?

As our surroundings become inundated with pornographic imagery aimed at keeping us plugged into the feedback loop, it’s easy to get distracted from what’s going on beyond all the hot pink noise. It’s in this fog of fake fucking that man sleepwalks closer toward an abyss of genetic implosion, environmental destruction and total economic collapse.

But crisis can precipitate change, and what needs to occur now is the genesis of a new “masculinism” – a philosophy of man that embraces the achievements of feminism and strives to reconnect with the real.

Since the beginning of America’s recession, over 80 percent of those who’ve been laid off have been men. This ironic byproduct of pay inequality provides a couple of great opportunities: the chance for a radical shift in gender relations, and the chance for men to rediscover how to subsist outside of the tyranny of consumer ease.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The last of the great film-school slackers, Douglas Haddow now works as a writer/designer/consultant in Vancouver, British Columbia. He enjoys reading, bike-riding, sunny days, tasty waves and positive vibrations. He has a blog: pblks.com

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Dear John... (Stolen from Cracker Lilo's Front Porch)

Dear John,

I've decided our relationship is just not working. This is not because we are both boys; I find you very dull. Though I do like show tunes, I do have issues with "Cats". I feel my dislike of said musical has nothing to do with my orientation. Enclosed are reviews from many gay critics who also found this play boring.

Second, the girl I am now dating doesn't shave and could likely beat you in a fight. I feel my relationship with her does not make me any less queer. In fact, the strap-on we bought online is much better endowed than you are (although I am not making ANY judgments on size). I just mean to say she "gets me" better than you, and I am happier now.

Just because I am now with a female, this does not mean that I want to be purged from the LGbt mailing list. We plan to attend every marriage rally we can make. I may even go back to that bar we met at someday if and when our strap-on dies. When I go there (if it is still there and has not become a hipster bar), I will not be going as a closeted straight man, but as a bisexual. As such, I will not be taking my rainbow flag from the bumper of my car but may have to cover my yellow equal sign if space is needed.

In closing, I hope that our failed relationship will not lead to anger at all bisexual men. Since you dated me, there may be part of your makeup that needs to fall in love with a bi guy. Please don't hold this against all bisexual males as I'm sure at least one of us thinks "Cats" is a great work.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Will you just LISTEN already??


When people learn that I have a mental illness, everything I say tends to be filtered through their existing preconceptions of what the mentally ill can and cannot do.

Let's say I have an argument or an unconventional belief - however well thought out and logical, however long it's taken me to come up with it - it's inevitably seen as a sort of twisted logic, I can't possibly be right. Homosexuality or bisexuality? It's because I'm ill. Polyamory? It's because my illness has distorted or warped my views on love and trust. The right to die? That's my depression talking.

People confuse causation with correlation. My bisexuality doesn't cause my depression and anxiety, neither is it a result of it. Polyamory is not a symptom of mental dysfunction, it's a position I take based on my understandings of human biology and psychology, it simply makes more sense to me than compulsory monogamy. I would change my opinion on it if I found evidence to the contrary. And my stance on the right to end one's own life is something I have come to having witnessed first-hand the misery and despair that failing health often brings. I strongly believe in human dignity, that people should be given the choice to take control of this one last aspect of their lives and that their loved ones should be free to assist them (or not). It’s respect for humanity - not weariness of it - that brings me to this conclusion.

Sure, when I’m deeply depressed I might think of ending my life, and sometimes these depressions last for weeks at a time. But that impulse is coming from a different place than my intellectual stand on the right to die. If I were someone else with the authority to grant permission for Danny’s death, I would refuse it, because I understand that Danny is not capable of making a rational choice at those times.

I think other people’s confusion of causation and correlation with regard to my unconventional thoughts is largely due to their simply not knowing enough about mental illnesses and the people who are affected by them. It’s assumed that my problem with depression and anxiety affects me all the time, people often fail to understand that I have significant periods of lucidity that outlast the periods of depression. In those periods, I have ample time in which to think rationally and clearly, and to reflect on whether my beliefs and understandings are the product of my illness or whether they are actually valid conclusions.

Yes, I probably do have experiences in my life that make me more likely to hold some of the opinions I do and feel the things I feel, who doesn’t? But I get frustrated with people thinking that I am incapable of thinking critically and discerning truth, that I am blind to my own condition and to the thought processes of ‘normal’ people. I think if anything my lapses into illness force me to be more critical, particularly of my own thought processes. I can’t take anything for granted.

I guess the point I’m trying to make here is that you can’t attribute any observable aspect of my being to another, as such, at least not without a fair bit of investigation. My mental illness is not a symptom of my polyamory, bisexuality or beliefs about death, neither does it cause any of these. It is another facet of me, it may have developed alongside some of these ideas and beliefs as a result of quite unrelated circumstances, and perhaps the marginality of my positions on these issues makes me more likely than most to experience mental illness, but you cannot attribute one to the other. Evidence from studies of other individuals and groups with these beliefs and conclusions exist, and they simply don’t support a causative hypothesis.

Monday, November 17, 2008

November 17 2008

Seven years.

I've been a self-admitted out homo for seven years today. And right now, I don't see anything to celebrate in that.

Being honest with myself and others - that was what it was all about. I believed so strongly that truth was the most important thing in life, that honesty was a force to be reckoned with. I thought I would change what 'gay' meant in New Zealand, I would reconcile homosexuality with faith and spirituality. I would prove that it was possible to be both Christian and gay. I guess I was hoping to change Christianity too.

But I couldn't do it, could I? Trying to make sense of the Bible's stance on homosexuality, I could come to no other conclusion but that the Biblical writers didn't know what they were talking about, and that actually, the truth wasn't really so hard to see. The Biblical writers were just bigots, pure and simple.

It didn't stop there though. I found I could not be selective about what I took from the Bible, it was either all inspired or none of it was. I discarded Christianity, and it was one of the most painful things I've ever had to do. I felt robbed of the world I had invested so much of my life in, my whole purpose and meaning. I guess I've been grieving ever since.

Certainly no 'family,' bological or otherwise, has lived up to the love and community I experienced with the Church of Christ. With my spirituality in tatters, I threw myself into the gay community, hoping to find the same sense of belonging. I didn't find it - I was largely ignored because I was neither rich enough or pretty enough.

But I didn't give up on the gay community, again, I sought to reform, to guide, to support and encourage. I became deeply involved in caring for and protecting queer people - I joined the Wellington Gay Helpline, helped with the Newcomers' support group for gay men, campaigned for gay rights with the Civil Union Bill and wrote to newspapers, even contributing regular articles for Deviant, the weekly gay page in the Massey Student newspaper.

Maybe I got so involved in supporting the queer community because I myself was in need of that support. I always seem to be outside the norm, even within the queer community. My committment to honesty has seen me try to find responsible alternatives to the world of nominal monogamy, first looking at open relationships, then polyamory. I've renamed my sexual and gender identity to have more integrity with who I am, from gay to bisexual to queer, and now genderqueer or possibly even transgender. And it seems that my committment to honesty and integrity actually hurts me more than it helps.

I'm lonely. I am so overwhelmingly, desperately lonley that I spent last night, before this anniversary, contemplating suicide, and actually seeking advice on how to go about it. This isn't a new thing either, most of this year I've felt completely alone, utterly hopeless. What good is polyamory if nobody will love you in return? Why be open about your capacity to love multiple people if not even one person will hold your hand?

And this is the great irony of my life. I've constructed my whole abult life around promoting love and letting people be sexual in whatever way is most true for them, and yet I personally hate my romantic and sexual impulses. I want to mutilate my genitals more than what my parents already have by circumcising me, I want to tear at and scar my body to hide the physical scars left by my ambivalence toward food ands exercise, to hide my ugliness. I want to take apill to forever erase my passions, but more tah that I just want to leave the world I can never be part of - I want to just die.

Because this is me, I'm an all or nothing sort of person. If I can't love you, and that person, and that one, then I want to love no one. If nobody wants to have sex with me, I want to be completely invisible and blind, so that I see no one and no one sees me. I either can't stop eating or I don't eat at all.

Why am I talking about this? Why haven't I just swallowed a bottle of bleach or slit my wrists?

Because that's also who I am - I'm scared. I'm not scared of what's on the Other Side, because I no longer believe there is one. Death is just a blessed release, the end, the light going out. But I'm scared of getting it wrong, of failing and ending up crippled or incarcerated. I'm scared of the pain. I wish someone would do this with me, or for me.

I await oblivion.

Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Eight Years

Eight years now I've given and
What have you done for me?
Though I've shown my committment
To this fickle family.
When you needed letters written
I wrote them, signed my name.
When you wouldn't speak up for yourselves
I stood up to be shamed.
You wanted to get married,
I took your cause up as my own
Though I knew I wouldn't benefit
I made your feelings known.
I manned the phones and held the line
Against religious freaks,
I trained to give words of advice
When you were suffering.
I've given up my evenings
And all anonymity,
You fucked me off, I held my tongue,
I didn't cause a scene.
When you were sick I comforted,
I took the time to care -
Though others washed their hands of you
I made sure I stood near
To let you know you're worth it,
That I love you as you are,
But sometimes I have to admit
You make it fucking hard.
You do nothing for yourselves
But it's me that gets the blame
When things go wrong, I'm on my own
To hell with what we've gained
And if I should show my differences
From all the rest of you
You treat me like a lepper,
Words of friendship ring untrue.
Eight years, and now looking back
What have I got to show?
I really did believe in you
But now I just don't know.

DannyR

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Goodbye, Yellow Brick Road

This song describes quite well how I'm feeling just now, having today resigned from UniQ and resolved to leave Palmerston North and go back to work. It's about turning my back on being cosmopolitan and fake, and returning to the familiar, the isolated and the genuine. A lot of the bitterness, reflected in references to 'Society Dogs' and being set on your feet again by just another couple of drinks, is directed toward Seth, who I feel at this point cares about nobody but himself and his own interests, least of all my feelings.

The Yellow Brick Road, I feel, is quite apt, too.... too long have I chased after dreams, thinking that happiness lay 'out there' somewhere. There is also, implicit in this song for me at least, a rejection of the Gay Community. I have found it to be shallow, superficial and judgemental - serving only it's own interests, readily abandoning those who cannot so easily conform to 'normalness'.

So then, here, in all their bitter splendour, are the lyrics to Elton John's 'Goodbye, Yellow Brick Road':



When are you gonna come down,
When are you going to land?
I should have stayed on the farm -
I should have listened to my old man!

You know you can't hold me forever -
I didn't sign up with you.
I'm not a present for your friends to open,
This boy's too young to be singing
The blues.

So goodbye, Yellow Brick Road,
Where the dogs of society howl -
You can't plant me in your penthouse,
I'm going back to my plough!
Back to the howling old owl
Hunting the horny back toad...
Oh I've finally decided my future lies
Beyond the Yellow Brick Road!

What do you think you'll do then?
I bet that'll shoot down your plane.
It'll take you a couple of vodka and tonics
To set you on your feet again!

Maybe you'll get a replacement,
There's plenty like me to be found -
Mongrels who ain't got a penny,
Sniffing for tidbits like you on
The ground.

So goodbye, Yellow Brick Road,
Where the dogs of society howl -
You can't plant me in your penthouse,
I'm going back to my plough!
Back to the howling old owl
Hunting the horny back toad...
Oh I've finally decided my future lies
Beyond the Yellow Brick Road!

by Bernie Taupin, Elton John



Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, assholes!!

Thursday, August 30, 2007

Quadruple Whammy -- SHAG Week, Deviant, CHAFF 2007

Queer enough?

What’s queer? Who’s queer?

These days, we usually use the word to talk about the ‘non-straight’ people in society, the obvious non-conformists like transsexuals, lesbians, gay men and bisexuals among us. Most of us understand ‘queer’ to mean same-sex orientation to some degree or the physical transition from one sex to the other, and for most intents and purposes, it suits just fine.

But who are we leaving out?

There are lots of other people out there who don’t call themselves straight but aren’t covered by our four ‘normal’ queer categories. Can the term ‘queer’ encompass all these many varied identities and behaviours?

First off the mark, how about people who are intersex, that is born neither male nor female, or some combination of both? Well of course, we queer people say earnestly, yes, obviously they belong under this umbrella with us. But we don’t think about them much, do we? We don’t make really make room in our communities for them, because we’re actually highly invested in people having ‘the right bits’. Gay girls emphatically want girl’s bits to play with, and gay guys are NOT welcoming of anyone who looks male overall but has some other sort of plumbing. Gay guys are positively elitist when it comes to the size and shape of certain organs. We're more about genitals than perhaps even straight people are. If the bits we expect to find aren't there, or are somewhat different, we react with something like disgust.

What about people who consider themselves transgender, but have no intention of making any sort of physical transition? The woman who secretly considers herself innately male, for instance, but lives an otherwise regular life? Or how about the ultra feminine woman, complete with all the plumbing, who is genetically male?
Shall we consider the transvestite – a straight man or woman who enjoys taking on the opposite gender only some of the time, with no interest in actually making a permanent transition? We in the queer community jump to the assumption that these people are bisexual or gay, given our experience with drag queens and kings, but surprisingly enough the vast majority of transvestites are actually heterosexual men.

What of the conventional male-female couple who enjoy swapping sexual roles and behaviours in the sack, celebrating their dual genderedness? A man may have no attraction to other men, and yet enjoy pretending to be a woman in the sack, and this role-playing is not that uncommon in women either. Similarly, there are men out there who would be considered ‘straight’ by all standards, except for their enjoyment of their female partner penetrating them with a sex toy or digit, and there’s a lot of resistance and discrimination toward these men among the majority male population. Surely, that qualifies them for queer status?

What about the man or woman who knows himself or herself to have the capacity to relate sexually to both men and women, who lives a happy, conventional life with the wife or husband and kids, never actively pursuing sexual relationships with anyone of the same-sex? In essence, a non-practicing bisexual? Queer enough? Do they need to be identified as queer? Maybe not, if queerness is qualified by participation in a lifestyle or community involving other queer people. But if it is, what of the celibate gay man or woman, someone who does not pursue sexual or social relationships with anyone, yet happily identifies as homosexual?

Recently in New Zealand, the tiny asexual community is striving to make itself heard. These are people who may have romantic interests and sometimes even sexual relationships with spouses, yet do not experience any sort of sexual attraction. That’s a difficult idea for a lot of us to get our heads around, but they’re here, and they’ll be queer, if we let them. Why not?

What are we to make of the straight man that chooses to have sex with men for convenience or out of a rejection of women? That’s not acceptable practice in the wider community – so is it queer? Or how about heterosexual platonic lovers, those happy few who choose never to have sex with their loved one - not just until they are married, but NEVER? They won’t be harassed by the heterosexual population at large, very likely, but they’ll certainly be considered odd or somehow faulty. Should we welcome such couples under our big queer umbrella?

And then there’s heterosexual polygamists and the polyamorous… those people who either have multiple spouses or multiple romantic relationships (FYI they’re not the same thing). Does a woman with two husbands living together in one household, sharing her romantically, fiscally and physically, count as queer? What about a man with a wife and a girlfriend or two who all know about each other and are happy with the arrangement? That’s definitely not acceptable in our day and age, though there are the beginnings of the tiniest whispers of social change around these issues.

The point I’m trying to make is that there is a vast array of diverse sexual behaviour out there that is in conflict with traditional conceptions of what it is to be ‘straight,’ ‘normal’ and ‘acceptable.’ By altering our notions of what it is to be queer, and inviting all those sex, love and gender nonconformists to share with us a position of confident opposition to the mandated model of heterosexuality in our culture, we can free our society of the expectation that weighs so heavily on so many of us. That’s the ‘queer’ I want to be a part of: a movement that stands in opposition to repression and conformity, that seeks to liberate and enable all to express their love, sexuality and many gendered identities.

Danny Rudd


Wank, wank, wank…

Is it mere coincidence that the idea of ‘the homosexual’ as an entirely separate type of human being emerged in the same century and culture as did the invention of the photographic image and the moving picture, or did the birth of these technologies in fact help create ‘the homosexual’ as a category of human, by making graphic imagery of same-sex sexual behaviours more accessible, thereby allowing greater numbers of men to cement their sexuality?

The historically recent emergence of visual technologies such as photography, print and film has allowed for the mass production of graphic depictions of human sexual behaviour. Inevitably, amongst the masses of ‘straight’ pornography made available by these technologies, some of these images were of same-sex behaviours. Now, I’m not suggesting for a moment that exposure to homosexual imagery actually causes homosexual urges, as it’s obvious that a person can have same sex attractions without having ever laid eyes on gay porn. There must have been a ready market for homosexual porn for it to have got off the ground at all. And clearly, homosexual sex acts occur in societies where the graphic image is absent. My argument, rather, is that it is the repeated, deliberate exposure to the static or moving depiction of exclusively male-male sex, in connection with masturbation, that has allowed a greater number of men than ever before to cement a preference for the type of sexual conduct depicted by homosexual pornography.

Let me explain how this happens in a little more detail. Through looking at images that depict certain behaviours (say, rimming or fellatio) and masturbating in contemplation of those images, a man creates a mental and perhaps even neural association between the behaviours he observes and sexual pleasure. He is then more likely to repeat the act of masturbation in response to the stimulus, in an attempt to recreate the initial pleasurable experience, and the more often he does this, the stronger the association becomes, until he finds himself unable to ‘get off’ in response to any other stimulus. I would suggest that this masturbatory process might in fact be responsible for more than the small-scale adoption of specific sex acts, that it is in fact largely responsible for creating an exclusive preference for one gender over the other. And maybe this has made exclusive homosexuality more prevalent in our Western societies than it might otherwise be. Commercial demand prompts greater supply and all the networking that goes with it, and before long there are enough people to form a rudimentary community.

In other words, gayness as an identity is largely the product of the male obsession with whacking off while looking at dirty pictures. I could be wrong, but I think there’s pretty good evidence for this assertion. For instance, in those cultures without ready access to film and print, where homosexual behaviour among men has been observed or reported, there is arguably more fluidity in male sexuality: the men almost without fail go on to develop sexual relationships with women after an ‘apprenticeship’ with older men, or they maintain sexual relationships with both men and women throughout their adult lives. In such cultures, actual communities founded on same-sex sexual behaviour are unheard of. Even historically, in classical societies such as those of the Greeks and Romans, it was considered the norm for men who engaged in homosexual sex acts to marry heterosexually and engage in heterosexual coupling as well. It is also telling that gay women, who are on the whole less likely to expose themselves to pornography, commonly report more fluidity in their sexual identity and expression than do gay men.

It would be fascinating to conduct sociological and psychological studies into this much neglected area of human behaviour… of course, no such studies have been proposed by mostly male queer theorists, who have much invested politically in the notion of homosexuality as something innate and immutable. Yes, the conception of inborn homosexuality has paved the way for rights and recognition, but increasingly as gay and bisexual women’s voices are heard, the biological determinist position looks less tenable.

Danny Rudd


A Challenge…

A lot of men these days proudly declare themselves feminists, or talk about being in touch with their feminine side… but what does that actually mean? Isn’t that an acknowledgement that each of us has a spark of female inside us? Doesn’t that mean we’re all just the tiniest bit transgendered? Funny, then, that we sensitive new age guys don’t give ourselves girl’s names.

Say what?

That’s a bit extreme, I hear you say, surely? The very idea makes even the most sensitive, most new age-y guys squirm. But if we are really, truly pro-female and comfortable with our inner femininity, however slight, we shouldn’t have any trouble with it. If we do, we’re hypocrites.

I gave myself a girl’s name. At first I kept it to myself, and that was weird enough. I found it hard just thinking of a girl’s name I could comfortably call myself… until I realised I wouldn’t feel comfortable with any girl’s name, because while I’m pretty darn feminist, I have some deep-seated discomfort with the idea of people calling me a girl in a derogatory way. Society tells us subtly that it’s not acceptable, and we listen. But after trying fairly androgynous-sounding names like Danni [sic] and Tara, I pushed myself and picked something more feminine, precisely because it made me uncomfortable. Then when I let my friends know I wanted to try it on for a day, they made it pretty obvious they thought I was being stupid, I got the message loud and clear. As a guy, I’m not allowed to be a Sarah.

But for a girl to have a guy’s name, like Terri or Jo, or even a name derived from a male name, like Geraldine or Paula, is quite normal… do you see the double standard here? It’s ok for a girl to ‘aspire’ to manliness, not just in name but in things like confidence and comfort of clothing and so on, but for a guy to look like a girl… that’s just not on. That’s because as a society, we still stupidly think there’s something inferior about femaleness. And that’s what’s behind effeminate males and drag queens being harassed and male-to-female transgender people being called immoral or perverted.

THAT’S not on.

So come on guys, put yourselves to the test… give yourself a girl’s name, even for just a day, and see if it makes you think or feel any differently. What are you afraid of?

Danny Rudd


Poison Seed

I don’t know whether I should be relieved or horrified that a lot of young bisexual and gay men these days don’t know what the term ‘bug chasing’ means.
According to that veritable fount of knowledge, Wikipedia: bugchasing (or bug chasing) is a slang term for a subculture of gay men who desire, and actively pursue HIV infection. Bugchasers ‘chase the bug’ by seeking sexual partners who are HIV positive for the purpose of having unprotected sex and sero-converting; ‘giftgivers’ are HIV+ men who attempt to infect bugchasers with HIV.

That’s insane, right? Why would anyone actually want to contract HIV?

There’s a lot of debate about how prevalent this behaviour actually is. A widely discredited article in Rolling Stone a couple of years back suggested that up to 25% of people who contract HIV do so on purpose, while some researchers consider it little more than an internet fantasy. But it does exist.
People who consider themselves bugchasers want to take control of their sex lives and destiny… basically, they see HIV infection as inevitable and just want to get it out of the way. A lot of them think using condoms is unnatural and gets in the way of their sexual pleasure by reducing the sensitivity of their penis. The problem is that these guys don’t know what they’re getting themselves into. Medications are available now which, while not curing the disease, can prolong an infected person’s life and to some extent hide the more unpleasant aspects. And in the States, doctors prescribe steroids to HIV+ men to prevent muscle wasting, and as a result a lot of positive men are able to achieve the trim, muscular looks the rest of us aspire to and desire.
Coupled with this, there is an alarming recent trend in gay pornography to glamorise ‘bare-backing’ or unprotected anal sex. There are now HIV+ gay porn stars saying that their positive status allows them to indulge in unprotected orgiastic behaviour without fear of the consequences, because they’ve already got the worst thing they can get, and thanks to the medications, it’s not doing them any noticeable harm. One such porn star is Treasure Island Media’s Dawson, the hulkingly well-built poster boy for ‘carefree’ HIV+ sexuality. So the message is clear: you can look hotter and get more sex if you've got the bug.

Sounds great, right? Trouble is, while outwardly you might look attractive and able to have as much sex as you want with whomever, there’s a whole lot else going on that the glamour account of HIV isn’t letting you in on. All those medications cause really uncomfortable and sometimes crippling side effects, and they’re not foolproof. You could get another strain of HIV from unsafe sex that your current medication can’t protect you from, get sick quickly and die unpleasantly. Or if you live in a country where the drugs aren’t covered by insurance or welfare and you can’t afford them, you’re in for an excruciating, drawn out death, being ugly to boot, as opportunistic skin infections tarnish your good looks.

The bugchasers could know all this, but they don’t. Why? Well, partly they’re just sick of hearing all the warnings, it’s like the news: you get desensitised after a while. But more so, the gay community is deeply age-segregated: we younger guys just don’t get to know the older guys because we don’t want them hitting on us. We’re only interested in the hot boys, who mostly happen to be young, like ourselves. This is all perfectly natural, really, we’re a pretty conceited lot, but this segregation means that we don’t hear the stories the older guys could tell. And maybe we don’t want to: we’re young, this is supposed to be the time of our lives, we don’t want to think about death. But the truth is, the older guys saw their friends, lovers and sex partners dying all around them, they haven’t forgotten, and now we’re at risk and we’re not listening to the stories that might help us to take more responsibility for ourselves and each other.

The point of all this is that it really is desperately important for all you guys who are having receptive anal sex, whether straight, bi or gay, to protect yourselves by insisting your sex partner(s) use condoms. Don’t be fooled into thinking it doesn’t matter – because getting HIV infection will seriously fuck up your life. I have friends who are positive, and all the discrimination, shame, cramps, diarrhoea, vomiting, lesions and blindness aren’t worth it. Believe me.

Danny Rudd

Monday, August 20, 2007

Queer by Choice

A collection of quotes taken from :

"Queer by choice: Lesbians, gay men, and the politics of identity" Whisman, Vera (1996) Routledge, New York


Edward Porter - 'My friends say "you're eithere straight or gay." And I say that's not true. I am not, twenty four hours a day, a sexually oriented person. It's at those times when I am going to be sexual, it is homosexual. The only time I'm gay is basically when I have a relationship with someone.'
Vera Whisman - 'So you might even say that relationships are gay, not that people are gay.'
Edward Porter - 'Oh, I like that.'

Mary Behnke (p34) - 'We don't even know what it would be like to choose to be heterosexual, almost, in this society. Because what you've seen on television and in the ads, and on and on, ad infinitum from moment one, and you know, when the first thing ever said about you is "It's a boy" or "It's a girl," you're being shuttled into that traditional gender role. I think it would be nice if change could be made so that all people could be fully human and heterosexuality could be a choice.'

Henry Yount (p34-35) - I think in a hundred years from now, homosexuals will have provided a means for a healthy heterosexuality. Heterosexuals never make a choice. There is no choice, that's the norm. So it's as bad for them as it is for homosexuals. Heterosexuals are left in this helpless position also, of "Well, that's the way it is. That's what I'm supposed to do, that's how I', supposed to behave." And that's not healthy. The route of being attracted to someone because they have the opposite plumbing is just a lie. I'm not heterophobic, but I just look forward to a time when it's a healthy choice, and it's made for good rational reasons, which is that you want to be involved with this person, whatever their plumbing is.'

Malcolm Wilson (p24) -I know that people do [choose to be gay]. I have friends who have. I didn't used to before, but now I sort of feel that I can accept the idea that one could turn gay. Which I guess means that one could turn heterosexual, I suppose. I mean, on some of these talk shows you always see at least one person who will say "I used to be gay and now I saw that light." What is going on? You start to think, well, is it really possible for the person to have *turned* heterosexual?'

Sam Broome (p21) - 'I think calling yourself bisexual is the purest form of narcissism. It's like, "If it has an orifice, I'm going to use it."

On Stonewall (p17) - 'The reason so few of us are bisexual is because society made such a big stink about homosexuality that we got forced into seeing ourselves as either straight or non-straight... We'll be gay until everyone has forgotten it's an issue. Then we'll begin to be complete.' (Wittman 1992, orig. 1970:331)

Friday, March 30, 2007

The Second Coming Out -- Deviant, CHAFF 2007

Bisexuality is a difficult topic for psychologists, queer theorists, Christian conservatives and a whole lot of other people out there. It’s not about sexual orientation, as we understand heterosexual or homosexual orientation, rather, it defies the very concept of orientation, refusing to be pinned down, insisting that sexuality is fluid and boundless. It poses some of the most interesting and complex challenges for queer theorists and sexologists – so complex, in fact, that that these questions are very often ignored. The results of my own investigations in our campus library and in town were sadly unsurprising; there is a real dearth of material available on the subject. Unfortunately, this is pretty much the state of affairs around the world, so here I will endeavour to cast a little light on the topic.

We’re taught to see duality in almost everything in our lives: male and female, light and dark, hot and cold, moral and immoral, to name but a few, and our perspectives of sex are no different; we generally only think in terms of gay and straight. But human sexuality is a little more complex than that; you simply can’t squeeze the full range of human sexual feelings and behaviours into only two classifications. And so, it’s generally agreed that a minimum of three categories is needed to represent these varied attractions and activities: heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual.

Misinformation abounds on any topic that involves human sexuality. However, it seems to be particularly prevalent where homosexuality and bisexuality are concerned. Some common myths about bisexuality are:

Everybody is bisexual
WRONG!! Kinsey found that only a very small minority of adults identify themselves as bisexual on his 7 level rating scale. His team found that the vast majority of adults rate themselves as either “0” (purely heterosexual; attracted only to members of the opposite gender) or “6” (purely homosexual; attracted only to members of the same sex.) and that in truth, only about 2% of the adult population is bisexual (ratings 1 to 5). Of these, only a very small minority are attracted to both men and women equally and identify themselves with a “3” rating.

Nobody is bisexual
WRONG!! Christian conservatives and the gay and lesbian community have generally agreed on one thing over the years: that bisexuality doesn’t exist. It’s easier to come out as bi now, but typically gays and lesbians have regarded bisexuals as fellow homos who just won’t play ball and come fully out of the closet (I used to get this all the time), while our conservative religious friends have repeatedly and emphatically denied the ontological existence of any sexual identity other than straight.

Bisexuality is just a phase
For some it may be. For example, some gay girls and guys try to ‘pass’ or hide from society's homophobia by developing sexual relationships with people of the opposite sex. A few even go so far as marrying. These relationships aren’t satisfying and usually don’t last very long though; the individual remains a homosexual. My experience has actually been the other way around, I came out as gay from the get-go, when I’d finally dealt with my religious issues, and only later came to acknowledge my bisexuality. Still others know themselves to be bi from an early age, or experiment and decide it’s not for them.

Bisexuals are equally attracted to both genders
A common misconception is that to be a bisexual, you must be sexually attracted to men and women equally. This is definitely not true. In the Kinsey scale described above, a person who is equally attracted to both men and women is a "3." Kinsey and others have found many bisexuals who identify themselves as a 1, 2 (i.e. mainly attracted to members of the opposite gender), or a 4 or 5 (i.e. mainly attracted to members of the same gender). Many individuals, although attracted to both men and women, have a real preference. The thing I find most interesting, personally, is that these attractions aren’t immutably fixed, that different things about different people, at different times of our lives, can be appealing.

Bisexuals “...possesses a generally indiscriminate sexual desire toward persons of both sexes”
This is a quotation from America, the national Roman Catholic weekly. However, all adults, including those with a bisexual orientation are known to be attracted to only some persons and not to others. We all discriminate on the basis of age, physical attractiveness, body style, etc. My bisexuality doesn’t mean I’ll lust after just anybody.

Bisexuals are incapable of monogamy
This is perhaps the most prevalent assumption about bisexuality, and has caused me so much grief I gave up identifying as bi for a while; it just wasn’t worth the arguments. You tell your girlfriend or boyfriend you’re bi, they instantly assume you’re going to cheat on them. But many bisexuals maintain loving, exclusive relationships with one significant other over considerable time, God knows I have. Similarly, Johnny Straight-Boy might be attracted to a substantial percentage of the 1.5 billion of adult women in the world, and yet, he may be quite capable of committing himself to a single Jill. Be fair, eh?

Bisexuals are only satisfied if they have sexual partners of both genders
Wrong again. Bisexuals are attracted to both genders, but we don’t necessarily act on our feelings of attraction, and are quite capable of developing exclusive, stable relationships. The term bisexuality is descriptive of how people feel, not necessarily how they act: a person can feel attractions to both men and women, decide to remain celibate or only become involved in relationships with persons of a particular gender, and still be considered a bisexual by themselves and others.

Bisexuals alternate genders in their relationships
Some people actually think that if a bisexual person ends a relationship with a man, their next sexual partner will definitely be a woman -- or vice versa. WRONG!! Nobody plans who he or she will fall in love with, it just happens.

Bisexuals have the same problems as gays and lesbians
Not necessarily. True, bisexuals who admit to or act on an attraction to a person of the same sex run the same risk as gays and lesbians, of being victims of gay bashing, being discriminated against in hiring, being fired from their job or refused accommodation, even losing custody of their children. But there are many other factors to consider, for instance, a bisexual who keeps his or her attraction to the same sex a secret can pass in society as a heterosexual and not be at risk of homophobia.
Some openly bisexual individuals are actually subjected to prejudice from the lesbian/gay community. When gay and lesbian communities were first establishing themselves last century, bisexuals were actually considered traitors! These days, however, this animosity has virtually disappeared as more gay/lesbian groups have evolved to become gay/lesbian/bisexual groups.

If you’ve always felt a little untruthful calling yourself straight or if, like me, you put on the gay hat and found it didn’t quite fit, do some reading and open your eyes to yourself and all the strange, wonderful and perversely normal things you could be.
Two great books, if you can find them, are: Vice Versa: Bisexuality and the Eroticism of Everyday Life by Marjorie Garber, and Queer Theories by Donald E. Hall. Don’t tie yourself up in knots about it, and remember, there are people around to help you out if it’s all new and scary to you. Try UniQ, or pop in and see a counsellor on campus.


DannyR

Science vs Religion

Heart

Heart
I guess I just care too much...