Anonymous #1 22h

I promise im not making it up its not a super popular take but its insidious

13

Anonymous #1 21h

the idea isn't based on subjective labels, feelings, and experiences, but in the idea that hypothetically, anyone gay or straight could fit into the technical definition and be attracted to someone who doesn't fit into their defined sexuality (ex being all the straight men in love with ryan reynolds. they consider themself straight as does everyone else, but you could argue that by being into this man, they fit into the prescriptive definition of bisexual)

-2

Anonymous #2 21h

i have met a guy before though that fully thought everyone was bisexual and romantic attraction wasn't real, it was just hyperclose platonic mixed with sexuality (i think he believed in asexuals too, though, but im not 100% sure)

12

Anonymous OP 21h

“In too” 🫠

45

Anonymous OP 21h

Certain people that are bi/pan fail to grasp the fact that some people do not think of the opposite gender sexually whatsoever, and that some people are not attracted to others on the basis of their sex/gender

29

Anonymous #5 20h

Tbh im not sure if this is a bi specific problem: i have met SOME homosexuals who think truly bisexuality is just a step to homosexuality rather than its own entirely valid separate sexuality. I think this comes down to humans tendency to think their experience is the only experience and they cant comprehend anything other than that. My point is that humans suck lol

46

Anonymous #6 19h

if there even has to be a default

7

Anonymous #2 18h

brother yall are just downvoting to downvote; i'm just explaining how and why people say that from my discussions with people

1

Anonymous #8 17h

Ding ding ding: assuming bisexuality as the default is in no way different than assuming straight is the default and everything else is abnormal. The only thing different about it is optics.

19

Anonymous #7 17h

Are you not hearing anyone? Default translates to normal and giving anything a default makes anything that is different “abnormal.” No default exists: sexuality is too complex to call anything a default.

10

Anonymous OP 17h

the way that these people also tend to be blatantly aphobic 😭

6

Anonymous OP 16h

Maybe you need to take a break from the internet

-2

Anonymous #10 16h

Homophobia is a nonissue?

6

Anonymous #6 16h

I dont think anything should be the default tbh with you.

3

Anonymous #10 16h

Maybe you need to deconstruct your homophobia

4

Anonymous #9 16h

Yep! Dont believe anyone could not feel their particular level of attraction, sexual or romantic so they in some ways genuinely think ace people dont exist 😭

4

Anonymous OP 15h

You guys are all so close to the actual point. Homosexuality/Bisexuality/Heterosexuality/etc are medical terms that were originally used to pathologize same-sex attraction, which imo, is just an innate part of the human experience. We should stop trying to quantify and box up said experience and the world would be much better off.

-3

Anonymous OP 15h

that’s why i added “if there even had to be a default” :) i think that there doesn’t need to be one but in this society idk if we will (at least for now) move away from labels and defaults. idk bruh

3

Anonymous #11 15h

Found the self important jack off who thinks labels are dumb. News flash: some people NEED labels. I love my “box” and you can kick rocks. You are missing my point that defining ANY sexuality as the default is problematic.

12

Anonymous #6 15h

Yeah unfortunately you can thank colonialism and imperialism for that lol. As you can most bad things in our society

2

Anonymous OP 15h

Identifying with your oppression is actually harmful. Calling same-sex attraction “homosexuality” and viewing it as a “wiring of the brain” instead of just normal human behavior is like calling gender dysphoria “Gender Identify Disorder” and treating transness as a mental illness. It’s crazy how you’re woke enough to understand the impact of imperialism and colonialism on our perception of ourselves but not the wide spread pathologization of identity in western medicine.

-2

Anonymous #11 15h

Its crazy how you’re woke enough to understand that some terms may be outdated (which I UNDERSTAND, but it is the best verbage we have without being jargon) yet you can’t understand how understanding multi-gendered or sexed attraction to be a default sexuality is harmful to people who are attracted to one. To suggest bisexuality as the default is to fall into the same exact trap in which we have been FORCED to understand sexuality for hundreds of years. The people who claim everyone is bisexual

8

Anonymous #11 15h

Are not arguing for the ridding of labels from society. Theyre arguing that everyone is ONE THING.

9

Anonymous OP 15h

Hmm well that’s not the argument I’m making. To me, there’s no such thing as a “default sexuality” because sexuality/“sexual orientation” doesn’t exist. Sexual and Romantic attraction exist and they exist in spectrums. You’re attracted to different people for different reasons.

0

Anonymous #11 15h

we shouldn't HAVE to NEED labels, but there's nothing wrong with people labeling themselves. there are a ton of labels that are innate human experience but we don't think about it. are you gonna tell a brunette person that they shouldn't call themself brunette? a blind person they shouldn't call themself blind? a fat person that they shouldn't call themself fat? these are all just states of being that come naturally in the world. and there's nothing wrong with labeling it.

1

Anonymous OP 15h

I think what people are trying to say when they say that “bisexuality is the default” is actually a misguided attempt at saying “people would be more open to sexual exploration outside of social expectations if those expectations didn’t exist” and that goes for everyone. There are masc lesbians in relationships with high-fem gay men.

-1

Anonymous #2 15h

I think the language we use to understand ourselves and each other important. Who knew saying something as harmless as “sexuality is a social construct and queerness is a part of the human experience” would ruffle this many feathers.

-2

Anonymous #11 15h

but that's not what you're saying. you said people shouldn't identify as any sexuality and even got to "sexuality doesn't exist". i believe queerness is natural and a spectrum and all that shit.

3

Anonymous #1 13h

I’ve heard it in real life multiple times this month alone…

4

Anonymous OP 13h

This image is extra irritating bc of how heteronormative it is. It’s acting like the reader is straight….. for me to be bi, I would have to find the OPPOSITE sex attractive, not the same. So even in this being a homophobic sentiment, it was written with a homophobic theme being that is is heteronormative.

6

Anonymous #6 13h

No. Sexuality is NOT fluid for everyone, just like everyone is not bisexual. Saying sexuality is fluid for everyone is the same amount of homophobic as saying everyone is bi.

8

Anonymous #11 13h

Nobody sees words created to identify yourself and your culture and community in regards to your sexual orientation as medical terms. Just bc that’s how certain words came to be, does not mean that’s how they were used. We don’t use these words as medical terms anymore and haven’t for my entire lifetime, personally. These words helps us identify ourselves and others so we feel less alone and can have community. Why would you think not having a term for who you are is a non oppressive idea?

10

Anonymous #11 13h

Maybe for YOU. tbh that sounds like saying “everyone’s bisexual” in different fonts. NOT EVERYONE’S SEXUALITY IS FLUID. STOP. people do not all have a spectrum inside of them. The spectrum is the idea that individuals can fall anywhere within a spectrum but that does not mean they can just change sexualities. It is usually fixed. Sexuality in general is a fluid idea, not that sexuality is fluid within people.

12

Anonymous #11 13h

A “lesbian” in a relationship with a man is not a lesbian. And a gay man with a woman is not a gay man. WTF is wrong with you?! How disrespectful of those identities.

3

Anonymous #11 13h

Sexuality is not a social construct.

7

Anonymous #7 13h

No

2

Anonymous OP 13h

You haven’t even deconstructed yours sweetie 😭 you’re still calling yourself a homosexual which was once a term synonymous with pedophile. Unpack THAT please!!

-4

Anonymous #13 13h

It quite literally is but if you wanna die on the hill of bio essentialism, then by all means, go for it. This is the same argument made by transphobes who claim that trans men cannot be in “homosexual” relationships with other men. Just weird all around.

-1

Idk I think you all kinda reek of transphobia to me

-4

Not you specifically but this weird defensiveness and open hostility towards people who discuss sexuality as a spectrum or explore sexual fluidity and that it’s not a cut-and-dry sort of thing. It just rubs me the wrong way. All bioessentialist rhetoric is bad as well.

-2

Anonymous #13 13h

yes sexuality is not fluid in most individuals, but the identities are social (the attraction itself is not, but being a lesbian is a social identity about sexuality) and there can be a lesbian/gay man in a relationship with a man/woman, although it will not be the vast, vast, vast majority of cases

2

Anonymous #2 13h

Can’t believe this is such a fucking hot take here. It’s like nobody’s ever taken a sociology class. 😭

-2

If the shoe doesn’t fit you don’t wear it? There’s lots of queer women that exclusively date other queer women who are also open to dating trans men. Like I said, sexual and romantic attraction aren’t a list of boxes you check. It exists on a spectrum.

-2

You are projecting your relationship with your mother onto a stranger online. I never said "you should try men." I’m saying "let people explore themselves freely and without the need for labels." Go to therapy.

-1

Anonymous #14 12h

yeah, it’s a misunderstanding of “sexuality is a spectrum, lots of people fall between sexualities.” people will still fall on the ends of the spectrum. and (for example) if a gay man has very little attraction or hyper-conditional attraction to women (such as only liking celebrities/fictional woman characters bc they’re unobtainable), then he’s still a gay man. no one would call that bisexual unless they’re trying to confuse people lol

1

Anonymous #11 11h

Unpack the fact that you’re homophobic lol. Find me one academic source where homosexual ever meant pedophile. Unpack your inability to critically think.

9

Anonymous #11 11h

I have a masters degree. I have taken numerous sociology classes.

1

Anonymous #11 11h

Not everything is transphobic. A lot of the things you are suggesting are transphobic are just basic respect to sexuality.

8

Anonymous #2 11h

The only way a lesbian and a gay man would be together is if it was friendship and they did r lavender marriage or something. Otherwise, they would not be gay and lesbian.

10

Anonymous #11 11h

I’ve taken sociology class…. Your ideas are just not very agreeable or inclusive… you’re looking at everything from only your point of view and fixing the rest of the world around it in a way that is very disagreeable. Like for example, when you said a lesbian can date a man and still be a lesbian. Blatantly false. So yeah…. I’ve taken sociology in college. Have you???

8

Anonymous #2 4h

that's called aroallo

1

Anonymous OP 2h

I’m not homophobic but you are chronically online to the point it has stunted you mentally

1

Anonymous OP 2h

I understand why you’re so pressed, I’d be finding molehills to turn into mountains too if I never interacted with people offline

0

Anonymous #16 59m

ik what it is if someone doesn't experience romantic attraction but they do sexual, im just reciting what some guy's beliefs were lol

1