The thing is when you’re bisexual, you’re not really surprised when a straight person is biphobic. Sure it sucks and you’re like “well fuck you too dude” to whoever the prick is; but it’s not so astonishing.
Biphobic gay people on the other hand, actually hurt like a motherfucker. Like bro you’re supposed to be on my side??? Like even “my people” can’t accept me?? That hurts so much more than some random dude who expects a threesome.
pocaloids asked: I kinda don't feel comfortable with "monosexual" because it implies that I'm only attracted to one gender
Also I’m the creator of matrosexual/romantic and I’d say yeah that counts as being mga considering that it specifies that yeah you can be a lesbian and attracted to more than one gender
Anonymous asked: I'm heterosexual but bi-romantic - would it be appropriative for me to say that I'm non-monosexual since the monosexual part refers to sexual attraction and monoromantic privilege is different from monosexual privilege?
I personally don’t think it’s appropriative, because I think it’s possible for people to experience both privilege and oppression at the same time (intersectionality!) so I think that while you may gain some privileges from being heterosexual, you still experience monosexism/monoromanticism(?) from being biromantic. You’re still a part of the community.
Like tbh I have 0 tolerance for people who are like “biromantic people are fake queers” or whatever bullshit they like to say. You are real and valid and so is your orientation, and I think as long as we’re all acknowledging our own privileges and talking about them then we should be as inclusive as possible.
Anonymous asked: Hey so I saw your response to the matrosexual query and I was wondering if you knew the term for the masculine. This would help put a name to what I've been thinking about my sexuality for he past few months.
I actually don’t know if there’s a specific term for this, but our followers are welcome to weigh in.
Anonymous asked: Do you have any idea what matrosexual means? I googled it and couldn't find anything.
My understanding is that it’s used to describe being attracted to female or femme-identified folks, so that may include women, genderqueer folks, and non-binary folks. So while they’re attracted to “femininity”, or however they identify that, they may still be attracted to more than one gender. So that’s why some people might identify as matrosexual and a lesbian, or matrosexual and bisexual, etc., to clarify that.
Anonymous asked: Are matrosexual/romantic lesbians considered mga? Do they not have monosexual privilege, since they're not monosexual? What about asexual or aromantic lesbians?
In these cases things may get a little more complex. If someone identifies as a lesbian, they may have the privilege of having their identity more readily accepted on the surface level. But if they then start dating a non-binary femme person, for example, their identity will likely come into question by others. They’ll probably be asked a lot of the same ridiculous questions a bi or pan person would be asked. So my personal opinion on that would be that in certain situations they might have monosexual privilege based on how they choose to identify themselves, but in other situations they certainly would experience the other side of monosexism.
And as I said before, I certainly think asexuals are a part of the non-monosexual community, regardless of their romantic orientation. They may experience different levels of privilege based on their romantic orientation, but if you’re asexual, I don’t think you have monosexual privilege.
I would say aromantic lesbians still have monosexual privilege because they are still attracted to one gender, but not romantic privilege. Similarly, a bisexual heteroromantic person can have romantic privilege without monosexual privilege.
panickyintheuk asked: I've offended some people by saying that bisexuality is, by our community's definition, an umbrella term that also encompasses pansexuality. I've been told that by two separate people that pansexuality and bisexuality are, in fact, two completely different things (and also that I'm gross and erasing them). Neither of those people has explained to me how exactly I'm mistaken, though. Can you help me clear this up by any chance?
(Sorry for taking so long to answer this!)
I’d recommend checking out our “bi vs pan" tag that contains many posts detailing the differences.
If the people you’re talking to say that bisexuality is different from pansexuality because “pansexuality includes trans people and bisexuality doesn’t”, they are misinformed at best, cissexist and biphobic at worst.
If their objection is more to your usage of the word as an umbrella term, then I get where they’re coming from. They probably feel they’re not being included (although that idea may be rooted in biphobia/misinformation). My advice to you would be to ask them what their objection is. Once you’ve read up on the more updated definitions of bi- and pansexuality, you can present them with any new information and hopefully change any misconceptions they have.
Another option would be to use a more inclusive term, of which there are many (and over which there is much debate), such as non-monosexual, multisexual, plurisexual, MAS (multi-attraction spectrum), etc.
Anonymous asked: ok so "mono" means one right? so would that mean an asexual person does not experience monosexual privilege?
(First, a disclaimer that while I do identify as ace spectrum – demisexual and bisexual – I can’t speak for everyone on the ace spectrum; this response is my opinion).
That’s right, because part of monosexual privilege is the idea of compulsory monosexuality (oftentimes compulsory heterosexuality), which implies compulsory sexuality. It’s society’s idea that everyone is attracted to one gender (usually the “opposite” one, a heteronormative and cissexist idea), and under that ideology asexuals get erased in similar ways to other non-monosexual people such as bi and pan people.
I consider asexuals to be a part of the non-monosexual community. They are erased even more often than bisexuals are, in my opinion. Many ace-spectrum people also happen to identify as bi- or panromantic. Some people argue that heteroromantic asexuals (and even homoromantic asexuals) should not be considered part of the community because they may have more privileges on a case-by-case basis. We could debate about that all day, but in my opinion, it would be a rather pointless debate, because to put it simply, being bisexual and being asexual are experiences that come with different challenges, and while they certainly can intersect (like in my case, for example), trying to place them on a hierarchy of privilege is not going to work (for more info on that, do some research on intersectionality).
So basically I think that while they don’t fit the definitions of “multisexual”, “plurisexual”, etc., asexuals do fit the definition of non-monosexual, and do not have monosexual privilege. Depending on their romantic orientation they may still experience monoromantic privilege, but we can’t just condense romantic and sexual orientation into one idea.
Sorry for the lengthy response, and I hope that helped.
Note: Any hate for ace-spectrum people will be deleted.