Gender Identity in Modern Ireland (Mod warnings and Threadbanned Users in OP)

EmmetSpiceland

For the day that’s in it:

Bobblehats

TomTomTim

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

For the day that’s in it:

I swear these days are made up as quickly as new genders. There seems to one every few weeks. You don't gain acceptance by ramming your ideology down peoples throats believe it or not.

keano_afc

Biphobia? They really are making it up as they go along.

Is bi-phobia the burning fear that someone else might just be having too good of a time?

Gentlemanne

Well if you asked me I think part of it is when people dismiss the fact that you can be bigoted towards bisexual people or find the concept of biphobia humourous.

Gentlemanne

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Well if you asked me I think part of it is when people dismiss the fact that you can be bigoted towards bisexual people or find the concept of biphobia humourous.

Why would one be bigoted towards bisexual people?

_Godot_

By not thinking it's a real sexuality, or that they're just being greedy, or are prone to being unfaithful, that sort of thing.

Gentlemanne

isha wrote: »

Why would one be bigoted towards bisexual people?

Why indeed, in my opinion they're perfectly valid!

Gentlemanne

Gentlemanne wrote: »

Why indeed, in my opinion they're perfectly valid!

Well, of course.

It is the humourless and po-faced who wish to claim victimhood on every side that are troubling.

I literally never heard of the word biphobia until today.

At the best of times I find it hard to understand why people would be homophobic - what is to be afraid of?

And if one has to invent words for ''sexuality phobias'' why is Aphobia not a thing (fear of the asexual), autophobia (fear of people masturbating), panphobia, polyphobia, spectraphobia ? - it seems biased to leave all those out of the remembrance day if including biphobia.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I literally never heard of the word biphobia until today.

At the best of times I find it hard to understand why people would be homophobic - what is to be afraid of?

And if one has to invent words for ''sexuality phobias'' why is Aphobia not a thing (fear of the asexual), autophobia (fear of people masturbating), panphobia, polyphobia, spectraphobia ? - it seems biased to leave all those out of the remembrance day if including biphobia.

Well if you find it hard to understand homophobia then it couldn’t really be much of an issue could it?

Try telling that to the Iranian guy whose family murdered him recently when they found his army exemption card.

_Godot_

_Godot_ wrote: »

By not thinking it's a real sexuality, or that they're just being greedy, or are prone to being unfaithful, that sort of thing.

Speaking of ''real'' sexualities... and given that homophobia is mentioned...is homosexuality same-sex attraction, by your definition? Or do you not believe that same sex attraction is a real sexuality?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Speaking of ''real'' sexualities... and given that homophobia is mentioned...is homosexuality same-sex attraction, by your definition? Or do you not believe that same sex attraction is a real sexuality?

A gay man who is attracted to a trans man is still gay.

(I assume this was the gotcha argument you were going for).

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

A gay man who is attracted to a trans man is still gay.

(I assume this was the gotcha argument you were going for).

Ergo homosexuality is same gender-identity attraction - is this your definition?

There are many homosexual people who are exclusively same sex attracted. Just that. That is their identity, preference, call it what you will. Perhaps there needs to be some new sexuality names.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ergo homosexuality is same gender-identity attraction - is this your definition?

There are many homosexual people who are exclusively same sex attracted. Just that. That is their identity, preference, call it what you will. Perhaps there needs to be some new sexuality names.

Feel free to invent some.

Won’t change that no matter how dismissive some people who haven’t experienced them are, homophobia and biphobia exist and are very damaging.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Feel free to invent some.

Won’t change that no matter how dismissive some people who haven’t experienced them are, homophobia and biphobia exist and are very damaging.

Sorry now, but you have not given consideration to the dilemma that for many homosexuals the meaning of the word is specifically same -sex attraction. That is their sexuality, full stop. What are you going to say about the phobia that exists towards people who define their homosexuality precisely in that manner?

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sorry now, but you have not given consideration to the dilemma that for many homosexuals the meaning of the word is specifically same -sex attraction. That is their sexuality, full stop. What are you going to say about the phobia that exists towards people who define their homosexuality precisely in that manner?

As I’ve said before on this thread I have no issue with someone being exclusively attracted to cis people as long as they don’t try to use it as some kind of silly evidence that trans people are not “real men/women”.

But that’s usually the context they bring it up in unfortunately.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

As I’ve said before on this thread I have no issue with someone being exclusively attracted to cis people as long as they don’t try to use it as some kind of silly evidence that trans people are not “real men/women”.

But that’s usually the context they bring it up in unfortunately.

Is it?

But thanks for clearing up that you do believe that homosexuality at least can include those who experience same sex attraction exclusively. That is good.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is it?

It is

But thanks for clearing up that you do believe that homosexuality at least can include those who experience same sex attraction exclusively. That is good.

Of course it can. Same for straight people. Nobody expects that being gay or straight means you are attracted to ALL men or ALL women. People have a type. I know people who aren’t attracted to anyone under 6ft. I’m fine with all of it.

One eyed Jack

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Ergo homosexuality is same gender-identity attraction - is this your definition?

There are many homosexual people who are exclusively same sex attracted. Just that. That is their identity, preference, call it what you will. Perhaps there needs to be some new sexuality names.

It’s not like there was ever any limitations to inventing language or people using whatever language they were comfortable with when referring to themselves?

Another term I’ve heard of to describe homosexuality or bisexuality for instance that’s not all that common is same gender loving, more commonly being used nowadays because the people who use it reject terms like gay, lesbian, transgender and so on.

Then there are terms like androphilia and gynephilia, which are rarely ever heard of outside of behavioural sciences, such as studies which refute Blanchard’s theories about sex and sexuality, gender identity and so on -


Sexual Behavior, Desire, and Psychosexual Experience in Gynephilic and Androphilic Trans Women: A Cross-Sectional Multicenter Study

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

It is



Of course it can. Same for straight people. Nobody expects that being gay or straight means you are attracted to ALL men or ALL women. People have a type. I know people who aren’t attracted to anyone under 6ft. I’m fine with all of it.

No. That is a misunderstanding of what I am saying. I am NOT saying all homosexual people have to be attracted to ALL homosexual people - that would be ludicrous. But I am saying that many homosexual people define their homosexuality as SAME SEX attraction exclusively. This is the understanding generally of homosexuality. It is not based on gender identity attraction for many, indeed I would hazard to say most. As I said perhaps a new word is needed.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

No. That is a misunderstanding of what I am saying. I am NOT saying all homosexual people have to be attracted to ALL homosexual people - that would be ludicrous. But I am saying that many homosexual people define their homosexuality as SAME SEX attraction exclusively. This is the understanding generally of homosexuality. It is not based on gender identity attraction for many, indeed I would hazard to say most. As I said perhaps a new word is needed.

I don’t see the need to restrict this to gay people. Surely a straight person is just as free to be exclusively attracted to cis people too. Everyone is free to be attracted to who they are attracted to.

I suspect that the only reason anyone would want a specific word is to marginalise trans people. A new word doesn’t seem to have any practical implications. I doubt most people care if I am attracted to trans men or not when I say I’m gay. Why would I feel the need to let them know?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

I don’t see the need to restrict this to gay people. Surely a straight person is just as free to be exclusively attracted to cis people too. Everyone is free to be attracted to who they are attracted to.

I suspect that the only reason anyone would want a specific word is to marginalise trans people. A new word doesn’t seem to have any practical implications. I doubt most people care if I am attracted to trans men or not when I say I’m gay. Why would I feel the need to let them know?

It seems every sexuality now has a name. It divides and subdivides multitudinously. Proliferates sexually, one could almost say. Why have any resistance to exclusively natal-sex-based attraction as a well defined exclusive sexuality?

Gentlemanne

Do you want new terms or is there too many terms, seems like a contradiction

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It seems every sexuality now has a name. It divides and subdivides multitudinously. Proliferates sexually, one could almost say. Why have any resistance to exclusively natal-sex-based attraction as a well defined exclusive sexuality?

Where is this imagined resistance?

Only me and OEJ have commented on your suggestion and both offered full support to you inventing a name for your sexuality and using it.

Why do you perceive support as resistance?

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Where is this imagined resistance?

Only me and OEJ have commented on your suggestion and both offered full support to you inventing a name for your sexuality and using it.

Why do you perceive support as resistance?

Well the new name should perhaps be invented for gender-identity based sexual attraction, which would be more in the domain of your responsibility for inventing, because homosexuals are using the word for their sexuality already and have been for rather a long time, 130 years or thereabouts- and it means same sex based sexual attraction.

In fact the word bisexual, where today's discussion started, has inherent in its very meaning that one is attracted to both (hence the bi part) sexes. It is in itself a rather problematic word then, as for a start it supports the idea of dimorphous sexes in the species, and then it makes a direct reference to both sexes as a dichotomy. Hmmm.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well the new name should perhaps be invented for gender-identity based sexual attraction, which would be more in the domain of your responsibility for inventing, because homosexuals are using the word for their sexuality already and have been for rather a long time, 130 years or thereabouts- and it means same sex based sexual attraction.

In fact the word bisexual, where today's discussion started, has inherent in its very meaning that one is attracted to both (hence the bi part) sexes. It is in itself a rather problematic word then, as for a start it supports the idea of dimorphous sexes in the species, and then it makes a direct reference to both sexes as a dichotomy. Hmmm.

I know many people who are attracted to trans people as well as cis people. They use the same terms as those who aren’t. They’ve also been using the words for a long time. Why should one group get exclusive rights to define a word? Especially given that most straight or gay people don’t feel the need to exclude trans people by way of a special definition, even if they are exclusively attracted to cis people.

Bi people can also be attracted to trans people. I don’t see how the word is problematic at all.

LLMMLL

LLMMLL wrote: »

Bi people can also be attracted to trans people. I don’t see how the word is problematic at all.

Bi is a bit of an awkward niggler though, isn't it. Bi as in it means ''two''. In this case ...sexes.

LLMMLL

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Bi is a bit of an awkward niggler though, isn't it. Bi as in it means ''two''. In this case ...sexes.

Most people recognise that a word that came into popular usage 50 or so years ago shouldn’t be used to define the concepts of sex and gender or have any political implications about them.