Comment

queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

The bisexual duality can not be satisfied by the binarity of one partner, leaving a lot of space for unhappiness, uncertainty and confusion, in a state where certainly might have been exspected.

This is an extremely common and extremely silly take. Bi folk aren’t any more or less “satisfied” in a relationship than mono folk are. People (bi or otherwise) betray their partnership commitments all the time, but for whatever reason bisexuality seems to get conflated with infidelity / general profligacy. It’s an ugly and inaccurate stereotype.

source

Sort:hotnew top

beejboytyson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
Some reason? Come on, not that complicated if you put yourself in a normal person head.

source
- Pelicanen@fedia.io ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  Societally normalized biphobia?
  
  source
  - beejboytyson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    First off people aren’t scared of the bi part just the homo one. Secondly, the stereotyping that BI people are dogs in heat come from both the gay community and the straight community. You still haven’t put a theory forward for the why just the what.
    
    source
    Pelicanen@fedia.io ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    So your argument is basically "lots of people discriminate, so that means that the discrimination is correct"? Because we can find about a million examples from history to learn why that is not a sound argument.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  
  normal person
  
  Sure, I can do that. quick question, by “normal” do you mean someone who has median characteristics across the board, or are you one of those people who define normal by their own tastes and experiences?
  
  source
  - beejboytyson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Well you clearly know what I meant so you aren’t stupid, so maybe willfully ignorant?
    
    source
    queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    I am neither, and I also don’t know what you meant, which is my point. Sometimes I ask pointed questions to demonstrate a flaw in the framing of a proposition. In this case, it’s that there’s no such thing as an objectively “normal person”, that phrase is meaningless outside of a particular frame of reference, and I can’t put myself in the mind of a “normal person” without knowing what the frame of reference is. Which would imply that maybe it’s a more complicated situation than you seem to think.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
- Forester@pawb.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
  Way to out yourself as low value
  
  source
  - beejboytyson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago
    Same you just proved its about equity not equality.
    
    source