Hate The Bi-Pride Flag / Symbol

[fredtyg]

dont know why but all those pride things flags ect. just dont do it anymore.

Not impressed with the bi flag. I've always loved the Pride flag and, were I to want to display a flag showing my bi/ queerness, I'd have no problem flying the Pride flag. I'm actually slowly acquiring Pride apparel, too. My first purchase being a rainbow colored jock strap!

[NotLostJustWandering]

it was done by phone in poll, you ring up and you answer questions.....

Well, all right then, that's about as reliable as surveying gets.

there are times in the site where we have people that post about how do they get their partners to allow them go out to have sex with other people.... and how they have to cheat cos of their partners refusal....

Yeah, I admit that in the short time I've been on this site I've been shocked at the number of posts like that. I think I've already found half a dozen people here I'd like to line up for a Three Stooges-style mass face slap.

it doesn't worry me what people think about bisexuals, as i already know that people will think what they choose to think, not what we tell them or want them to think.....

Really? Then why do you say:

people will not judge us on what we tell them to think.... they will judge us on what they see us doing and saying...

So we do have some influence on how people see us. Obviously we can't control others like robots, but what we say and do make a difference.

to most people they can see that as bisexuals will not settle for one partner, bisexuals are openly stating that they enjoy partners of both genders..... and yes that would make any non bisexual partner, bloody nervous in a relationship.....

This IS a serious problem, though I think you exaggerate the case in saying "any" monosexual partner. I've also noticed how many people on this site have mono partners totally OK with their having other partners, sometimes even sharing.

But yes, the fidelity issue is MAJOR, and I think it really just comes down to individual integrity, being honest with oneself and ones partners. Personally, I've come to find I'm the very type of bi so many other bis don't want to be associated with: I really can't commit to one person no matter how much I want to be in a committed relationship. I am totally upfront about this with anyone who shows an interest in me, and sure, it turns away some people, but I shouldn't be with those people in the first place, so alhamdulillah. Until I find Mr. and Mrs. Right I'll continue having vacation romances with the straight women and gay men that pass through here.

But while we're on the subject of personal morality, here's something to ponder: is there room for a moral stance within the bi movement? It's something I notice the gay movement totally lacks; it fits in very nicely with the "it's all about me" non-ethic. Of course ethics may seem awfully old-fashioned for a sexual liberation movement; what do you all think?

[djones]

there is a reason why the gays and lesbians has the issues they do with us.... we gave them every reason to feel that bisexuals can not be trusted and that we are mainly interested in sex, sex and more sex.......and we prove it regularly......

yet its the casual sex bisexuals that give bisexuals as a whole, the bad rep..... not the bisexuals that are committed relationship bisexuals and equally attracted to males and females sexually and emotionally

That argument for why we get slammed by the gay community is severely lacking in a few key ways.

Namely, the gay community is so incredibly promiscuous as to count monogomous relationships in dog, or gay, years - as in "Doug and Richard have been together three years, but that's like ten years in gay years".

The biggest issue with your argument, however, is that the main reason the gay community slams Bisexuals is purly political. As the general public views homosexuality as a choice, and the gay movement has been fighting for years to educate people about this issue, along come Bisexuals who appear to the general public to exemply choice (or indecision), thus taking the strength out of the gay movement's position on the matter. Hence, a lot of hatred from the gay movement and a main reason many in the gay community deny Bisexuality as a real seaxual orientation. Not because we are promiscuous.

[NotLostJustWandering]

"Doug and Richard have been together three years, but that's like ten years in gay years".

You mean "that's like 30 straight years." A quip I've heard often, too.

The biggest issue with your argument, however, is that the main reason the gay community slams Bisexuals is purly political. As the general public views homosexuality as a choice, and the gay movement has been fighting for years to educate people about this issue, along come Bisexuals who appear to the general public to exemply choice

I think you've hit the nail on the head here. It's the nature vs. nurture argument. The argument that homosexual preference is purely from nature is only partially true, and therefore a weak argument which requires its adherents constantly be on the defensive. It's very touchy because opponents of gay rights argue that allowing gays to raise kids, and promoting the gay lifestyle as equally valid may "pervert" youth who would otherwise remain straight. Arguing that ones sexuality is predetermined at birth is seen as the best argument against this; if your sexuality can not be influenced by others, "perversion" is impossible.

I am thinking now of all the gay men I've known who confessed to me that they had some attraction to women, but couldn't imagine going through with sex with them. Most of them had horrific relationships with their mothers, and the cause-and-effect relation was painfully obvious. But talk about this amongst gays outside of the bedroom confessional, and you are branded politically incorrect.

I think human nature is mostly bisexual, in the general sense of being capable of expressing either homo or hetero behavior, and most people's sexuality is shaped by their upbringing. Some may have innate homosexual preference that no conditioning may change, but I think there are fewer than the gay thought police would have us believe. So, to be actively bisexual demonstrates relatively unconditioned sexual nature, and therefore threatens to expose the nature-only mistruth.

[tenni]

Do you like or dislike the Bi Pride flag / symbol ?
I dislike the flag.

Do you identify with it ?
Hell no I most definitely do not identify with anything called the "Queer Nation".

Do you have any other suggestions or designs of your own ?

I think that djones idea of using grey is appropriate but it needs contrasting colours with it. I'd suggest a white and black design with an overlay of shades of grey. I'm not that crazy on the B symbol but it might work until some bi graphic designer did something more effectively.

The problem with the three colours in this supposed bi flag are that they are too limp wrist gay...lol (I know my bad...shame on me ...The devil made me do it The rainbow flag has more strength that this blue, purple, pink thing....yuck. Blue and pink are too strongly identified in western societies with male and female infants rather than adults.

I think that NotLostJustWandering has made some very valid points.
As far as some bisexual belief that other bisexuals are giving bisexuals a bad name is concerned, that really strikes me as hypocritical. I think that some gay people have made similar statements when people do not live within their moral range of beliefs. It would be best to put such internal comments in a drawer or maybe a sock and stuff it...up...lol I prefer to promote acceptance of divergence within not only the bisexuals but the society as a whole. If it doesn't harm another me or other third parties, it is none of my business nor others.

Some bisexuals identify closer to the gay community while others identify closer to the straight community. This may make it difficult to reach consensus. Many bisexuals feel no need to be politically active on this issue.

[MarieDelta]

Somethin here baffles me, bear with me cause I am just trying to get a handle on where you folks are coming from-

What is it about "the queer nation" that you find so reprehensible?

Do you see being bisexual as being closer to being straight?

Do you see the political causes espoused by the lgbtqi as not representing you?

I understand some of this, believe me the trans have had several issues with gay males and their lack of understanding and support when it comes to certain issues (ENDA comes to mind.) In addition many transgender/ transsexuals do not identify as gay , bi, or lez and therefore post-transition leave the community without even so much as a glance back.

Yes, ours is a loosely held together coalition. But the benefits of staying in this coalition are that we have much more political clout than we would alone.

We may be a giant, however there is too much division within our ranks to achieve anything like awakening that giant.

[Long Duck Dong]

Well, all right then, that's about as reliable as surveying gets.



Yeah, I admit that in the short time I've been on this site I've been shocked at the number of posts like that. I think I've already found half a dozen people here I'd like to line up for a Three Stooges-style mass face slap.



Really? Then why do you say:



So we do have some influence on how people see us. Obviously we can't control others like robots, but what we say and do make a difference.


This IS a serious problem, though I think you exaggerate the case in saying "any" monosexual partner. I've also noticed how many people on this site have mono partners totally OK with their having other partners, sometimes even sharing.

But yes, the fidelity issue is MAJOR, and I think it really just comes down to individual integrity, being honest with oneself and ones partners. Personally, I've come to find I'm the very type of bi so many other bis don't want to be associated with: I really can't commit to one person no matter how much I want to be in a committed relationship. I am totally upfront about this with anyone who shows an interest in me, and sure, it turns away some people, but I shouldn't be with those people in the first place, so alhamdulillah. Until I find Mr. and Mrs. Right I'll continue having vacation romances with the straight women and gay men that pass through here.

But while we're on the subject of personal morality, here's something to ponder: is there room for a moral stance within the bi movement? It's something I notice the gay movement totally lacks; it fits in very nicely with the "it's all about me" non-ethic. Of course ethics may seem awfully old-fashioned for a sexual liberation movement; what do you all think?

any survey is flawed.... but when the behievour matches the survey... it adds to the validity....

now one point, I never said monosexual....... I said non bisexual....
I am actually pansexual and I embrace asexuals as a valid part of society too....
society will present gay, hetero and bi as the three sexualities....
there is pansexual and we are the ones that embrace the the gay, the lesbian, the bi, the hetero and the asexual ( no sexual attraction and interest ) and allowing for the trans and intersex that regard themselves as the 3rd gender, we embrace them too....
a 3rd gender falls outside of the range of the bisexual 2 gender attraction

[Long Duck Dong]

Somethin here baffles me, bear with me cause I am just trying to get a handle on where you folks are coming from-

What is it about "the queer nation" that you find so reprehensible?

Do you see being bisexual as being closer to being straight?

Do you see the political causes espoused by the lgbtqi as not representing you?

I understand some of this, believe me the trans have had several issues with gay males and their lack of understanding and support when it comes to certain issues (ENDA comes to mind.) In addition many transgender/ transsexuals do not identify as gay , bi, or lez and therefore post-transition leave the community without even so much as a glance back.

Yes, ours is a loosely held together coalition. But the benefits of staying in this coalition are that we have much more political clout than we would alone.

We may be a giant, however there is too much division within our ranks to achieve anything like awakening that giant.

lol hugs marie and promises not to multi quote

I have no issue with the queer nation, but I have issues with some of the people in it, they are personal issues tho......

I see bisexual as a range of possibilities, but I embrace the fact that without the hetero, we can not have the bi part..... we would be just gay..... so the hetero side of bis is valid, equal and needs to be embraced as well as the gay side of the bisexual

to me a trans people is a person with a gender, be it male or female, or if they perfer, 3rd gender..... and a sexuality that they define themselves as..... and as a pansexual, I embrace that aspect and do not try and mold them into societies definations

and yes, i live in NZ, so we do not need the political clout that the us needs..... but we walked with the churchs to get our rights.....

[tenni]

"What is it about "the queer nation" that you find so reprehensible?
Do you see being bisexual as being closer to being straight? "

Marie
You make some good points. I can only write for myself and I do not spend a lot of time pondering these questions.

I do not identify with the term "queer nation" at all. I do not spend time indoctrinating myself over gay issues or trans issues. I have no understanding to this phrase and its political weight or purpose. I understand that using "queer" is an attempt to reclaim that term. I do not see myself as a member of any such groups. I'm moderately interested in what you tell us. I do pay attention to the injustices that you mention. In a certain situation, I may speak about what you have told us.

I think that because bisexuals are attracted to both genders that some may feel a stronger attraction to opposite sex and identify stronger with the straights rather than gay. For some of us, we just have no interest in belonging to a gay community. I have gay friends but we just do not get all caught up in the political side of our sexuality. I do get caught up in socio political issues though to various degree of involvement. Maybe due to not feeling connected to the issues and the fact that many of the rights issues have been resolved in my country I just don't feel part of a queer nation. Not all of course and there are tons of bigots. I will stand up against injustice at times and less than I use to. Generally, at this point in my life, I'm not that interested in giving a lot of my time to a group that I do not really identify with.

[MarieDelta]

"What is it about "the queer nation" that you find so reprehensible?
Do you see being bisexual as being closer to being straight? "

Marie
You make some good points. I can only write for myself and I do not spend a lot of time pondering these questions.

I do not identify with the term "queer nation" at all. I do not spend time indoctrinating myself over gay issues or trans issues. I have no understanding to this phrase and its political weight or purpose. I understand that using "queer" is an attempt to reclaim that term. I do not see myself as a member of any such groups. I'm moderately interested in what you tell us. I do pay attention to the injustices that you mention. In a certain situation, I may speak about what you have told us.

I think that because bisexuals are attracted to both genders that some may feel a stronger attraction to opposite sex and identify stronger with the straights rather than gay. For some of us, we just have no interest in belonging to a gay community. I have gay friends but we just do not get all caught up in the political side of our sexuality. I do get caught up in socio political issues though to various degree of involvement. Maybe due to not feeling connected to the issues and the fact that many of the rights issues have been resolved in my country I just don't feel part of a queer nation. Not all of course and there are tons of bigots. I will stand up against injustice at times and less than I use to. Generally, at this point in my life, I'm not that interested in giving a lot of my time to a group that I do not really identify with.

OK so what you are saying is no matter what flag or symbol Bi folks use, it wouldnt really represent you. In essence you have no use for a bisexual community. Am I right?

[MarieDelta]

lol hugs marie and promises not to multi quote

I have no issue with the queer nation, but I have issues with some of the people in it, they are personal issues tho......

I see bisexual as a range of possibilities, but I embrace the fact that without the hetero, we can not have the bi part..... we would be just gay..... so the hetero side of bis is valid, equal and needs to be embraced as well as the gay side of the bisexual

to me a trans people is a person with a gender, be it male or female, or if they perfer, 3rd gender..... and a sexuality that they define themselves as..... and as a pansexual, I embrace that aspect and do not try and mold them into societies definations

and yes, i live in NZ, so we do not need the political clout that the us needs..... but we walked with the churchs to get our rights.....

Churches here have varied stances on BLGTQI, and I believe even in your own country the Roman Catholics are not supposed to support ITLGBQ, correct?

So you are talking about specific churches or all churches?

It does work out here that some churches stand with us , and some against us.

[Long Duck Dong]

Churches here have varied stances on BLGTQI, and I believe even in your own country the Roman Catholics are not supposed to support ITLGBQ, correct?

So you are talking about specific churches or all churches?

It does work out here that some churches stand with us , and some against us.

specific churchs.... including some of the traditional churchs.... but they * hid * behind the stance that they were there to support the hetero side of the civil union bill, to appease some members, tho when it was safe, they admitted that they were there for gods children, the lgbt and the heteros....

the catholics over here are like a dumping ground.... one of the catholic churchs up north has a alcoholic priest and he is lgbt allied... or in his words, " if the pope can't be fucked coming to see me, I can not be assed fighting his battles for him "

[djones]

@ djones - "queer" does not equal "gay". I would suggest that "queer" is everything in the TBGLQQI rainbow. It simply means "non-straight".

Here are some earlier posts I have made relating to this :

I don't consider myself queer at all.

Although I have had attractions to men for most of my life, I never felt any connection to the gay community - which has appropriated the term queer (thereby taking the derogatory sting out of the word) . Given that I have always been attracted to, and sexually active with, women, I have always identified as straight. However, I am very comfortable with identifying myself as BI.

I don't feel being lumped as the LGBT is an accurate association for the BI community. More and more, I feel the "B" should be removed from the LGBT and given it's own place in the social strata. Many of the "L" and "G" don't really accept us as we are, so why join their club ? (Many of the "T" seem to accept us though !).

In a sense, to go along with being part of the LGBT is to say hetero is normal and all the other sexualities can be thrown together as being abnormal - a notion I reject !

Don't get me wrong - I support the LGBT fight for equality and acceptance. I simply feel there is no simple "catch all" social classification for all non straights - in essence, you are normal or queer .

Further, you cannot divorce the concept of identity from definition - hence I don't identify as queer

Though in some circles, and perhaps some regions, queer my be used as a synonym for the LGBT community as a whole, for the majority, the term queer IS equal to gay or homosexual. Thus giving the word its definition - and identity. As most dictionaries define the word to mean "strange", "odd" , "unusual", "abnormal", etc., it is actually empowering the anti-gay, anti-bi, anti-etc. movements by classifying people as either normal or queer. It is impossible to remove the negatives from the definition.

To use queer arbitrarily to describe anyone in the LGBT world is to give them an identity which they may not choose to define themselves !

[Long Duck Dong]

That argument for why we get slammed by the gay community is severely lacking in a few key ways.

Namely, the gay community is so incredibly promiscuous as to count monogomous relationships in dog, or gay, years - as in "Doug and Richard have been together three years, but that's like ten years in gay years".

The biggest issue with your argument, however, is that the main reason the gay community slams Bisexuals is purly political. As the general public views homosexuality as a choice, and the gay movement has been fighting for years to educate people about this issue, along come Bisexuals who appear to the general public to exemply choice (or indecision), thus taking the strength out of the gay movement's position on the matter. Hence, a lot of hatred from the gay movement and a main reason many in the gay community deny Bisexuality as a real seaxual orientation. Not because we are promiscuous.

nobody I know, that is gay, uses dog years.... it may be a us / uk term but its not a nz term......and I did contact a few people about the term

after working at a lgbt bar as a doorman / bartender......helping run a lgbt social group, and doing counseling and therapy work with the lgbt.....
I speak from a wide range of experience.....
it may be different in other countries..... but in nz, its anything but political.... we have equal rights in nz.....

so I am not arguing anything, merely sharing what its like in a country of equal rights for lgbt..... others may see things differently, but they are in different countries and it may well be political.....

[Long Duck Dong]

Then again LongDuck did write before about how if he could be heterosexual or monosexual he gladly would instead of being bisexual and having what he calls bisexual urges.

yes... but for personal reasons, I have a mental illness called dysthimia.... the bisexuality conflicts with my monogamous nature in a relationship...and that causes more issues with the dysthimia

[tenni]

OK so what you are saying is no matter what flag or symbol Bi folks use, it wouldnt really represent you. In essence you have no use for a bisexual community. Am I right?

Marie
In some respects I do not identify with some poster's perspective on bisexuality but I do identify with other bisexual's perspective. I do identify with a basic understanding of bisexuality expressed on this site. I find it beneficial to come here but whether I feel the need or desire to march as a bisexual I don't seem to. Even within this supposed bi community there are those who reject my sexual morality and declare it wrong to a level of anger that they become condemning and intolerant. How can I identify with them?

I agree with djones when he states that queer is a term for gay or homosexual. Since I do not identify as a hetero or gay but somewhere in the middle, how can I identify with that word? It doesn't give me "strength" as perhaps it might give a gay person. What do you get out of identifying as "queer"?

[MarieDelta]

Queer means to me to be other than straight. It does not mean "gay" or "straight" but somewhere in that fuzzy middle.

Queer could mean an interest in kink, for some.

Queer could be a woman who only wants to penetrate her boyfriends and not be penetrated.

Queer could be a person who likes boys and girls and everything in-between.

Queer could be someone who only experience sex through BDSM, gets no "release" and is truly satisfied by that.

Queer could be a person who doesn’t like to have their genitals touched at all, but prefers to touch others and serve them.

It’s a way of saying yes I am different, and I don’t care what you think of it. I do what I do and enjoy what I enjoy.

For me, as a bisexual pre-operative transsexual (switch) woman, it means that I don’t have to keep repeating that when someone asks me what I am. I simply say "queer" and it’s none of their business how I like my sex. They only know that I am not straight / vanilla which suits me.

In addition there are all sorts of complications arising from the definition of "gay" and "straight" when it comes to transsexuals. In my world when I am with a man I am in a same sex, but not a same gender, relationship. When I am with a woman I am in a same gender relationship, but not a same sex relationship.

What happens if I partner with a transsexual man? Am I straight or gay? What about when I am with a transsexual woman? And then there is the potential of partnering with an intersexxed person or a gender queer person.

There may be words to describe all these relationships, but they are too clinical sounding. I prefer to call myself something a lot shorter and less technical.

So for me, queer says that I am a person who defines herself as something other than straight/vanilla. It simplifies things tremendously, for me.

[mikey3000]

The biggest issue with your argument, however, is that the main reason the gay community slams Bisexuals is purly political. As the general public views homosexuality as a choice, and the gay movement has been fighting for years to educate people about this issue, along come Bisexuals who appear to the general public to exemply choice (or indecision), thus taking the strength out of the gay movement's position on the matter. Hence, a lot of hatred from the gay movement and a main reason many in the gay community deny Bisexuality as a real seaxual orientation. Not because we are promiscuous.

And why can't one's sexuality be a choice? We choose where we want to live, we choose what we do for a career, we choose our friends, why not choose who we love? I do believe it is a choice for most.

But if someone comes along and "proves" that homosexuality is genetic, you can rest assured that they will try and cure it. Not good at all.

[MarieDelta]

This from Urban Dicionary:

2. queer -
Originally meant to describe something as unusual or strange. Became a deroggatory word to describe homosexuals. More recently, it has been reclaimed by non-heterosexuals as a word used to describe themselves. Queer can now be used to describe homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgendered people. In scholarly studies the word queer is also used to describe those who practice unconventional sex (e.g. bondage, etc.), therefore even heterosexuals can sometimes be defined as queer.

[RockGardener]

Thank you Marie for that post, since I'm the one that opened the "queer" can of worms. Hmmm, can worms be queer?? Or is it the can that's queer? English has always confused me.

[MarieDelta]

Thank you Marie for that post, since I'm the one that opened the "queer" can of worms. Hmmm, can worms be queer?? Or is it the can that's queer? English has always confused me.

I can only reply with a quote from "Gardens Of Stone"

"Goody" Nelson: You ever take biology in school, soldier?
Jackie Willow: Yes, Sergeant-Major.
"Goody" Nelson: How do worms copulate?
Jackie Willow: They don't, Sergeant-Major; they use asexual reproduction.
"Goody" Nelson: Mmmm-hmmmm! Interesting concept! Tell me, Willow - any idea who first came up with that notion: reproducing without sex?
Jackie Willow: Your wife, Sergeant-Major?

[tenni]

Marie
From what you write, I can accept that "queer" applies to you. Other than your reference to someone who likes boys and girls and everything in between, I am very far away from all of your identifying points. I am also quite far away from being attracted to boys and girls and everything in between as well. I suspect that you do not mean boys and girls as in children though?

I'm attracted to men and women and nothing in between. I'm not interested in being penetrated.

Therefore, I hope that you can understand that some of us are not identifying with "queer" or "queer nation". It just is not us.

Queer means to me to be other than straight. It does not mean "gay" or "straight" but somewhere in that fuzzy middle.

Queer could mean an interest in kink, for some.

Queer could be a woman who only wants to penetrate her boyfriends and not be penetrated.

Queer could be a person who likes boys and girls and everything in-between.

Queer could be someone who only experience sex through BDSM, gets no "release" and is truly satisfied by that.

Queer could be a person who doesn’t like to have their genitals touched at all, but prefers to touch others and serve them.

It’s a way of saying yes I am different, and I don’t care what you think of it. I do what I do and enjoy what I enjoy.

For me, as a bisexual pre-operative transsexual (switch) woman, it means that I don’t have to keep repeating that when someone asks me what I am. I simply say "queer" and it’s none of their business how I like my sex. They only know that I am not straight / vanilla which suits me.

In addition there are all sorts of complications arising from the definition of "gay" and "straight" when it comes to transsexuals. In my world when I am with a man I am in a same sex, but not a same gender, relationship. When I am with a woman I am in a same gender relationship, but not a same sex relationship.

What happens if I partner with a transsexual man? Am I straight or gay? What about when I am with a transsexual woman? And then there is the potential of partnering with an intersexxed person or a gender queer person.

There may be words to describe all these relationships, but they are too clinical sounding. I prefer to call myself something a lot shorter and less technical.

So for me, queer says that I am a person who defines herself as something other than straight/vanilla. It simplifies things tremendously, for me.

[tenni]

"It’s a way of saying yes I am different, and I don’t care what you think of it. I do what I do and enjoy what I enjoy."



As far as this point is concerned, I'd prefer to see it that being sexually attracted to men and women is normal and acceptable rather than seeing it as different. As an artist, I know that many of my thoughts are outside of the norm but they are a norm for me. I don't think that it is odd or queer. It just isn't the norm for some others. We are all a little different so what. Accept it.

[MarieDelta]

@tenni -I dont mean children actually I'm not realy that sexually attracted to folks under 28. But, again thats just me.

I'm fine with you not being queer. I think that you limit yourself in doing so, however that is your right. If you want to set yourself up as your own sexuality , that too is your right.

Being different is the point of being queer. However I do undrestand that some folks cant get past the negative connotations. Different isnt bad, its just different.

FWIW - I'm not a big fan of "normalcy" I think that it's illusory at best.


@hot_fun_summertime -I would tend to disagree on the part about being unsure of sexual /gender identity. Most people I've known who Id'ed as queer have put more thought into who and what they are than many others.

Not everyone who is into fetish activities id's as queer, however some clearly could & it wouldnt bother me.

I'm ok with almost everyone being queer, the more the merrier.

But if you'd rather be something else, that is your right.




People I wouldnt want to be Queers-

KKK, Neo nazis (Elwood: Illinois Nazis.Jake: I hate Illinois Nazis.), FRC'ers &ex gays and any other bigotted hateful folks.

[biinterested]

we have too much time on our hands

[citystyleguy]

most everything has a symbol; to like or not is a personal choice. for me, and by far more often at this site i utilize it as a commonly recognized symbol. however, would i hoist it over my house, probably not, not for fear or whatever, but i find for the very reason it helps define a cause, it can also place limits. thus, for my own self, i do not engage symbols very often, unless it is for artistic sake and/or enhancement of what i am.

[darkeyes]

@tenni -I dont mean children actually I'm not realy that sexually attracted to folks under 28. But, again thats just me.

I'm fine with you not being queer. I think that you limit yourself in doing so, however that is your right. If you want to set yourself up as your own sexuality , that too is your right.

Being different is the point of being queer. However I do undrestand that some folks cant get past the negative connotations. Different isnt bad, its just different.

FWIW - I'm not a big fan of "normalcy" I think that it's illusory at best.


@hot_fun_summertime -I would tend to disagree on the part about being unsure of sexual /gender identity. Most people I've known who Id'ed as queer have put more thought into who and what they are than many others.

Not everyone who is into fetish activities id's as queer, however some clearly could & it wouldnt bother me.

I'm ok with almost everyone being queer, the more the merrier.

But if you'd rather be something else, that is your right.




People I wouldnt want to be Queers-

KKK, Neo nazis (Elwood: Illinois Nazis.Jake: I hate Illinois Nazis.), FRC'ers &ex gays and any other bigotted hateful folks.

Why o why do we have to consider ourselves normal or queer? We are who we are.. what we are just is...

[MarieDelta]

Why o why do we have to consider ourselves normal or queer? We are who we are.. what we are just is...

why do we label ourselves anything? To try to at least describe ourselves and our needs to others.

The same reason an "apple" is an "apple". Because when you want an apple you dont want an orange, right?

[darkeyes]

why do we label ourselves anything? To try to at least describe ourselves and our needs to others.

The same reason an "apple" is an "apple". Because when you want an apple you dont want an orange, right?

We all label ourselves in many different ways in life Marie I accept that.. but the concepts of normal or queer are concepts I neither identify with or like nor do I think they are appropriate descriptors....