Feminism has done many, many things to benefit and try to eliminate the patriarchal society we live in, however it does have its faults. Erasure of the problems stemming from racism and Islamophobia contributes to the face of a feminism that is mostly white. Mainstream…
This is a poem by Alysia Harris & Aysha El Shamayleh, it is about the dual identities of a transgender person.
Melissa sits in the back of the classroom afraid to speak up, She pulls akwardly at her extra loose khaki cargo pants, She doesn’t want the boys to notice her.
James finds himself at the back of a classroom, His baseball cap casts a shadow on his pimple stained forehead, A wide shirt hangs from his broad shoulders, But no one ever noticed him.
Melissa The teacher asks, And she says nothing because she is not here, And Melissa has never been here, Because Melissa is just some abstract jumble of syllables that doesn’t fit her position, She is not what she seems, She doesn’t want to have to explain to her mother for the 232nd time why she doesn’t want to wear a dress to prom, Doesn’t paint her face it’s cause her whole body is painted on.
James doesn’t want to have to explain where he came from, Cause with the exception of Melissa he has been deemed an abstract reality by everyone, All he wishes for is to get to wear a tuxedo to prom.
And Melissa has been tucking in breasts that will be growing for three years now, Been using duct tape to press them down and mould them more into pecs, She just wishes that people would understand that at birth her genitals didn’t know which way to grow, Mad at God who couldnt relay a message directly to her hormones that they should produce more testosterone, The only person who understands her is James, And they have been playmates since the age of four, Around the time girls notice boys and boys notice girls, See James’ family wanted daughters instead of sons, And Melissa was always like that male beetle that everyone called a ladybug,
Melissa, Melissa where is she? Sometimes she wishes she could rip the skin of her back, Every moment of everyday feels trapped in the flesh of a stranger, Melissa, As she stands to her feet wanting to say "I’m here, I’ve been here since I was born, so quit asking me if I’m a him or a her, Cause when you combine the two pronouns you get H.I.R, Hir, And God combined the two genders and put me in this body transgendered, I’m here so quit talking about me like I’m not here.”
James falls back into Melissa’s skin, And the two comfort each other in a syncapated heartbeats, Waiting for the day when Melissa can finally scrub off this made up genetic make up, When the teacher asks for James and he can say “I’m here.”
I’ve come to the realization recently that I got ho tendencies. I mean this in all but the classic sense, having been literally (if nonpenatratively) in bed over the course of the past month with more individuals than I care to grow enough fingers to count. If, as we have been wont to posit from time to time, one can get just as intimate without sex as with it, then hot damn do I get around.Really though.One of the quirks of being asexual, I’ve found, is that classifying and prioritizing relationships becomes a mite tricky. Though not all sexual people choose to employ it as such, sexual activity can serve as a neat marker of importance, something that, for better or worse, is saved like fine china for the really special occasions. The same cannot be said of, say, intellectually intense emotively reflectively discussion, which is more my bread and butter. Maybe this is wrong of me, but I’ll have an interesting discussion at the slightest suggestion, and will get intellectually intimate with anything that has a pulse.This becomes something of a problem, as, like the town bicycle I am, I tend to leave one relationship for another the second it becomes convenient. After all, interesting people are everywhere, so why inconvenience myself?The result is that I wind up talking not in terms of boyfriends or girlfriends but in terms of networks, entire communities with which I am in some way intimate. I find myself wondering whether this mode of forming relationships is healthy, or even sustainable. Will I eventually “settle down” in some spider’s web of deep, committed friendships that will have me and hold me so long as I shall live? Will I build up a village capable of raising my child or will, as I’m afraid, my fickle and flexible networks disappear into neat bundles of monogamy, reachable only in polite passing company.Love’s a funny thing. What about the friendships that I’m forming makes them so expendable? Maybe it’s just what I grew up with. There are some who argue that friendship in our society is vastly undervalued. We set out to find “true” (sexual) love and fortune, and friends are the flowers on the side of the road. Deeply enjoyable, an important part of the journey but by no means the destination. I grew up where “just” friendship was always considered relatively expendable. Of course people will stay in touch, but it’s more or less expected that friends will be left for school, jobs, lovers, wives, husbands, kids and all of the other things that count themselves among the nonnegotiable quota of a life well lived. No wonder I’m cheap. Like the classics of my condition I spread my eggs among many baskets because I know I’ll be abandoned. I know that regardless of how close and committed I become to my (almost all sexual) friends they’ll keep up their all-but-obligatory search for the Right One. After hearing friend after friend drone on about their personal life without including me in it it becomes easy to get discouraged. And the discouraged are often predisposed to wander.
It is not surprising there is so much confusion when the question “What is polyamory?” comes up. Words have both definitions and connotations that build over time heavily influenced by the culture around them. Polyamory was only recently added to the dictionary; first Webster’s and then the Oxford English Dictionary. Webster’s is “the state or practice of having more than one open romantic relationship at a time” and Oxford English Dictionary states “the practice of engaging in multiple sexual relationships with the consent of all the people involved.” These definitions are different and hold different meaning. Who is right?
The word is spelled “bisexual”. It’s really quite simple. It has no hypen and the “s” is not caps. Unless it is at the beginning of a sentence, the first letter is lowercase.
RIGHTWRONGbisexualbi-sexualBiSexualBisexual (unless at the beginning of a sentence)
It’s easy to remember the thing about the hyphen: It’s not homo-sexual, it’s not les-bian, it’s not bi-sexual.
I see some people write it with the first letter in caps as in:
Tom is a Bisexual.
I consider this to be bad form. Nationalities are first letter cap, but adjectives aren’t. The word “bisexual” is an adjective, not a nationality. There is no Bisexualia from which we all come. Therefore this is correct:
Tom is Italian.
and this is correct also:
Tom is bisexual.
On the other hand, some GLBT publications, like the Philadelphia Gay News have an editorial guideline that dictates that they always capitalize Gay and Lesbian. Therefore they write:
Johnson, a Gay activist, spoke at the conference.
In this case, we demand capitalization parity and therefore in this case and in this case only should the word be capitalized. Therefore, PGN should write:
Bob, a Gay man, and his partner Mike, who is Bisexual, also spoke at the conference.
However, we consider this a silly editorial standard since they don’t capitalize the word “heterosexual”.
I can’t believe that I’ve been doing bisexual activism for the last 10 years and this issue still comes up so often. Oh well. There are bigger fish to fry.
P.S. This reminds me of the old vaudville joke where the secretary asks her boss if “brown” should be capitalized. He tells her “no” and leaves the room. She turns to her typewriter and speaks as she types: “Dear Mister brown”.
To: MySpace, Facebook, and other social networking sites
We are asking that MySpace, Facebook, and other social networking sites expand the available options for users in the “sexual orientation” category. Currently, most sites only offer “gay,” “straight,” or “bi,” and some also allow a “not sure” and/or “no answer” option, but options for “asexual” and “pansexual” aren’t listed. It’s important to acknowledge that failure to include these categories forces asexuals and pansexuals to misrepresent themselves with another answer or to be unable to answer truthfully at all. These categories are not made up, nor are they a subsection of any of the available options. Thousands of people identify themselves with these terms and aren’t being offered an appropriate choice.
An asexual is a person who doesn’t experience sexual attraction (not “no sexual orientation” so much as it is “a sexual orientation of no”). A pansexual is a person whose attraction to others goes beyond bisexuality (it specifies a person whose attraction can express toward any person, regardless of biological sex or gender orientation, usually with the understanding that it is a sexual interest that grows from initially emotional attraction). Leaving asexuals without an option forces them to choose “no answer” or some other misrepresentation, and leaving pansexuals without an option removes their ability to express that they can experience attraction outside the gender binary.
We think it would reflect a progressive and open-minded view to consider these additions, and we think being in touch with members’ need for proper expression options is very important for any influential social networking site. Please take our suggestions into consideration
An online space for the dissemination of information and discourse related to queer identity and theory, sexuality, anti-oppression ideology, social justice, sex positivity, multiplicity of identities, gender identity, feminism, art, DIY projects, racial justice, anti-ableism, body positivity and liberal and radical politics.
Please feel free to add to the conversation by submitting a post or asking a question.