?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry



Comments

trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 05:42 pm (UTC)
*sigh*

There are plenty of reasons why bisexual women would want bisexual fellowship. Being commodified as a desirable HBB is in fact one of those reasons, not a counter to them.
pstscrpt
Dec. 29th, 2010 05:59 pm (UTC)
I was just talking rates. Sure, there are plenty of reasons for women to be interested in such a group, but bi men also may have nowhere else they're quite accepted as bisexual in the first place. Maybe the HBB-annoyance approximately offsets it.
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 06:04 pm (UTC)
People join bi-focused groups because they're bi (or bi-curious, or bi-allies, but primarily because they're bi).

HBB "privilege" doesn't change that.

And frankly...being an exotic "desirable", being treated like meat, is not a privilege, no more than being a straight woman perceived as "fuckable" is.
pstscrpt
Dec. 29th, 2010 06:08 pm (UTC)
What the hell are you talking about? Did you mean to be responding to someone else?
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 06:11 pm (UTC)
I was just talking rates. Sure, there are plenty of reasons for women to be interested in such a group, but bi men also may have nowhere else they're quite accepted as bisexual in the first place. Maybe the HBB-annoyance approximately offsets it.

Did I misread your last sentence?
pstscrpt
Dec. 29th, 2010 06:18 pm (UTC)
Maybe, but I'm drawing a blank on what you took it to mean.

I was acknowledging that being treated as a role to fill ("seeking sisterwife", etc.) would be something that would bring in women more often than men (men do get this from straight woman / bi man couples, but less often). I don't know whether it's by more or less than the big reason that would bring in more men than women.
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:11 pm (UTC)
Argh. "sisterwife" is a polygamist term. It does *not* apply to couples seeking HBBs.

Look. *YOU* are not a bisexual woman, right? Maybe you're not qualified to make the statements you've been making?
pstscrpt
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:24 pm (UTC)
I see "sisterwife" all the time on the Michigan poly mailing lists. Yes, it annoys everyone.

And I didn't want to get into it. People keep demanding that I explain myself on minor points.

Besides, by definition, no one can be a member of every group we're talking about.
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:28 pm (UTC)
Does "sisterwife" mean "HBB, having a separate sexual F/F (wives) relationship without the husband involved" ? Or does it mean "all interactions are presumed to be F/M/F, any F/F sexual interaction for the benefit of the husband" ?

I'm saying that maybe you don't have the standing to talk about bisexual women's issues compared to actual bisexual women.
pstscrpt
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:36 pm (UTC)
I've seen it used to mean both triad and V.

And you don't have the standing to talk about bisexual men. (to be fair, I just barely do) Is this something only trans people can talk about, then?
trinker
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:47 pm (UTC)
I can only talk about what I've witnessed in terms of participation of bisexual men in mixed gender bisexual groups. The only groups I've seen that are heavily weighted toward bisexual women are, in fact, explicitly bisexual women's groups. ;)

Cisprivilege is something else altogether. (And at least no one is arguing that bisexuality doesn't exist, or that you have to be doing things *simultaneously* to be bisexual.)

I'm skeptical about sisterwife as a potential triad, for large values of 'triad'. But people don't always choose their labels with thought for connotation, so who knows.
ashbet
Dec. 29th, 2010 07:38 pm (UTC)
As icky as it is, I've seen it, too. Usually from people who pop up briefly in a poly space, get roundly jeered/flamed, and then go away quietly (or move to OKCupid.)

It's generally a dog-whistle for "Man wants a harem, women must perform sexually with each other for man's amusement."

It also often signifies a situation where a married couple with kids wants a live-in nanny/maid/sex toy, sometimes with the expectation that the third partner is also expected to bear the man's children.

It squicks me, but I have to admit that it exists, mostly as a fantasy in the minds of people who think the configuration would be just peachy-keen. ;p

-- A <3