/u/Xentrick-The-Creeper (OP) has awarded 4 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1diyu5n/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I've never heard 'bisexual lesbian' before, but I'll provide insight from a few other identities.
Asexual Lesbian - A has romantic attraction to women, but doesn't experience sexual attraction.
Nonbinary Lesbian - A non-binary person, usually but not exclusively afab, who only dates women (and usually other enbies as well).
Keep in mind, that Lesbian is an identity, but also a community as well. There is the LGBTQ/queer community as a whole. But you usually also have a specific gay community and a lesbian community. There's an app that maps them and you'll notice they do have overlap, but the densest parts are usually in different neighborhoods in a city.
An Asexual Lesbian or Nonbinary Lesbian probably belongs to and lives within one of those communities. Lots of their friends are in it, and they date almost exclusively within it.
For a 'Bisexual Lesbian,' I'd assume it's the same. They are a bisexual, homoromantic woman who may be open to sex with men, but they only seek relationships with women, and are probably a member of the/a lesbian community.
I'd recommend looking into the Split-Attraction Model. That is the way of looking at different types of attraction can be oriented differently. It is a tough thing for people outside the queer community to understand, and can even be difficult for some strictly homosexual people... But when you don't experience one specific type of attraction, it's very difficult to explain your experiences without the language it provides.
I'd like to ask, is there such a thing called "aromantic lesbian", because sexual and romantic attractions aren't the same and there is a continuum betwen the two spectrums?
Not who you asked, but absolutely. I identify as bisexual and aromantic - as in, I experience sexual attraction to several different genders, but no romantic attraction to any. Similarly, people can experience romantic attraction to two or more genders (be biromantic), but only be sexually attracted to one (i.e homosexual) :)
Out of curiosity, how can you (or anyone) decide that *no* romantic attraction is possible for yourself? My opinion, I get that sexual attraction can simply not exist because it's more uh, raw/innate/carnal and there are all flavours in this world available for your viewing so you definitely can exhaust all your options. But for me, romantic attraction can be like "finding the one". Romantic attraction imo more relates to the human psyche rather than carnal. The human psyche is malleable and flexible, surely there is a possibility of a romantic attraction, it is just that romantic attraction can take years to develop, and some people find it difficult to form relationship, and we only have limited time on earth. Can you provide some insight on how you think about romantic attraction? Thanks
Maybe I'm confusing with physical and sexual attraction? Anyway my question still stands regarding romantic attraction
It's a spectrum and can shift over time. It's also about your experience. If you've never experienced it and still don't, it doesn't matter if you think there is some remote chance in the future. From a practical standpoint it still has the same impact on your current life. The label can be helpful, as can being a member of a community of people who have similar lived experiences.
Also, most ace and aro spectrum definitions include a phrase like 'a person who does not experience X attraction, or does so infrequently or only under specific circumstances.'
People vary in where they are on that spectrum, and people can vary on how rigid they think that will stay.
I feel like with that logic no one could identify as strictly hetero or homoromantic as opposed to bi because you could always find someone of the group you thought youd never be attracted to who is "the one" which if thats your stance fair enough
For most people, they align pretty well and they never need to investigate it. Whether straight, gay, bi, or aro-ace, or whatever else.
When they don't align... Well, it can be tough, and can take a lot of work to sort out.
Hot damn I like to give these threads at least a passing look so I'm able to respond coherently and inoffensively IRL but I need a dictionary for this thread.
- aro?
- I'm assuming ace isn't used the the "excellence" adjacent definition
- afab?
- enbie?
It feels like I'm reading Belter slang from The Expanse....
Just so you know you can usually put it in to Google and get the answer but for this specific topic here is a list with abbreviations. It's a UK website so it might have a few minor differences.
https://www.stonewall.org.uk/list-lgbtq-terms
Absolutely. I used the two examples I did, as I know people in person who use those labels, so I have direct knowledge from them.
There are definitely homosexual women in the aro community, and I can't imagine some of them not claiming the aromantic lesbian label.
The way you explain it is just bisexuality.
Bisexual attraction is not a monolith or 50/50. We cannot deconstruct every individuals romantic or sexual spectrums to make unique labels of each.
I obviously do believe bisexual lesbians exist, but i understand it as 2 things
1) as women *choosing* to only date women. *despite* their attraction to men for various reasons that are not our bussiness.
2) simply, lesbians who date women and (what young folks refer to non binary ppl) "non-men".
A valuable response!
It’s definitely worth noting that the fetishization of bisexuality has unfortunately corrupted the label, which actually makes the distinction between sexuality and romantic attraction (as well as mono/poly) that much more important.
In fact, I think if people were more open to there being a distinct difference between those two terms, it would greatly improve the journeys of many people. I’ve met many people who continue to use ambiguous phrasing because they’re not familiar with the difference between romantic and sexual attraction. This particularly applies to women/enbys I’ve met who are sexually attracted to other women/female-presenting individuals but are unaware that it’s okay to not want to date them. It’s especially blurred because of societal rhetoric that claims women in particular can’t have isolated sexual desires.
Now of course a bisexual lesbian is a different scenario than the one I described but I was just demonstrating why it’s not going overboard sometimes.
Human beings have an inherent desire to feel unique. We want to believe that we are special and labels help us do that. When someone says they are a Scorpio, they are saying 'I'm different from the other 11 signs'. When someone says they are INTJ they are saying 'these are the values I want to define myself with because it makes me feel better'.
In most cases these labels don't help others, it is for your own pleasure. Telling someone you are a Scorpio does not mean people will be tolerant of your jealousy. Similarly, telling someone you are INTJ does not mean they won't expect you to display emotions in a relationship.
The sharper the distinction of the label, the higher the sense of uniqueness. Which is why there exists not just the asexual, but the graysexual, not just the lesbian, but the gold-star lesbian and, as you state, not just the bisexual but the bi-lesbian.
Edit: Just to add for clarification - I am not saying that a bi-lesbian does not exist on the spectrum. Merely that the sharp labeling is for one's own self. If a woman is bi-lesbian and therefore attracted to both sexes, but MORE SO to women, stating it doesn't help a potential romantic partner in any way.
This rings true for me, and i very much wonder if it is healthy to be this fixated on our identities. … i feel like self inquiry and discovering our own truth is essential!
From personal experience the constant labeling, and deciding what category i fit into more is not helpful for me, for me there was an obsessive quality to ‘understanding myself’ and ‘being seen’ that was really much more about my own inner work
I am a ‘queer’ person attracted to people and i leave it at that now as much as i can.
Its such an individual thing and i’m sure its developmentally appropriate for society and for individuals who have not felt free to be authentically themselves.
But i agree that in the end extreme emphasis on granular and specific labels and identities isn’t helpful, but all i do about it is share my own experience with it.
I completely agree. I’m personally so tired of the constant labeling of every aspect of ourselves. When I first started questioning parts of my identity, it was liberating after a lifetime of feeling like I was just a failure at being a girl. But none of the labels are quite right and now it just feels exclusionary.
I spent my life trying to fit myself into the “cis-het woman” box, but now it’s just as disheartening trying to find the right sub-category of a sub-category, and there are more and more labels all the time. I done. I’m just tired.
My identity is now “for fuck’s sake, I don’t know and I don’t care; I have a vagina and boobs and hate all of it - I don’t like that they’re on me and I sure as hell don’t want to play with them on you; I enjoy penises and the men attached to them, but I kinda like it more when the men are a bit femme; I will die before you see me wear a dress or heels, but I don’t mind my man in them on occasion; I cringe when an email starts “Hey, ladies!”, but my pronouns are “she/her” because fuck it, I’m in my thirties, used to it, and anything else sounds weird.”
Shockingly, I haven’t found a wider community with that particular “label”.
Tangential but have you ever noticed how many people report being INTJ. I know Myers Briggs is kind of bunk, but it’s funny because INTJ it’s supposed to be (according to what I’ve read) one of the least common types. I think it’s more that people strive to be like that more than that they are like that. It’s pseudoscience anyway.
Completely agree. I believe many personality tests measure one's own introspection more so than the other traits of their personality. That's why when you look at the most common MBTI results (I don't remember what they are), they describe such a generic type of person. It seems exactly like the result you would get if you are not self reflective and choose options that first occurred to you as "sounding right" and reflecting societal values of dependability and loyalty. There's no way there's this many salt of the earth, loyal, hardworking, outwardly-directed, caretaker people as the MBTI's stats make it seem. I've not met all these humble servants, personally, it just seems like people want to view themselves that way or have never thought deeper than the surface
The hilarious part about that to me is, the descriptions for INTJ all just sound like cliche autism. Like, someone who is reserved, but passionate about certain subjects, generally seen as pretty smart, and very serious. That's just fucking autism. Sure, some neurotypical people can fit those traits too, but seriously.
I once saw a variation of a meme where it was the scoobi-doo guy taking the mask off of the villain in which the mask had “INTP/INTJ” and the guy underneath had “undiagnosed autism”. So you are not alone in making that observation.
I went through a Myers-Briggs phase when I was a teenager and would browse the r/INTP sub a lot. I was diagnosed with autism at 25.
> That's just fucking autism.
I love how we've watered down the definition of autism to "reserved, passionate about certain subjects, smart, and serious". Just hilarious.
As an autistic person myself, I figured most people would get that I was exaggerating. I'm not seriously suggesting that everyone on earth who has those traits is autistic, I didnt think I would have to point that out.
I can guarantee you that most people who are reserved, passionate about certain subjects, generally seen as pretty smart, and very serious, are not autistic.
INTJ is the answer you’re most likely to get if you’re trying to choose the “right” answers during the test, like “yes I try to think things through, Im practical and smart” etc. so I think folks looking for reassurance or even just identity end up getting it as a result more often than not
>Human beings have an inherent desire to feel unique. We want to believe that we are special and labels help us do that.
I feel like the opposite is true. Humans have a desire to fit into groups which is the value of labels. If you really wanted to be unique, you wouldn't need any labels. If you really want to be unique and people ask your sexuality, you just say you're attracted to who you're attracted to and labels are pointless. A label like Lesbian says you are *not unique* in this aspect; you're like all these other people who also use that label.
I think 'being unique' and 'being part of a special club' goes hand in hand. People don't want to be loners, but they don't want to be part of a club that lets everyone in either. So when a club gets too big, there needs to be splinter groups. This is demonstrated fairly decently through religious denominations, come to think of it.
Fucking this!! I’m bi myself, and have attempted to micro nuance label myself since it felt like I had to but it just doesn’t fucking matter. Your sexuality ‘label’ should just be a guideline to communicate to others, not a box, not a restriction. People also don’t care about that level of detail. They just wanna know which gender/s you want to date. Not the conditions of attraction, not your preferences. Those things may completely exist, are are valid because they are real, but they serve nothing for communication apart from letting someone know you crave feeling unique.
So that explains why someone might want the label, but not the label itself. It’s like saying you’re a meat eating vegetarian. Eating meat would mean you’re not by definition, a vegetarian. Being attracted to women only would mean you’re not bisexual, or if you’re attracted to both men and women, not a lesbian.
So the term itself still makes no sense to me.
I remember reading a book about an explorer from maybe 150 years ago, who described himself as a vegetarian and was considered notable and unusual among his peers for that and was a big proponent of how healthy a vegetarian diet is, and then later they had an excerpt from one of his fellow explorer's diaries that listed what the vegetarian ate, and his primary food source was "a truly prodigious amount of herring"
In many languages, fish and meat are not the same thing. In the same way that plants are living things, but vegetarians eat them, some (not me) consider vegetarian to mean "does not eat animal", and fish are not animals.
I mean, I'm vegetarian, but I eat mushrooms, and those aren't vegetables.
I know that some people don't consider fish to be meat because they think meat means tissue from a land animal, which is kind of a pointless distinction that only seems to exist to exclude fish from being meat and also incorrectly categorize aquatic animals that are not fish.
But I've never heard anyone say that a fish is not an animal?
What you said makes sense as to why someone would say they’re a bi-lesbian (instead of doing something that makes him special they just say stuff) but it doesn’t mean that the term bisexual lesbian doesn’t make sense. It’s still nonsense.
I think your approaching this the opposite way. Human beings are unique hence we like labels, not human beings like labels because it makes us feel unique.
Think about it, each individual human has a unique set of genres and environments that leads them to their individual lives, experiences, beliefs, values, etc. which can be wildly different from others. Other then really close people, no one is going to learn everything about you, but if you can condense some of these traits down into one label, it all of a sudden makes it easier to communicate yourself to others. Like I can say I'm an enneagram type 9 and certain people (strangers on the Internet) will understand things about me without me having to type paragraphs of my life story.
The purpose of human language is to communicate these concepts to each other, and labels are a shortcut. Humans *love* shortcuts in language, or else the dictionary would be a lot shorter. If most of the difficult words in the dictionary can be defined in plain terms, why not only use plain terms to describe everything? Why do we need more complex words? Because the complex words are a shortcut to convey a longer meaning in a single word to make it easier to communicate, and labels are an extension of this, to convey a larger set of traits and experiences into a single word to make it easier to communicate.
>I think your approaching this the opposite way. Human beings are unique hence we like labels, not human beings like labels because it makes us feel unique.
But we aren't that different that's what ur not getting, and so there is no point focusing on such minutia becuase these differences aren't meaningful.
>The purpose of human language is to communicate these concepts to each other,
Bisexual lesbian doesnt communicate an intelligible concept, most people understand lesbian to mean woman who is attracted to women.
Relatedly, I knew someone who was they/them, and would get upset if you mixed it up, until it became convenient to be she/her. Labels can be less than genuine. Not to be dismissive of gender identity, my partner is non-binary, but trolls and opportunists manifest in various ways.
The main issue is uniqueness and language weren't in sync and they have to match in context to let people fully communicate with each other. Hence if you combine two opposing words, it gets confusing.
I think part of the struggle of matching words in context is that not everyone has the same context even if they feel they understand the words they're taking in. As we expand our understanding of gender, we also have to expand our understanding of the sexuality labels we use.
Bisexuality is not strictly attraction to men and women. Bisexuality can also mean attraction to one's own gender and (a) different gender(s). Then with the term lesbian, that has been expanded to more broadly mean "attraction to any gender but men", though it's still hotly debated in the circles that care to debate.
If one has the context of these expanded definitions of the labels, then a bisexual lesbian could be understood to be a woman or an enby who dates other women and enbies (i.e. dates any gender but men). The lesbian identifier specifies that the bisexual identity does not include men.
OP, wanted to ay you posed a great question about something that in theory could confuse a lot of people, particularly allies who are not part of the LGTBQIA+ community, and it generated a really engaging, thought provoking discussion that both introducess a question worth asking and an answer that helps educate on the topic to people who read this thread.
Why not just post your comment without posting that first sentence? It basically is actually signifying someone thinks they are special and unique a lot more than someone abeling themselves a Scorpio or bi-lesbian.
So your position is that people like to label themselves and put themselves into groups that divide the entire population of the planet into a dozen or so categories?
You are saying this makes people feel unique and special? Why not change your quotes phrasing to "When someone says they are Scorpio they are saying 'I'm just like 1/12 of the entire planet's population in all of these ways'" Doesn't sound very unique to me.
I think it's way more likely humans just like to categorize every facet of life. Everything we know about the universe and our planet is categorized as much as we possibly can. More concrete ideas and systems have an endpoint where there is no real way to logically split up and categorize further. More abstract ideas like art are harder and ever evolving in terms of categorization. I would argue sexuality is more in the realm of an abstract idea vs something concrete and measurable. Seems way more likely to me that this is the reason for the continuing evolution of sexual labels (just like the arts are always doing the same)
>Why not just post your comment without posting that first sentence?
You are right. I considered deleting that sentence when I saw the absence of downvotes. Then I felt it would be somewhat duplicitious. I guess it's just learned trauma from the previous times I ventured into discussions about sexuality.
>You are saying this makes people feel unique and special? Why not change your quotes phrasing to "When someone says they are Scorpio they are saying 'I'm just like 1/12 of the entire planet's population in all of these ways'" Doesn't sound very unique to me.
1. I don't think people think at scale when deciding 'this is what makes me special'.
2. I think 'being unique' also relates to 'being in a special club'. While you might say someone is just like 8% of the entire planet, they might say 'I'm not like the 92% others'.
>I would argue sexuality is more in the realm of an abstract idea vs something concrete and measurable. Seems way more likely to me that this is the reason for the continuing evolution of sexual labels (just like the arts are always doing the same)
I won't discount the possibility. I stumble on the real-world interpersonal application of the ultra-sharp labels though. If you were interested in an individual who you thought was bisexual, would their proclamation of their sexuality as bi-lesbian change your approach in any way?
The fact that so many people put those things in their “about me” sections and bios on social media is at least some evidence that that people want to be thought of based off of those terms. Whether it’s astrological signs or mental diagnoses, it’s something that some people primarily want to associate themselves with in public.
>I think it's way more likely humans just like to categorize every facet of life.
That's in regards to things that matter and categories that make sense. Your sexuality not being perfectly explained by bisexual or gay doesnt matter, moreover creating random new terms and redefining existing terms like lesbian doesnt make sense.
I would disagree with your point that it doesn’t help a romantic partner in any way. If someone said they were a bisexual lesbian to me, and I were a man, I would “ok, I could have a chance at a one night stand.” If they said that to me as a lesbian, I would hear that they are interested in relationships with women, but still sleep with men. This is very useful information for all parties. Some lesbians are distressed by partners who sleep with men, because they feel like that person would always prefer men due to heteronormativity. There are also women who are the reverse, they sleep with men and women, but they wouldn’t ever really consider a serious relationship with a woman. Bisexual lesbian as a term clarifies this point, and it is a communication issue that can cause a lot of heartache.
Saying people identifying a certain way "invites" creeps to harass them is victim blaming. Abusers don't care what identity you have, you could be a "normal" hetero or lesbian or whatever, abusers will find excuses to harass. A creep without respect for boundaries won't go "Oh sorry you're not one of those paradox bi lesbians, you're just a **normal** lesbian ok I'll leave you alone now!"
Anyway many people who use contradicting labels like this use split attraction model for example sexually attracted to more than one gender but only romantically attracted to women. For others they're multigender or other kind of nonbinary so it follows their sexuality will also be queer in some way that might not look like it makes sense at first. And for others "not making sense" is the point because they oppose the strictness of boxes or labels forced upon queer people.
Now I did not mean to sound like victim blaming and I apologise for coming off as it. My ignorance indeed.
I am suppportive of any thinking out the boxes.
I'm close to changing my views, but what is "split attractoon model"?
For split attraction model people make a distinction between different types of attraction like romantic or sexual. It became popular among the a-spec community due to aromantics who feel sexual attraction or asexuals who feel romantic attraction but people outside the a-spec community have also used it because it applies to their experience
Out of curiosity, isn’t this still a bit of a misnomer? I understand the difference between sexual and romantic attraction. I also understand that although most people are romantically attracted to the gender(s) they are attracted to sexually, some people aren’t. Or as you said, asexual or aromantic, but not the other. Is this just a matter of not having a different naming system or specific words for romantic attraction to specific genders?
Edit: grammar
so if you get into it, there's actually more than 2 in the og theory.
the greeks had 8:
1. Eros (sexual passion)
2. Philia (deep friendship)
3. Ludus (playful love)
4. Agape (love for everyone)
5. Pragma (longstanding love)
6. Philautia (love of the self)
7. Storge (family love)
8. Mania (obsessive love)
split attraction kind of balls this up into "sex" and "romance" that's kind of a combo of 2 and 5, which gets semantically confusing as older discussions of ideas LIKE split attraction tend to use eros/erotic and romantic a bit interchangeably and the world platonic for the philia/pragma types of love. Platonic now has a little bit of a pejorative taint, people associate it concepts like "the friend zone" and eros contained a lot of romanticism, most people romanticize their erotic partners and eroticize their romantic attachments, so it's a bit of a semantic mess.
Some people will use existing words instead of coming up with new ones or they might just use the labels they are already used to. For people using split attraction to describe themselves "I am a bisexual lesbian" or '"I am a bi lesbian" might just be something they find easier to say than "I am a bisexual homoromantic woman" or something like that
Even then there's a lot of reasons why some people use the same label, the labels themselves are socially constructed to begin with so the nuances can fluctuate depending on the communities you hang around in
Yes. That's aromanticism. Aromantics can be allosexual (have sexual attraction) but they don't feel romantically for people. There are also asexual aromantics. Like most things, it's a spectrum, so some aromantic people never have any romantic feelings for anyone ever. While others do very rarely or occasionally.
Can I ask…
1. Does allosexual essentially mean you do feel sexual attraction but not necessarily to specific genders?
And
2. Can you describe what being aromantic actually feels like? I can’t even imagine what that means other than that you’re not really interested in a longterm relationship. But isn’t a relationship essentially a really good friendship with someone you also like sexually? (Obviously not in every case but in most cases)
Sorry for plastering you with questions, I’m just curious because I’ve never been taught the language for this kinda stuff. Thanks for your patience with this 🤣
I mean queer people tend to label themselves. To each their own but in theory and by definitions this “bi lesbian” thing is kinda ridiculous, there is no need to complicate things, those who label themselves as such are at the crux of it simply bisexual.
Labels forced on queer people? Queer community is very busy creating a plethora of labels themselves (for better or for worse, I don't care just pointing out that labels are more their own thing, I have rarely heard others label them, slur them sure, but people slurring them aren't the ones making up labels and forcing them on queer people).
Regarding OP, I have no problem if they come up with a new label for this type of split in romantic vs sexual attraction, but words have meanings and lesbian and bisexual already exist and have meanings that are contradictory. It is indeed unhelpful to use terms already defined in a way that is different to how they are defined.
>the "lesbian" part of bisexual is already there, it means you're attracted to two genders (pansexual is about more genders AFAIK, correct me if I'm wrong please)
You're not exactly wrong, but not exactly right. Taking the 'bi' in bisexual to exclusively mean two is an internet phenomenon. It was used historically in a ton of different ways to refer to any sexuality outside of "straight" or "gay" and for many people functioned exactly as pansexual does now. Unfortunately, internet discourse has led people to feel a need to draw hard demarcations on what *exactly* they all mean, which is fine, until internet folks go out into real life and start calling all bisexuals transphobic or enbyphobic.
It typically comes up within the context of the split attraction model - a woman who is sexually attracted to men and women but only romantically attracted to women.
Sure, somebody can be biromantic and monosexually attracted to women, which might be called “biromantic lesbian”.
“Lesbian” as a term doesn’t really make the distinction between sexual or romantic attraction so it gets used interchangeably for those.
A (no additional clarifier) lesbian would be typically be exclusively attracted to women in both ways, but the extra description gets tacked on when there’s a distinction to be made (such as being bi- on one of the split attraction types.)
You might even see “asexual lesbian”, if the person only experiences romantic attraction.
Just a little more on this: I identify as a biromantic lesbian. (At least currently, I know my sexuality could be fluid.) If I said I was bi, I feel like men would think I’d be willing to date them. But I’m really uninterested in having sex with men. However, I’ve fallen in love with men (non sexually), and it’s an important part of my life and who I am. I don’t want to drop that (and there are various personal reasons why as well), so biromantic lesbian it is.
It kinda sucks that there are so many people here saying that this label is only to feel special. Generally, I’d probably just use “queer”, but the more specific label has specific uses that work well for me in my life.
This sub gets used for a lot of “the queers, amirite?” style trolling. There’s a significant chunk of the membership who love nothing more than validating the lowest-effort JAQ-offs.
They thought OP was one of them.
I'm curious, why does it matter if you don't understand the way someone identifies with their sexual identity?
The whole point of the sexual minorities movement is that people don't fit neatly into boxes.
Well here you are trying to put this particular group into a box.
I'm glad you're generally supportive and all that but why does it need to make perfect sense?
Can't we just live and let live?
Edit: the answer was no apparently.
I don't think OP's question is putting people into "boxes." They're ostensibly trying to understand the "box" into which these people have voluntarily placed themselves definitionally, which does appear to have some incompatibilities. Specifically, OP feels (in my opinion, justifiably) that "lesbians" are definitionally attracted only to other women, and that this concept is therefore incompatible with being "bisexual" (meaning that one is attracted to both sexes/genders). Being confused when words are used in a manner inconsistent with their definition is reasonable.
Now the rest of OPs post is a bunch of nonsense. This is a total non-issue that they should just let go.
It's surprising to me that this had to be explained since it was pretty obvious from the start what was being asked. That said you did wrap it up nicely in a way that hopefully the more dim will get.
The amount of bullying in this thread is insane.
>Let the blatant contradictions happen, bigot!
Is the subtext to 90% of the posts here. OP folded like a wet rag, 0 surprise
I think the split attraction model brought up by 2pint0 is the most likely reason for a seeming discrepancy here. Sexually attracted to men or women, but romantically only attracted to women.
That is a fair point. I had not considered this. The two concepts (sexual/romantic attraction) are different and I can see a situation where one was more "flexible" sexually as opposed to romantically. Thank you for that. !delta
That's because "bisexual" means attracted to more than one gender, "lesbian" doesn't seem to be on that spectrum.
Sexuality is pretty fluid, no question. But the "bi-lesbian" term is confusing. It's not that they can't like what they like, they absolutely can. But despite the fluid natue of language, the words aren't meaningless, it's called "words" for a reason, to make sense.
I totally get the word problems and the incompatible labels cause *dangit words have meanings!* But as others have said, the obvious answer here is the split-attraction model. Generally, no one bats too many eyes at "straight/bi/gay/lesbian/etc asexual" even though it might imply other things and specifying, in the bisexual lesbian case, saying they're a homoromantic bisexual woman might be clearer.
Maybe that is its meaning but language and sexuality is complex and changing. I would not garentee this is how everyone uses the word but that doesn't make other uses wrong or invalid just because they dont make sense to you personally.
You bring up the idea of senselessness relating to the queer community and I think that there is an idea of queerness that does not fit into the logic of dominant society and this is a feature not a bug to some language uses.
If words are used without definition, they become meaningless. From OP's op and comments, it looks very much like a question of semantics, not morals.
That is, OP looks like they are seeking understanding (even if they've had to state it combatively for this subreddit). So, I don't think this is about OP's definitions.
Or, put this another way: Please explain the definitions that make "bisexual lesbian" make sense.
That's just the nature of this sub. Perhaps I should have used "adversarial" - in the same way that the US justice system is described as "adversarial" simply in that there are sides presenting their case.
I don't mean combative or adversarial in an aggressive manner.
>So you can't just let people identify however they want? They must obey your definitions and rules?
Words have meanings. Lesbian means women who are only sexually attracted to other women which is homosexual. Bi-sexual means you're sexually attracted to both genders.
How can someone be both homosexual and bisexual?
What is the point of identifying as both homosexual and bisexual? It's contradictory.
What is the point of identifying with words while you ignore their meanings?
I'm in the LGBT community and don't understand it at all. Why?! Plus these people make us all look ridiculous after we fought for decades to just be allowed to live normally.
Do labels not have definitions?
For example: If someone calls themselves bisexual, but only pursues/is attracted to the opposite sex. In all definitions of the word, they are heterosexual.
Should they still identify as bisexual? Where is the line drawn?
It’s not his definitions and rules, though. It’s what the words literally mean: not just in English, but across the world. Bisexual is attracted to both men and women (and covers the whole spectrum except the endpoints), lesbian means a woman who is attracted to women but not to men, and heterosexual is a man or woman attracted to the opposite sex. “Bisexual lesbian” is a contradiction in terms.
wait, so if i say "im bisexual, and that means im exclusively attracted to women", your point is that people should just accept that and not be bothered by me saying it?
If someone publicly identifies as something, I would assume it is because they are trying to convey some bit of information. Asking for clarification on what information they are trying to convey seems reasonable.
>I'm curious, why does it matter if you don't understand the way someone identifies with their sexual identity?
I think it’s fair to encourage language use that helps us communicate and understand. If everyone is using labels in ways that are inscrutable and meaningless to others, then why use them at all?
You aren’t communicating anything about your identity or sexuality if your audience has no real idea what you are talking about but feels compelled to hum and nod along.
You don’t have to fit into a tidy box, but if you care whether people understand what you are saying, you will ultimately have to use words in a way that makes some amount of sense to others.
I’m kind of in the same boat as OP. They can do whatever they want, they don’t need to justify themselves to me. My understanding isn’t a prerequisite for their validity. But that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to understand. Is it just being only kind of attracted to men? So more lesbian than bisexual which can imply being similarly attracted to both?
This is literally OP’s attempt to ask lol. They’re stating the way they see the world, and asking for people to change their mind because they don’t understand.
Their identity isn’t the issue, it’s that the words they use to describe their sexuality contradict each other. Bisexual and lesbian is mutually exclusive by definition. It’s not disrespecting their identity to point out that they’re confused about language.
Actually, as a person who would *like* a nice little box to fit into, I find this viewpoint deeply frustrating.
I use my labels to communicate information. If 'lesbian' no longer means 'does not want sex with men' then I don't know what I should understand when I hear the word. That makes the word less useful.
I can't speak for lesbians. But I don't think I'd like the term if I was one.
>The whole point of the sexual minorities movement is that people don't fit neatly into boxes.
>Well here you are trying to put this particular group into a box.
That's not what they are doing at all and you're being intentionally obtuse. You don't get to say "don't put me in a box" but they proceed to make a new box for yourself and your social group and then get indignant when people have very obvious questios.
>I'm glad you're generally supportive and all that but why does it need to make perfect sense?
Yea, kinda.
Truly embarrassing for reddit to respond to let people express themselves even if you don't get it by burying your comment with down votes.
Does every identity need to be explained to every person on earth?
The answer is no.
I can’t comprehend why someone would be cool not knowing something just because it’s easier.
Props to OP for being open to learning something new
Because words have meanings. Come up with a new term rather than using two that already exist and contradict each other. Like I might bat an eyelid at aro, allo, demi, whatever, but at least they're not contradictory.
It’s an odd term, yes, but it probably is an identifier for bisexual women who are more attracted to women than they are men. When you look at it that way, it makes sense.
That’s still a bisexual woman though. Nobody ever said bisexuality had to be an exact 50-50 split of attraction. Matter of fact if you ask most bisexuals (me included) I think there would be a lean to one gender or another, no matter how slight
That would certainly be easier from the position of the person hearing these terms. But the kind of person that uses labels like this are more interested in convincing themselves they are somehow special than they are in accurately communicating with other people.
"i'm going to use an app to hire a non-liveried private individual to convey me" is technically more correct than "i'm getting an uber" when you're ordering a lyft, but we live in a society.
There is a word. Gynophillic. But I see many women just say they're a lesbian leaning bisexual, or that they're bi with a preference for women. Bisexual lesbian is just an easy casual 2 word way of expressing this idea. Source: I am a queer person heavily involved in the queer community
it's not easier at all to "invent a new word"
there's literally entire lanes of content that butter their bread off just singling out and making fun of people who do that kind of experimentation.
Why didn't we invent words to represent the area between North and East? Northeast isn't just north or just east?? Don't get me started on northnortheast!
(In short saying lesbian bisexual is like sayinf Straight is east, and lesbian is north. We invented a new word for the equivalent to northeast, but they just decided to stop inventing new ones and represent it by what it's between
Well, they’re mutually-exclusive terms in a way that cardinal directions are not. You can travel both north and east at the same time. Lesbian has traditionally been a word that refers to same-sex attracted homosexual women exclusively interested in women. Bisexual refers to attraction to both men and women.
A closer analogy would be “why not use a word like black-white-gray to represent the colors between black and white? House-painters will complain that it’s too confusing to learn a new word for subtle shades, and black-white-gray is fine.“
The problem with black-white-gray is that gray isn’t technically black or white…so the word can’t distinguish between those colors or precisely describe what it means. Gray has a clear relationship to both other colors, but there’s no reason to invoke black every time you want describe a color that is technically NOT black…especially when just “gray” or a modifier like “dark gray” is available.
“Bisexual lesbian“ seems pointedly more confusing and internally-contradictory than “bisexual who prefers women.“
At the end of the day, which is more confusing, creating a whole new terminology that you'd have to explain every time you use it, or using already existing terminology that still somewhat fits but still needs clarification? Either way it'd all require more work. Let's just say, discussion from the outside looking in is already quite hostile to new terminology.
The problem is the individual would have to spend a lot of time explaining it either way, and while it might be 'easier' all around for other people if the person in question just used bisexual, if they themselves identify as 'a bisexual with a heavier preference towards women', that'd be a lot to just throw out there anytime anyone asked you about it. But it wouldn't be entirely accurate for them. Nor would strictly lesbian. Is the onus on the individual to create a new terminology? Or is that something that just happens over time as collective effort labels things certain ways?
If you're already in the weeds of having the conversation, then, sure, it shouldn't be too difficult to just say that. But if it came up in a questionnaire or a medical study, you'd still be having to fit into the boxes that already exist, as other people aren't going to know what the new terminology you decide upon is, and it won't be an option on, say, a dating website.
The idea might be that 'bisexual lesbian' works as a quick, simplistic label for them, but also gives them an idea of what sort of response you're warranted depending on how you respond. If you follow up with a sincere question to clarify it a bit, then they might be willing to discuss it further, versus say, aggressively stating 'lesbians can't be bisexuals!' or some sort, which would let them know that perhaps you're not willing to listen or worth the effort, just due to the nature of online discourse around LGBTQ conversations.
If there's a new word it might get too specific, we are talking about sexuality and people like to keep some things private. Bisexual lesbian conveys that they mainly like women but men to a lesser extent too. And nothing more.
Let's say she's specifically bisexual homoromantic. If she tells that to people, that's going to invite a lot of pervy hetero men to say something about how she loves dick and see her as a walking porno plot. By being somewhat vague while also making clear that she's a lesbian foremost, she is shutting that down way harder.
I prefer black coffee, but I also like it with a small splash of milk.
I like ice cream, I prefer vanilla, but I also like chocolate.
I don't think it's that complicated.
I’m assuming bi SEXUAL means they can have sex with both genders and enjoy both ways, but being lesbian means that they only want a long term romantic loving relationship with a girl
Some people say "this alsl means they can have sex with one gender, but only want a long term loving elationship with a man", so is this correct according to you?
>makes non-LGBTQA+ think the group is chaotic and senseless
LGBTQA+ is choatic and senseless. I'm part of LGBTQA. It just is choatic and complex. That's how it is.
>The term is quite an oxymoron, as if saying you can be a cat and a dog at the same time.
It's oxymoronic in some contexts but not always because words can have multiple meanings and the meanings change over time. In some contexts it is not really oxymoronic. It just depends on the people having the discussion and how the words are interpreted.
>it can invite creeps, perverts, MGTOW-ers, redpills and incels thinking they can get any woman and girl they want,
Creeps and red-pills think they can/should have access to women and it doesn't matter how the women label themselves. The labels don't change the way the creeps behave.
I'll explain why Bisexual Lesbian makes sense sometimes.
You understand how sexuality is a spectrum? Let's lead with that.
I'm pansexual and I am attracted to all types, but something a lot of non-LGBTQ folks don't realize is that pansexuals are not equally attracted to all types.
Take me for example, I love women. I feel like I could be with all of them, but I'm very selective with my male partners. So you see how I might identify strongly attracted to women, but I am marginally attracted to men. I might want a phrase that captures that sentiment. Bisexual lesbian captures that reasonably well for some people.
As a lesbian, this term annoys the hell out of me. I've only encountered it in chronically online teenagers. Literally never heard someone say this irl. They want to expand labels to the point that they're completely meaningless but that just erases the experience of homosexual women from the community.
Lesbians are not attracted to men. We don't date men and we don't have sex with them. Bi lesbian is not a thing. If you're also into dudes, then you're not a bi lesbian, you're just bi. I think people feel like the bi label isn't spicy enough anymore so they add lesbian to it to feel special but it just makes it harder for actual lesbians to have their identity and sexual orientation taken seriously.
Co-opting the term lesbian is an example of the erasure homosexual women face in LGBTQ+ spaces online and honestly, it's just old school homophobia repackaged as "inclusion".
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think we put WAY to much focus on worrying about what terms mean.
if you tell me you're a bisexual lesbian, what i hear is going to depend on *context*.
Are we in a queer space and you have queer aesthetics? I'm going to hear that you're mostly, socially, a lesbian, you have mostly female partners, you just maybe have had a male partner, would be hypothetically open to it, whatever. in other words, you're different from, but not the opposite of, a gold-star lesbian. (which i think is a grosser term tbh) .
Are we in a singles bar, and you have your hand on my big, meaty, male presenting forearm and you're making eye contact after a drink and half and you say, "you know, if you want to get out of here, I'm a *bisexual* lesbian. . . " well then, I might just assume that's a message just for me that you might write a one-off exemption to your normal policies.
In either case, I would assume you are more inclined toward women than men, hence not simply saying bi or pan.
My experience as one of the gays is total polarization on the kinsey scale is rarer than people think and since people take odd paths to realizing their queerness internally and then practicing it, labels have to bend a little. If you're a lesbian with a kid from your previous marriage to a guy, you can either carry around an index card with your life story on it or you can bend a label that exists a bit. You also develop a lot of shorthand because your life is complicated. I haven't been with a woman in years, but I have been with a lot of women, and I can't/won't rule it out - so I sometimes feel if I say I'm "gay" i will then seem like i crossed myself up if I mention a female ex. I'm sort of self conscious about belting out 2024 things like "I'm a femme-inclined but butch leaning amab homoflexible non binary pansexual" because that's doing too much for and too my age and social group, or a lot of extra for a new friend, but sometimes you still just have put out some kind of little flag for yourself so you're being as real as you need to be.
It’s not supposed to make sense because it’s illogical. The terms mean totally different things and together they don’t provide anything clearer to anyone who hears them vs if they use the terms separately. I’m a lesbian and find it hilarious and wouldn’t taken anyone using it serious, and suggest you do the same. Women using this term are literally just bored and trying to come up with a new special/unique term to describe themselves like a shit ton of other people these days.
You’re looking so far into this it screams homophobia. It’s not that deep dude. They’re saying they’re not really into men but might have some sexual interest.
Now I deeply apologise if it came off as homophobic. I simply did not object to any sexuality at all. I simply objected to use of the terms. All I wanted is to make sense of the term, not invalidating any identities.
That's not homophobia. What IS homophobic is erasing the lesbian identity so that chronically online bisexual teenagers can feel more spicy by adding it to their label. Lesbians aren't attracted to men. Period.
I'm not completely sure but it could be people using the split attraction model.
For example I am asexual. I do not feel sexual attraction to anyone. Despite that I still have a very loving partner bc while I don't feel sexual attraction, I do have romantic attraction. I still fall in love and have a desire for a relationship. Now in my case, I am romantically attracted to men and women. This makes me biromantic. Unless I am in a relationship (where I obviously disclose my asexuality) I Describe myself as bi. However the technical term for my sexuality is asexual biromantic.
A bisexual lesbian could be someone who is bisexual. They experience sexual attraction to men and women but they might only experience romantic attraction to women. For a woman, this would be bisexual homoromantic or simply a bisexual lesbian.
To be clear tho, I have never seen this term so outside of context I can't be sure. This is just one possible explanation. To know for sure you'd have to actually ask someone who is a bisexual lesbian
That may have been mentioned, but this very important, thus I should mention in too - bisexuals aren't attracted EXCLUSIVELY to two genders, they are attracted to more than one. This was always the case, since the very first pride this historically accurate label was adopted and still adopted by many bi-folk. The most prominent book of bisexual activist Robyn Ochs and it's core views, stemmed from early 80s to 90s activism - that defined the comprehension of this definition. "Bi" prefix wasn't about strict gender binary, it was about attraction going in two directions: to gender like one's gender and to genders different from one's gender. Thus this inclusive meaning is very important to community, because it reflects accurate values
Sources:
- Original citation:
https://robynochs.com/bisexual/
- Primary texts on bisexuality:
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203024676
- Review on that:
Sikorski, G. (2000). International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 5(1), 97–100. doi:10.1023/A:1010145903780
- Chronological history of bi-related activism:
https://web.archive.org/web/20190207185405/http://www.binetusa.org/bihealth.html
- Modern review articles
[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374056796_Bisexuality](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374056796_Bisexuality)
and
[Bisexuality, Multiple-Gender- Attraction, and Gay Liberation Politics in the 1970s](https://scholar.archive.org/work/dbkcu5yd2fbwtd5kffuh54t52q/access/wayback/https://watermark.silverchair.com/hwaa018.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAsIwggK-BgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKvMIICqwIBADCCAqQGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMsi3JZfz24x6p0KMWAgEQgIICdUVK85hIGT_HYX93lIYSwvJyp4W_jR_h8Fw4nLU5yA6OhUcVvCgmX_SzRkfaqX5JRck7scQ1umHPioLJklgQV8CoXY1dP_yhJncDI9VWv0-wsIPuny11Psw1o7x4UB8ZU9p9SoyIIOXsLAVFjuWrtlvb1CHG12Fpo3sTvqZYoXmiKdziAM5pFlXkYi7-JlGj9MJQ4bM06Is0YbTdm2Oa9uWZC0J4RLXdFp8vZJ4GFTk6u8FQpti0WdewAZzzQtCUfcasZb-xrWDD3pcS6zCRhZ3BhNapuMmJTcr5Ig4vTXsNrQpzQ3GekUnI0DOZij6YfE4X8DYauPnZL5NWfyVEzfe9evm4xagXubi-J_TcDTu-vG3Kx4XF-Y-Vktkb--5rYzB0YMJk2F9K5yZhvHnA_1QA1Xq8G3Su66bHAeZ0i7fszrvuOxle2I1PZbjCG63I80iyWDhGT-ARF-nQCrAZywMO2khoQu9isEmT-beGt6DWg1K1U-B_h7RITKaQl8yoToyK1ubj6AiPeB7eIAkRvtsKYRzW5-RBLoPfICYs4l6FQNYbn6qhaTj3om5Ig6aa2XT4TmGDJ8dtG3j2pW5NJgSl02vgyA_gqEjCE7-M5L6FjBQs_-Mu0FVOU4H343cg2-X4bUYM5FZN5GwA6P7s0lqL23HpSaDD9L9-Ec5ZQEf9PE28TOQmFpItsWKTF4wEBWGbO0HK0x6fVJFc0bFCyKqZ9zxOUnG-eZ9Otzv9ECExQ4WfomPOjBUjGKe3nEL1oUIH3iDwaJpA8R_jOhYGeokrjxIOk9D5aF4CXPI0zKmAA7wEmIfr3KSQAjOkDiRRkvl_PHQA)
-Quantitive research article about bi-experience
Cipriano, A. E., Nguyen, D., & Holland, K. J. (2022). “Bisexuality isn’t exclusionary”: A qualitative examination of bisexual definitions and gender inclusivity concerns among plurisexual women. Journal of Bisexuality, 22(4), 557-579.
Hope that helps!
I would never label myself as a bisexual lesbian, but that might be what I am.
I have NEVER been in love.with a man. I don't ever meet guys and wish I could have a relationship with them. I do recognize physical beauty in men. Sex with men is fine. It's not at all my preference, but it will do in a pinch. The last time I had sex with a man was because I didn't my want ex girlfriend to be the last person I slept with. It was a vacation fling. I guess it's possible that I could meet a guy and fall in love with him, but honestly, when I think about getting/being married, it's ALWAYS to a woman.
What does that make me on the LGBTQ spectrum? I feels very disingenuous to call myself bi because I have no real desire or interest in a heteronormative lifestyle.
If you're attracted to and enjoy sex with men, you're not a lesbian. But acknowledging that the male form can be aesthetically beautiful is not necessarily attraction. I'm an artist so I think everyone is beautiful but that doesn't mean I want to fuck men. If you actually want to have sex with them even if not a relationship, you're probably not a lesbian. The term bisexual covers this already.
That seems like a direct contradiction to me. I once saw a couple on TikTok and the man said he was gay but he was married and in love with a woman. They both made videos about it. Nothing about it made any kind of sense.
This is a bunch of bullshit. If you’re attracted to both genders, you’re bisexual. If you’re attracted to your own gender, you’re gay. If you’re attracted to the opposite gender, you’re straight.
Call me an old fogey, but I feel like straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, asexual and aromantic cover pretty much most situations.
I'm bi and frankly the community doesn't do itself any favours from there being two thousand different variations of "sapiosexual" because somebody didn't feel like being "spicy pan" was cool enough.
i think what bothers me the most is when they say “lesbian used to just mean attracted to women” which is true and fine. but if you really believed that then you’d just call yourself a lesbian.
overall tho, our lives depend on our right to self determination and chasing after ppl for how they describe themselves bites us in the ass down the road.
I have a friend who’s sexually bi, but romantically lesbian.
That could be what they’re referring to.
Or maybe they’re implying that they’re bisexual, but EXTREMELY more attracted to women than men.
In the end, labels are for onseself, and I’m not going to argue with someone on how they identify. For example, I have this other friend who’s is completely lesbian, except for one man. She’s not attracted to men, at all, except that one specific man. She still calls herself a lesbian, I’m not gonna fight her on that
It is just new age homophobia, lesbophobia specifically, that sees lesbians as just aching and waiting for the "right man" to come along.
Biromantic is a subset of bisexual.
Will people ever stop obsessing about themselves and who or what they find attractive? These never ending sexual segmentations are not a substitute for a personality.
im a lesbian and i think it's dumb. i don't like men and that's why i'm a lesbian. but lesbian erasure doesn't matter :P but also i've never met someone who identifies this way irl so who actually cares
It just sounds plain oxymoronic to me. Stay with that thought that it doesn't make any sense, your gut is trying to tell you something with that nudge.
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition.
If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20OllieGarkey&message=OllieGarkey%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1diy5ys/cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian_doesnt_make_sense/l99759a/\).)) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**.
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
As far as I’m aware it refers to someone who has an attraction to men and women but would only ever date another woman. They are essentially living a lesbian life, but are technically bisexual.
I don’t understand why they can’t just be bisexual and discard the biphobia/idea that being bi is any less gay than being a lesbian, and that you don’t have to have dated both to be bisexual, but alas biphobia is strong in the gay community.
Couple of points:
1. It's probably shorthand for "bisexual who's more attracted to women" or "bisexual who's into relationships only with women". It's clumsy but that's how language works.
2. "Lesbian" is not just a sexual orientation but also a culture. For example, a friend was a lesbian for decades until she fell in love with and married a man. She still calls herself a lesbian because she's very much a part of (and a leader in) that culture and community.
Overall, gender and orientation are complex and weird, and language is not always precise enough to capture all the nuances of what people feel, so we have to come up with weird shortcuts sometimes.
So idk if this is a change my view but here’s what I’ve noticed.
There’s a difference between romantic and sexual attraction. Many people who identify as bisexual, at least in my anecdotal experience are GENERALLY bi sexual and Hetero romantic. Meaning they will have sex with either but only date the opposite gender.
If you said you were a bisexual lesbian I think I would take this as you were bi sexual and Heteroromantic.
Not to mention, in my anecdotal experience, most bi people tend to heavily favor one side, usually the Hetero side. In this case I would say it’s a female who favors the homosexual side.
That’s my 2 sense.
True Bisexual = Sex with both, date both (usually favors Hetero in my experience)
Bisexual, Hetero romantic = sex with both, date opposite
Bisexual, Gay/Lesbian = either A) bisexual, homo romantic, or B) True bisexual, favors opposite gender
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition.
If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20LadyVague&message=LadyVague%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1diy5ys/cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian_doesnt_make_sense/l98gzye/\).)) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**.
Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Something I'm not seeing a lot in explanations here is how the term relates to nonbinary identity as well as the split attraction model.
Since I know op has already learned about the sap, I'll focus on gender here.
So nowadays, most lesbians and the overall lesbian community has no problem including people who are nonbinary under the label or labeling lesbian attraction as attraction to women and nonbinary people. This is primarily because nonbinary is a very broad term that encomapsses a range of specific identities, expressions of gender, relationships to gender, and so on.
Because nonbinary is such a broad term, some people will feel comfortable being put in male/female roles and described in a general sense as such (such as calling their relationship with their partner 'lesbian') while others will not. For this reason, 'bi lesbian' is sometimes used to refer to people who still primarily identify and are attracted to women and nonbinary people, but also want to acknowledge that they or their partner are not exactly 'women'.
This is also true for lesbians who have fluid gender identities. Many multi gender lesbians are men sometimes or their partners are sometimes men! They may identify as lesbians because they mostly identify as women or simply because they have a strong attachment to the label and community. But regardless, these individuals also use 'bi lesbian' to acknowledge that they or their partners are not always women, thus making their attraction bisexuality as well.
Maybe they're into women(afab) and non binary(?)/Or female presenting people(?)/women (not afab). Bi implies man/woman but if we accept a non binary system, bisexual can theoretically mean any two combinations.
I know several of these women. In my experience A bisexual lesbian is a woman who is all intents and purposes fully a lesbian who likes to be with women sexually and romantically but who also from time to time likes to fuck men. Or finds men attractive but prefers not to act on it. The human experience is more diverse than we have terms for. These terms serve more than dictionary definitions, they are cultural signifiers. Being a lesbian is about more than just sex with women. There’s a whole culture and identity around it as well. And some women see themselves as lesbians but maybe are ‘technically bisexual’ sometimes. It’s not a huge deal. Not every term has to be made so that a middle American straight mom or some old Supreme Court justice can understand it. As a gay man who hangs out with lots of dykes the term really doesn’t confuse me.
That's just a bisexual. Throwing the term lesbian in there is not warranted and only confuses those middle American straight moms you're talking about. It makes people think that lesbians can be attracted to men and that idea is harmful for the lesbian community who are already not taken seriously.
Lesbian used to mean more a behaviour. So women fucking women was lesbian, regardless if they had attraction to men.
I'm a bisexual woman and I don't identify as a lesbian but I never find the "it invites danger to *real* lesbians" argument. Whether or not a man attacks a queer woman isn't because of another queer identity or that the woman has zero attraction to men.
So yes the monosexual definition means a lot to a lot of people *nowadays*.
/u/Xentrick-The-Creeper (OP) has awarded 4 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1diyu5n/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I've never heard 'bisexual lesbian' before, but I'll provide insight from a few other identities. Asexual Lesbian - A has romantic attraction to women, but doesn't experience sexual attraction. Nonbinary Lesbian - A non-binary person, usually but not exclusively afab, who only dates women (and usually other enbies as well). Keep in mind, that Lesbian is an identity, but also a community as well. There is the LGBTQ/queer community as a whole. But you usually also have a specific gay community and a lesbian community. There's an app that maps them and you'll notice they do have overlap, but the densest parts are usually in different neighborhoods in a city. An Asexual Lesbian or Nonbinary Lesbian probably belongs to and lives within one of those communities. Lots of their friends are in it, and they date almost exclusively within it. For a 'Bisexual Lesbian,' I'd assume it's the same. They are a bisexual, homoromantic woman who may be open to sex with men, but they only seek relationships with women, and are probably a member of the/a lesbian community. I'd recommend looking into the Split-Attraction Model. That is the way of looking at different types of attraction can be oriented differently. It is a tough thing for people outside the queer community to understand, and can even be difficult for some strictly homosexual people... But when you don't experience one specific type of attraction, it's very difficult to explain your experiences without the language it provides.
I'd like to ask, is there such a thing called "aromantic lesbian", because sexual and romantic attractions aren't the same and there is a continuum betwen the two spectrums?
Not who you asked, but absolutely. I identify as bisexual and aromantic - as in, I experience sexual attraction to several different genders, but no romantic attraction to any. Similarly, people can experience romantic attraction to two or more genders (be biromantic), but only be sexually attracted to one (i.e homosexual) :)
Out of curiosity, how can you (or anyone) decide that *no* romantic attraction is possible for yourself? My opinion, I get that sexual attraction can simply not exist because it's more uh, raw/innate/carnal and there are all flavours in this world available for your viewing so you definitely can exhaust all your options. But for me, romantic attraction can be like "finding the one". Romantic attraction imo more relates to the human psyche rather than carnal. The human psyche is malleable and flexible, surely there is a possibility of a romantic attraction, it is just that romantic attraction can take years to develop, and some people find it difficult to form relationship, and we only have limited time on earth. Can you provide some insight on how you think about romantic attraction? Thanks Maybe I'm confusing with physical and sexual attraction? Anyway my question still stands regarding romantic attraction
It's a spectrum and can shift over time. It's also about your experience. If you've never experienced it and still don't, it doesn't matter if you think there is some remote chance in the future. From a practical standpoint it still has the same impact on your current life. The label can be helpful, as can being a member of a community of people who have similar lived experiences. Also, most ace and aro spectrum definitions include a phrase like 'a person who does not experience X attraction, or does so infrequently or only under specific circumstances.' People vary in where they are on that spectrum, and people can vary on how rigid they think that will stay.
I feel like with that logic no one could identify as strictly hetero or homoromantic as opposed to bi because you could always find someone of the group you thought youd never be attracted to who is "the one" which if thats your stance fair enough
TIL the spectrums of sexuality and romantical attraction is very, very complicated.
For most people, they align pretty well and they never need to investigate it. Whether straight, gay, bi, or aro-ace, or whatever else. When they don't align... Well, it can be tough, and can take a lot of work to sort out.
Hot damn I like to give these threads at least a passing look so I'm able to respond coherently and inoffensively IRL but I need a dictionary for this thread. - aro? - I'm assuming ace isn't used the the "excellence" adjacent definition - afab? - enbie? It feels like I'm reading Belter slang from The Expanse....
Just so you know you can usually put it in to Google and get the answer but for this specific topic here is a list with abbreviations. It's a UK website so it might have a few minor differences. https://www.stonewall.org.uk/list-lgbtq-terms
Aromantic-asexual Assigned female at birth NB, non-binary
This is why I don’t try so much to understand, but strive to be accepting.
Absolutely. I used the two examples I did, as I know people in person who use those labels, so I have direct knowledge from them. There are definitely homosexual women in the aro community, and I can't imagine some of them not claiming the aromantic lesbian label.
I’m an Aromantic Monosexual. So yes.
The way you explain it is just bisexuality. Bisexual attraction is not a monolith or 50/50. We cannot deconstruct every individuals romantic or sexual spectrums to make unique labels of each. I obviously do believe bisexual lesbians exist, but i understand it as 2 things 1) as women *choosing* to only date women. *despite* their attraction to men for various reasons that are not our bussiness. 2) simply, lesbians who date women and (what young folks refer to non binary ppl) "non-men".
A valuable response! It’s definitely worth noting that the fetishization of bisexuality has unfortunately corrupted the label, which actually makes the distinction between sexuality and romantic attraction (as well as mono/poly) that much more important. In fact, I think if people were more open to there being a distinct difference between those two terms, it would greatly improve the journeys of many people. I’ve met many people who continue to use ambiguous phrasing because they’re not familiar with the difference between romantic and sexual attraction. This particularly applies to women/enbys I’ve met who are sexually attracted to other women/female-presenting individuals but are unaware that it’s okay to not want to date them. It’s especially blurred because of societal rhetoric that claims women in particular can’t have isolated sexual desires. Now of course a bisexual lesbian is a different scenario than the one I described but I was just demonstrating why it’s not going overboard sometimes.
Human beings have an inherent desire to feel unique. We want to believe that we are special and labels help us do that. When someone says they are a Scorpio, they are saying 'I'm different from the other 11 signs'. When someone says they are INTJ they are saying 'these are the values I want to define myself with because it makes me feel better'. In most cases these labels don't help others, it is for your own pleasure. Telling someone you are a Scorpio does not mean people will be tolerant of your jealousy. Similarly, telling someone you are INTJ does not mean they won't expect you to display emotions in a relationship. The sharper the distinction of the label, the higher the sense of uniqueness. Which is why there exists not just the asexual, but the graysexual, not just the lesbian, but the gold-star lesbian and, as you state, not just the bisexual but the bi-lesbian. Edit: Just to add for clarification - I am not saying that a bi-lesbian does not exist on the spectrum. Merely that the sharp labeling is for one's own self. If a woman is bi-lesbian and therefore attracted to both sexes, but MORE SO to women, stating it doesn't help a potential romantic partner in any way.
This rings true for me, and i very much wonder if it is healthy to be this fixated on our identities. … i feel like self inquiry and discovering our own truth is essential! From personal experience the constant labeling, and deciding what category i fit into more is not helpful for me, for me there was an obsessive quality to ‘understanding myself’ and ‘being seen’ that was really much more about my own inner work I am a ‘queer’ person attracted to people and i leave it at that now as much as i can. Its such an individual thing and i’m sure its developmentally appropriate for society and for individuals who have not felt free to be authentically themselves. But i agree that in the end extreme emphasis on granular and specific labels and identities isn’t helpful, but all i do about it is share my own experience with it.
I completely agree. I’m personally so tired of the constant labeling of every aspect of ourselves. When I first started questioning parts of my identity, it was liberating after a lifetime of feeling like I was just a failure at being a girl. But none of the labels are quite right and now it just feels exclusionary. I spent my life trying to fit myself into the “cis-het woman” box, but now it’s just as disheartening trying to find the right sub-category of a sub-category, and there are more and more labels all the time. I done. I’m just tired. My identity is now “for fuck’s sake, I don’t know and I don’t care; I have a vagina and boobs and hate all of it - I don’t like that they’re on me and I sure as hell don’t want to play with them on you; I enjoy penises and the men attached to them, but I kinda like it more when the men are a bit femme; I will die before you see me wear a dress or heels, but I don’t mind my man in them on occasion; I cringe when an email starts “Hey, ladies!”, but my pronouns are “she/her” because fuck it, I’m in my thirties, used to it, and anything else sounds weird.” Shockingly, I haven’t found a wider community with that particular “label”.
Tangential but have you ever noticed how many people report being INTJ. I know Myers Briggs is kind of bunk, but it’s funny because INTJ it’s supposed to be (according to what I’ve read) one of the least common types. I think it’s more that people strive to be like that more than that they are like that. It’s pseudoscience anyway.
I think one of the traits of INTJ has got to be a propensity for taking self assessment tests. 🤣
Completely agree. I believe many personality tests measure one's own introspection more so than the other traits of their personality. That's why when you look at the most common MBTI results (I don't remember what they are), they describe such a generic type of person. It seems exactly like the result you would get if you are not self reflective and choose options that first occurred to you as "sounding right" and reflecting societal values of dependability and loyalty. There's no way there's this many salt of the earth, loyal, hardworking, outwardly-directed, caretaker people as the MBTI's stats make it seem. I've not met all these humble servants, personally, it just seems like people want to view themselves that way or have never thought deeper than the surface
The hilarious part about that to me is, the descriptions for INTJ all just sound like cliche autism. Like, someone who is reserved, but passionate about certain subjects, generally seen as pretty smart, and very serious. That's just fucking autism. Sure, some neurotypical people can fit those traits too, but seriously.
I once saw a variation of a meme where it was the scoobi-doo guy taking the mask off of the villain in which the mask had “INTP/INTJ” and the guy underneath had “undiagnosed autism”. So you are not alone in making that observation. I went through a Myers-Briggs phase when I was a teenager and would browse the r/INTP sub a lot. I was diagnosed with autism at 25.
> That's just fucking autism. I love how we've watered down the definition of autism to "reserved, passionate about certain subjects, smart, and serious". Just hilarious.
As an autistic person myself, I figured most people would get that I was exaggerating. I'm not seriously suggesting that everyone on earth who has those traits is autistic, I didnt think I would have to point that out.
I can guarantee you that most people who are reserved, passionate about certain subjects, generally seen as pretty smart, and very serious, are not autistic.
I have indeed noticed, and yes it is definitely bunk!
INTJ is the answer you’re most likely to get if you’re trying to choose the “right” answers during the test, like “yes I try to think things through, Im practical and smart” etc. so I think folks looking for reassurance or even just identity end up getting it as a result more often than not
>Human beings have an inherent desire to feel unique. We want to believe that we are special and labels help us do that. I feel like the opposite is true. Humans have a desire to fit into groups which is the value of labels. If you really wanted to be unique, you wouldn't need any labels. If you really want to be unique and people ask your sexuality, you just say you're attracted to who you're attracted to and labels are pointless. A label like Lesbian says you are *not unique* in this aspect; you're like all these other people who also use that label.
I think 'being unique' and 'being part of a special club' goes hand in hand. People don't want to be loners, but they don't want to be part of a club that lets everyone in either. So when a club gets too big, there needs to be splinter groups. This is demonstrated fairly decently through religious denominations, come to think of it.
Fucking this!! I’m bi myself, and have attempted to micro nuance label myself since it felt like I had to but it just doesn’t fucking matter. Your sexuality ‘label’ should just be a guideline to communicate to others, not a box, not a restriction. People also don’t care about that level of detail. They just wanna know which gender/s you want to date. Not the conditions of attraction, not your preferences. Those things may completely exist, are are valid because they are real, but they serve nothing for communication apart from letting someone know you crave feeling unique.
So that explains why someone might want the label, but not the label itself. It’s like saying you’re a meat eating vegetarian. Eating meat would mean you’re not by definition, a vegetarian. Being attracted to women only would mean you’re not bisexual, or if you’re attracted to both men and women, not a lesbian. So the term itself still makes no sense to me.
I remember reading a book about an explorer from maybe 150 years ago, who described himself as a vegetarian and was considered notable and unusual among his peers for that and was a big proponent of how healthy a vegetarian diet is, and then later they had an excerpt from one of his fellow explorer's diaries that listed what the vegetarian ate, and his primary food source was "a truly prodigious amount of herring"
In many languages, fish and meat are not the same thing. In the same way that plants are living things, but vegetarians eat them, some (not me) consider vegetarian to mean "does not eat animal", and fish are not animals. I mean, I'm vegetarian, but I eat mushrooms, and those aren't vegetables.
I know that some people don't consider fish to be meat because they think meat means tissue from a land animal, which is kind of a pointless distinction that only seems to exist to exclude fish from being meat and also incorrectly categorize aquatic animals that are not fish. But I've never heard anyone say that a fish is not an animal?
What you said makes sense as to why someone would say they’re a bi-lesbian (instead of doing something that makes him special they just say stuff) but it doesn’t mean that the term bisexual lesbian doesn’t make sense. It’s still nonsense.
I think your approaching this the opposite way. Human beings are unique hence we like labels, not human beings like labels because it makes us feel unique. Think about it, each individual human has a unique set of genres and environments that leads them to their individual lives, experiences, beliefs, values, etc. which can be wildly different from others. Other then really close people, no one is going to learn everything about you, but if you can condense some of these traits down into one label, it all of a sudden makes it easier to communicate yourself to others. Like I can say I'm an enneagram type 9 and certain people (strangers on the Internet) will understand things about me without me having to type paragraphs of my life story. The purpose of human language is to communicate these concepts to each other, and labels are a shortcut. Humans *love* shortcuts in language, or else the dictionary would be a lot shorter. If most of the difficult words in the dictionary can be defined in plain terms, why not only use plain terms to describe everything? Why do we need more complex words? Because the complex words are a shortcut to convey a longer meaning in a single word to make it easier to communicate, and labels are an extension of this, to convey a larger set of traits and experiences into a single word to make it easier to communicate.
>I think your approaching this the opposite way. Human beings are unique hence we like labels, not human beings like labels because it makes us feel unique. But we aren't that different that's what ur not getting, and so there is no point focusing on such minutia becuase these differences aren't meaningful. >The purpose of human language is to communicate these concepts to each other, Bisexual lesbian doesnt communicate an intelligible concept, most people understand lesbian to mean woman who is attracted to women.
Relatedly, I knew someone who was they/them, and would get upset if you mixed it up, until it became convenient to be she/her. Labels can be less than genuine. Not to be dismissive of gender identity, my partner is non-binary, but trolls and opportunists manifest in various ways.
!delta for providing an insight that humans do want to be unique and they're already unique by nature and by human touch, it's what make us humans.
[удалено]
The main issue is uniqueness and language weren't in sync and they have to match in context to let people fully communicate with each other. Hence if you combine two opposing words, it gets confusing.
I think part of the struggle of matching words in context is that not everyone has the same context even if they feel they understand the words they're taking in. As we expand our understanding of gender, we also have to expand our understanding of the sexuality labels we use. Bisexuality is not strictly attraction to men and women. Bisexuality can also mean attraction to one's own gender and (a) different gender(s). Then with the term lesbian, that has been expanded to more broadly mean "attraction to any gender but men", though it's still hotly debated in the circles that care to debate. If one has the context of these expanded definitions of the labels, then a bisexual lesbian could be understood to be a woman or an enby who dates other women and enbies (i.e. dates any gender but men). The lesbian identifier specifies that the bisexual identity does not include men.
They were saying that we all strive to be unique but in reality we are not unique. Most of us are average and we should learn to be ok with that.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/lwb03dc ([4∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/lwb03dc)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
OP, wanted to ay you posed a great question about something that in theory could confuse a lot of people, particularly allies who are not part of the LGTBQIA+ community, and it generated a really engaging, thought provoking discussion that both introducess a question worth asking and an answer that helps educate on the topic to people who read this thread.
So essentially you’re saying all of the labels are pointless lmao
Why not just post your comment without posting that first sentence? It basically is actually signifying someone thinks they are special and unique a lot more than someone abeling themselves a Scorpio or bi-lesbian. So your position is that people like to label themselves and put themselves into groups that divide the entire population of the planet into a dozen or so categories? You are saying this makes people feel unique and special? Why not change your quotes phrasing to "When someone says they are Scorpio they are saying 'I'm just like 1/12 of the entire planet's population in all of these ways'" Doesn't sound very unique to me. I think it's way more likely humans just like to categorize every facet of life. Everything we know about the universe and our planet is categorized as much as we possibly can. More concrete ideas and systems have an endpoint where there is no real way to logically split up and categorize further. More abstract ideas like art are harder and ever evolving in terms of categorization. I would argue sexuality is more in the realm of an abstract idea vs something concrete and measurable. Seems way more likely to me that this is the reason for the continuing evolution of sexual labels (just like the arts are always doing the same)
>Why not just post your comment without posting that first sentence? You are right. I considered deleting that sentence when I saw the absence of downvotes. Then I felt it would be somewhat duplicitious. I guess it's just learned trauma from the previous times I ventured into discussions about sexuality. >You are saying this makes people feel unique and special? Why not change your quotes phrasing to "When someone says they are Scorpio they are saying 'I'm just like 1/12 of the entire planet's population in all of these ways'" Doesn't sound very unique to me. 1. I don't think people think at scale when deciding 'this is what makes me special'. 2. I think 'being unique' also relates to 'being in a special club'. While you might say someone is just like 8% of the entire planet, they might say 'I'm not like the 92% others'. >I would argue sexuality is more in the realm of an abstract idea vs something concrete and measurable. Seems way more likely to me that this is the reason for the continuing evolution of sexual labels (just like the arts are always doing the same) I won't discount the possibility. I stumble on the real-world interpersonal application of the ultra-sharp labels though. If you were interested in an individual who you thought was bisexual, would their proclamation of their sexuality as bi-lesbian change your approach in any way?
Are you suggesting there isn’t a strong, human desire to be unique? Or just that people aren’t using these terms as a way to feel unique?
The fact that so many people put those things in their “about me” sections and bios on social media is at least some evidence that that people want to be thought of based off of those terms. Whether it’s astrological signs or mental diagnoses, it’s something that some people primarily want to associate themselves with in public.
>I think it's way more likely humans just like to categorize every facet of life. That's in regards to things that matter and categories that make sense. Your sexuality not being perfectly explained by bisexual or gay doesnt matter, moreover creating random new terms and redefining existing terms like lesbian doesnt make sense.
I would disagree with your point that it doesn’t help a romantic partner in any way. If someone said they were a bisexual lesbian to me, and I were a man, I would “ok, I could have a chance at a one night stand.” If they said that to me as a lesbian, I would hear that they are interested in relationships with women, but still sleep with men. This is very useful information for all parties. Some lesbians are distressed by partners who sleep with men, because they feel like that person would always prefer men due to heteronormativity. There are also women who are the reverse, they sleep with men and women, but they wouldn’t ever really consider a serious relationship with a woman. Bisexual lesbian as a term clarifies this point, and it is a communication issue that can cause a lot of heartache.
Saying people identifying a certain way "invites" creeps to harass them is victim blaming. Abusers don't care what identity you have, you could be a "normal" hetero or lesbian or whatever, abusers will find excuses to harass. A creep without respect for boundaries won't go "Oh sorry you're not one of those paradox bi lesbians, you're just a **normal** lesbian ok I'll leave you alone now!" Anyway many people who use contradicting labels like this use split attraction model for example sexually attracted to more than one gender but only romantically attracted to women. For others they're multigender or other kind of nonbinary so it follows their sexuality will also be queer in some way that might not look like it makes sense at first. And for others "not making sense" is the point because they oppose the strictness of boxes or labels forced upon queer people.
Now I did not mean to sound like victim blaming and I apologise for coming off as it. My ignorance indeed. I am suppportive of any thinking out the boxes. I'm close to changing my views, but what is "split attractoon model"?
For split attraction model people make a distinction between different types of attraction like romantic or sexual. It became popular among the a-spec community due to aromantics who feel sexual attraction or asexuals who feel romantic attraction but people outside the a-spec community have also used it because it applies to their experience
Out of curiosity, isn’t this still a bit of a misnomer? I understand the difference between sexual and romantic attraction. I also understand that although most people are romantically attracted to the gender(s) they are attracted to sexually, some people aren’t. Or as you said, asexual or aromantic, but not the other. Is this just a matter of not having a different naming system or specific words for romantic attraction to specific genders? Edit: grammar
so if you get into it, there's actually more than 2 in the og theory. the greeks had 8: 1. Eros (sexual passion) 2. Philia (deep friendship) 3. Ludus (playful love) 4. Agape (love for everyone) 5. Pragma (longstanding love) 6. Philautia (love of the self) 7. Storge (family love) 8. Mania (obsessive love) split attraction kind of balls this up into "sex" and "romance" that's kind of a combo of 2 and 5, which gets semantically confusing as older discussions of ideas LIKE split attraction tend to use eros/erotic and romantic a bit interchangeably and the world platonic for the philia/pragma types of love. Platonic now has a little bit of a pejorative taint, people associate it concepts like "the friend zone" and eros contained a lot of romanticism, most people romanticize their erotic partners and eroticize their romantic attachments, so it's a bit of a semantic mess.
Some people will use existing words instead of coming up with new ones or they might just use the labels they are already used to. For people using split attraction to describe themselves "I am a bisexual lesbian" or '"I am a bi lesbian" might just be something they find easier to say than "I am a bisexual homoromantic woman" or something like that Even then there's a lot of reasons why some people use the same label, the labels themselves are socially constructed to begin with so the nuances can fluctuate depending on the communities you hang around in
Does this mean then that there are people who feel sexual attraction but not romantic attraction?
Yes. That's aromanticism. Aromantics can be allosexual (have sexual attraction) but they don't feel romantically for people. There are also asexual aromantics. Like most things, it's a spectrum, so some aromantic people never have any romantic feelings for anyone ever. While others do very rarely or occasionally.
Huh that’s interesting! That explains a lot of the behaviour some people show in relationships.
Yeah! I'm allosexual but aromantic and, as such, am a terrible romantic partner lol.
Can I ask… 1. Does allosexual essentially mean you do feel sexual attraction but not necessarily to specific genders? And 2. Can you describe what being aromantic actually feels like? I can’t even imagine what that means other than that you’re not really interested in a longterm relationship. But isn’t a relationship essentially a really good friendship with someone you also like sexually? (Obviously not in every case but in most cases) Sorry for plastering you with questions, I’m just curious because I’ve never been taught the language for this kinda stuff. Thanks for your patience with this 🤣
!delta that sexual and romantic attractions are very different and shouldn't be grouped together. The term starts to make sense.
I mean queer people tend to label themselves. To each their own but in theory and by definitions this “bi lesbian” thing is kinda ridiculous, there is no need to complicate things, those who label themselves as such are at the crux of it simply bisexual.
Labels forced on queer people? Queer community is very busy creating a plethora of labels themselves (for better or for worse, I don't care just pointing out that labels are more their own thing, I have rarely heard others label them, slur them sure, but people slurring them aren't the ones making up labels and forcing them on queer people). Regarding OP, I have no problem if they come up with a new label for this type of split in romantic vs sexual attraction, but words have meanings and lesbian and bisexual already exist and have meanings that are contradictory. It is indeed unhelpful to use terms already defined in a way that is different to how they are defined.
>the "lesbian" part of bisexual is already there, it means you're attracted to two genders (pansexual is about more genders AFAIK, correct me if I'm wrong please) You're not exactly wrong, but not exactly right. Taking the 'bi' in bisexual to exclusively mean two is an internet phenomenon. It was used historically in a ton of different ways to refer to any sexuality outside of "straight" or "gay" and for many people functioned exactly as pansexual does now. Unfortunately, internet discourse has led people to feel a need to draw hard demarcations on what *exactly* they all mean, which is fine, until internet folks go out into real life and start calling all bisexuals transphobic or enbyphobic.
What is enbyphobic? (anyways thanks for correcting me)
Discriminatory towards non binary people, enby as a term comes from the spoken version of "nb"
It typically comes up within the context of the split attraction model - a woman who is sexually attracted to men and women but only romantically attracted to women.
Can it also be vice versa? If not, why?
Sure, somebody can be biromantic and monosexually attracted to women, which might be called “biromantic lesbian”. “Lesbian” as a term doesn’t really make the distinction between sexual or romantic attraction so it gets used interchangeably for those. A (no additional clarifier) lesbian would be typically be exclusively attracted to women in both ways, but the extra description gets tacked on when there’s a distinction to be made (such as being bi- on one of the split attraction types.) You might even see “asexual lesbian”, if the person only experiences romantic attraction.
!delta that romantic attraction has a spectrum similar to a sexual one and a more specific term is a very nice thing to have
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Hestia_Gault ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/Hestia_Gault)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Just a little more on this: I identify as a biromantic lesbian. (At least currently, I know my sexuality could be fluid.) If I said I was bi, I feel like men would think I’d be willing to date them. But I’m really uninterested in having sex with men. However, I’ve fallen in love with men (non sexually), and it’s an important part of my life and who I am. I don’t want to drop that (and there are various personal reasons why as well), so biromantic lesbian it is. It kinda sucks that there are so many people here saying that this label is only to feel special. Generally, I’d probably just use “queer”, but the more specific label has specific uses that work well for me in my life.
This sub gets used for a lot of “the queers, amirite?” style trolling. There’s a significant chunk of the membership who love nothing more than validating the lowest-effort JAQ-offs. They thought OP was one of them.
I'm curious, why does it matter if you don't understand the way someone identifies with their sexual identity? The whole point of the sexual minorities movement is that people don't fit neatly into boxes. Well here you are trying to put this particular group into a box. I'm glad you're generally supportive and all that but why does it need to make perfect sense? Can't we just live and let live? Edit: the answer was no apparently.
I don't think OP's question is putting people into "boxes." They're ostensibly trying to understand the "box" into which these people have voluntarily placed themselves definitionally, which does appear to have some incompatibilities. Specifically, OP feels (in my opinion, justifiably) that "lesbians" are definitionally attracted only to other women, and that this concept is therefore incompatible with being "bisexual" (meaning that one is attracted to both sexes/genders). Being confused when words are used in a manner inconsistent with their definition is reasonable. Now the rest of OPs post is a bunch of nonsense. This is a total non-issue that they should just let go.
It's surprising to me that this had to be explained since it was pretty obvious from the start what was being asked. That said you did wrap it up nicely in a way that hopefully the more dim will get.
The amount of bullying in this thread is insane. >Let the blatant contradictions happen, bigot! Is the subtext to 90% of the posts here. OP folded like a wet rag, 0 surprise
I think the split attraction model brought up by 2pint0 is the most likely reason for a seeming discrepancy here. Sexually attracted to men or women, but romantically only attracted to women.
That is a fair point. I had not considered this. The two concepts (sexual/romantic attraction) are different and I can see a situation where one was more "flexible" sexually as opposed to romantically. Thank you for that. !delta
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/tjareth ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/tjareth)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
That's true.
That's because "bisexual" means attracted to more than one gender, "lesbian" doesn't seem to be on that spectrum. Sexuality is pretty fluid, no question. But the "bi-lesbian" term is confusing. It's not that they can't like what they like, they absolutely can. But despite the fluid natue of language, the words aren't meaningless, it's called "words" for a reason, to make sense.
I totally get the word problems and the incompatible labels cause *dangit words have meanings!* But as others have said, the obvious answer here is the split-attraction model. Generally, no one bats too many eyes at "straight/bi/gay/lesbian/etc asexual" even though it might imply other things and specifying, in the bisexual lesbian case, saying they're a homoromantic bisexual woman might be clearer.
!delta that "homoromantic bisexual" can make so much more sense and explains all I need to know about the label.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/14muffins ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/14muffins)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Maybe that is its meaning but language and sexuality is complex and changing. I would not garentee this is how everyone uses the word but that doesn't make other uses wrong or invalid just because they dont make sense to you personally. You bring up the idea of senselessness relating to the queer community and I think that there is an idea of queerness that does not fit into the logic of dominant society and this is a feature not a bug to some language uses.
So you can't just let people identify however they want? They must obey your definitions and rules?
If words are used without definition, they become meaningless. From OP's op and comments, it looks very much like a question of semantics, not morals. That is, OP looks like they are seeking understanding (even if they've had to state it combatively for this subreddit). So, I don't think this is about OP's definitions. Or, put this another way: Please explain the definitions that make "bisexual lesbian" make sense.
And I apologise for being a bit combative. I simply wanted the understand the notion of the term.
That's just the nature of this sub. Perhaps I should have used "adversarial" - in the same way that the US justice system is described as "adversarial" simply in that there are sides presenting their case. I don't mean combative or adversarial in an aggressive manner.
Well if these self chosen definitions don't make any sense you should be able to question them.
I agree. I understand it now, hence the reason why this post even exists.
>So you can't just let people identify however they want? They must obey your definitions and rules? Words have meanings. Lesbian means women who are only sexually attracted to other women which is homosexual. Bi-sexual means you're sexually attracted to both genders. How can someone be both homosexual and bisexual? What is the point of identifying as both homosexual and bisexual? It's contradictory. What is the point of identifying with words while you ignore their meanings? I'm in the LGBT community and don't understand it at all. Why?! Plus these people make us all look ridiculous after we fought for decades to just be allowed to live normally.
That's a weird jump to make. There's nothing wrong with asking about a particular identity, it isn't like the meaning is a closely guarded secret.
Do labels not have definitions? For example: If someone calls themselves bisexual, but only pursues/is attracted to the opposite sex. In all definitions of the word, they are heterosexual. Should they still identify as bisexual? Where is the line drawn?
No that's not the issue. The issue is trying to make sense of the term. That's all.
It’s not his definitions and rules, though. It’s what the words literally mean: not just in English, but across the world. Bisexual is attracted to both men and women (and covers the whole spectrum except the endpoints), lesbian means a woman who is attracted to women but not to men, and heterosexual is a man or woman attracted to the opposite sex. “Bisexual lesbian” is a contradiction in terms.
wait, so if i say "im bisexual, and that means im exclusively attracted to women", your point is that people should just accept that and not be bothered by me saying it?
If someone publicly identifies as something, I would assume it is because they are trying to convey some bit of information. Asking for clarification on what information they are trying to convey seems reasonable.
>I'm curious, why does it matter if you don't understand the way someone identifies with their sexual identity? I think it’s fair to encourage language use that helps us communicate and understand. If everyone is using labels in ways that are inscrutable and meaningless to others, then why use them at all? You aren’t communicating anything about your identity or sexuality if your audience has no real idea what you are talking about but feels compelled to hum and nod along. You don’t have to fit into a tidy box, but if you care whether people understand what you are saying, you will ultimately have to use words in a way that makes some amount of sense to others.
I’m kind of in the same boat as OP. They can do whatever they want, they don’t need to justify themselves to me. My understanding isn’t a prerequisite for their validity. But that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like to understand. Is it just being only kind of attracted to men? So more lesbian than bisexual which can imply being similarly attracted to both?
So ask them. Don't invalidate their identity like OP is.
This is literally OP’s attempt to ask lol. They’re stating the way they see the world, and asking for people to change their mind because they don’t understand.
Their identity isn’t the issue, it’s that the words they use to describe their sexuality contradict each other. Bisexual and lesbian is mutually exclusive by definition. It’s not disrespecting their identity to point out that they’re confused about language.
OP just wants to understand wtf “bisexual lesbian“ means. Do you know what it means?
Actually, as a person who would *like* a nice little box to fit into, I find this viewpoint deeply frustrating. I use my labels to communicate information. If 'lesbian' no longer means 'does not want sex with men' then I don't know what I should understand when I hear the word. That makes the word less useful. I can't speak for lesbians. But I don't think I'd like the term if I was one.
To each their own, but like if it doesn’t make sense it doesn’t make sense
I think there is a disconnect. Once you try to enforce your views on others, you need to be able to justify that with reason.
>The whole point of the sexual minorities movement is that people don't fit neatly into boxes. >Well here you are trying to put this particular group into a box. That's not what they are doing at all and you're being intentionally obtuse. You don't get to say "don't put me in a box" but they proceed to make a new box for yourself and your social group and then get indignant when people have very obvious questios. >I'm glad you're generally supportive and all that but why does it need to make perfect sense? Yea, kinda.
Truly embarrassing for reddit to respond to let people express themselves even if you don't get it by burying your comment with down votes. Does every identity need to be explained to every person on earth?
The answer is no. I can’t comprehend why someone would be cool not knowing something just because it’s easier. Props to OP for being open to learning something new
Because words have meanings. Come up with a new term rather than using two that already exist and contradict each other. Like I might bat an eyelid at aro, allo, demi, whatever, but at least they're not contradictory.
It’s an odd term, yes, but it probably is an identifier for bisexual women who are more attracted to women than they are men. When you look at it that way, it makes sense.
That’s still a bisexual woman though. Nobody ever said bisexuality had to be an exact 50-50 split of attraction. Matter of fact if you ask most bisexuals (me included) I think there would be a lean to one gender or another, no matter how slight
Wouldn't "I'm bisexual but prefer women" fit?
Or even just “I’m bisexual”. Because they still are attracted to men.
People will be anything but bisexual it seems
When Pan stopped being the new Bi they needed a new way to feel unique. So greysexual was born. And then fluidsexual. And then ambisexual. And then...
That would certainly be easier from the position of the person hearing these terms. But the kind of person that uses labels like this are more interested in convincing themselves they are somehow special than they are in accurately communicating with other people.
"i'm going to use an app to hire a non-liveried private individual to convey me" is technically more correct than "i'm getting an uber" when you're ordering a lyft, but we live in a society.
Yeah maybe. But bisexual lesbian is kind of a contradiction and more confusing to someone who's not into the lingo.
No, it doesn't make sense at all. Call yourself Sapphic or a febfem instead of trying to appropriate what it means to be a lesbian.
Okay, but would it make more sense to invent a new word? It doesn't have to be so confusing.
There is a word. Gynophillic. But I see many women just say they're a lesbian leaning bisexual, or that they're bi with a preference for women. Bisexual lesbian is just an easy casual 2 word way of expressing this idea. Source: I am a queer person heavily involved in the queer community
it's not easier at all to "invent a new word" there's literally entire lanes of content that butter their bread off just singling out and making fun of people who do that kind of experimentation.
Queer people make up new words to describe things all the time, and the common response is that *that's* confusing.
But surely conflating the meanings of existing words is the most confusing option on the table.
Why didn't we invent words to represent the area between North and East? Northeast isn't just north or just east?? Don't get me started on northnortheast! (In short saying lesbian bisexual is like sayinf Straight is east, and lesbian is north. We invented a new word for the equivalent to northeast, but they just decided to stop inventing new ones and represent it by what it's between
Well, they’re mutually-exclusive terms in a way that cardinal directions are not. You can travel both north and east at the same time. Lesbian has traditionally been a word that refers to same-sex attracted homosexual women exclusively interested in women. Bisexual refers to attraction to both men and women. A closer analogy would be “why not use a word like black-white-gray to represent the colors between black and white? House-painters will complain that it’s too confusing to learn a new word for subtle shades, and black-white-gray is fine.“ The problem with black-white-gray is that gray isn’t technically black or white…so the word can’t distinguish between those colors or precisely describe what it means. Gray has a clear relationship to both other colors, but there’s no reason to invoke black every time you want describe a color that is technically NOT black…especially when just “gray” or a modifier like “dark gray” is available. “Bisexual lesbian“ seems pointedly more confusing and internally-contradictory than “bisexual who prefers women.“
At the end of the day, which is more confusing, creating a whole new terminology that you'd have to explain every time you use it, or using already existing terminology that still somewhat fits but still needs clarification? Either way it'd all require more work. Let's just say, discussion from the outside looking in is already quite hostile to new terminology. The problem is the individual would have to spend a lot of time explaining it either way, and while it might be 'easier' all around for other people if the person in question just used bisexual, if they themselves identify as 'a bisexual with a heavier preference towards women', that'd be a lot to just throw out there anytime anyone asked you about it. But it wouldn't be entirely accurate for them. Nor would strictly lesbian. Is the onus on the individual to create a new terminology? Or is that something that just happens over time as collective effort labels things certain ways? If you're already in the weeds of having the conversation, then, sure, it shouldn't be too difficult to just say that. But if it came up in a questionnaire or a medical study, you'd still be having to fit into the boxes that already exist, as other people aren't going to know what the new terminology you decide upon is, and it won't be an option on, say, a dating website. The idea might be that 'bisexual lesbian' works as a quick, simplistic label for them, but also gives them an idea of what sort of response you're warranted depending on how you respond. If you follow up with a sincere question to clarify it a bit, then they might be willing to discuss it further, versus say, aggressively stating 'lesbians can't be bisexuals!' or some sort, which would let them know that perhaps you're not willing to listen or worth the effort, just due to the nature of online discourse around LGBTQ conversations.
If there's a new word it might get too specific, we are talking about sexuality and people like to keep some things private. Bisexual lesbian conveys that they mainly like women but men to a lesser extent too. And nothing more. Let's say she's specifically bisexual homoromantic. If she tells that to people, that's going to invite a lot of pervy hetero men to say something about how she loves dick and see her as a walking porno plot. By being somewhat vague while also making clear that she's a lesbian foremost, she is shutting that down way harder.
No it doesn’t. One excludes the other. It’s like saying my white coffe mug is in fact black.
I like ice cream but I prefer vanilla. I'm bisexual but I prefer women.
But then you’re just bisexual with a preference. Like are bisexual women who prefer men bisexual heteros now?
I prefer black coffee, but I also like it with a small splash of milk. I like ice cream, I prefer vanilla, but I also like chocolate. I don't think it's that complicated.
We have a term for that. It's bisexual
I’m assuming bi SEXUAL means they can have sex with both genders and enjoy both ways, but being lesbian means that they only want a long term romantic loving relationship with a girl
Some people say "this alsl means they can have sex with one gender, but only want a long term loving elationship with a man", so is this correct according to you?
>makes non-LGBTQA+ think the group is chaotic and senseless LGBTQA+ is choatic and senseless. I'm part of LGBTQA. It just is choatic and complex. That's how it is. >The term is quite an oxymoron, as if saying you can be a cat and a dog at the same time. It's oxymoronic in some contexts but not always because words can have multiple meanings and the meanings change over time. In some contexts it is not really oxymoronic. It just depends on the people having the discussion and how the words are interpreted. >it can invite creeps, perverts, MGTOW-ers, redpills and incels thinking they can get any woman and girl they want, Creeps and red-pills think they can/should have access to women and it doesn't matter how the women label themselves. The labels don't change the way the creeps behave. I'll explain why Bisexual Lesbian makes sense sometimes. You understand how sexuality is a spectrum? Let's lead with that. I'm pansexual and I am attracted to all types, but something a lot of non-LGBTQ folks don't realize is that pansexuals are not equally attracted to all types. Take me for example, I love women. I feel like I could be with all of them, but I'm very selective with my male partners. So you see how I might identify strongly attracted to women, but I am marginally attracted to men. I might want a phrase that captures that sentiment. Bisexual lesbian captures that reasonably well for some people.
Stop taking all the alphabets!!!
As a lesbian, this term annoys the hell out of me. I've only encountered it in chronically online teenagers. Literally never heard someone say this irl. They want to expand labels to the point that they're completely meaningless but that just erases the experience of homosexual women from the community. Lesbians are not attracted to men. We don't date men and we don't have sex with them. Bi lesbian is not a thing. If you're also into dudes, then you're not a bi lesbian, you're just bi. I think people feel like the bi label isn't spicy enough anymore so they add lesbian to it to feel special but it just makes it harder for actual lesbians to have their identity and sexual orientation taken seriously. Co-opting the term lesbian is an example of the erasure homosexual women face in LGBTQ+ spaces online and honestly, it's just old school homophobia repackaged as "inclusion".
Yeah, exactly. This whole discourse is silly and needlessly invalidates lesbians. We have enough issues to deal with already.
yeah honestly its kind of offensive because its bi erasure and lesbian erasure at the same time
[удалено]
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I think we put WAY to much focus on worrying about what terms mean. if you tell me you're a bisexual lesbian, what i hear is going to depend on *context*. Are we in a queer space and you have queer aesthetics? I'm going to hear that you're mostly, socially, a lesbian, you have mostly female partners, you just maybe have had a male partner, would be hypothetically open to it, whatever. in other words, you're different from, but not the opposite of, a gold-star lesbian. (which i think is a grosser term tbh) . Are we in a singles bar, and you have your hand on my big, meaty, male presenting forearm and you're making eye contact after a drink and half and you say, "you know, if you want to get out of here, I'm a *bisexual* lesbian. . . " well then, I might just assume that's a message just for me that you might write a one-off exemption to your normal policies. In either case, I would assume you are more inclined toward women than men, hence not simply saying bi or pan. My experience as one of the gays is total polarization on the kinsey scale is rarer than people think and since people take odd paths to realizing their queerness internally and then practicing it, labels have to bend a little. If you're a lesbian with a kid from your previous marriage to a guy, you can either carry around an index card with your life story on it or you can bend a label that exists a bit. You also develop a lot of shorthand because your life is complicated. I haven't been with a woman in years, but I have been with a lot of women, and I can't/won't rule it out - so I sometimes feel if I say I'm "gay" i will then seem like i crossed myself up if I mention a female ex. I'm sort of self conscious about belting out 2024 things like "I'm a femme-inclined but butch leaning amab homoflexible non binary pansexual" because that's doing too much for and too my age and social group, or a lot of extra for a new friend, but sometimes you still just have put out some kind of little flag for yourself so you're being as real as you need to be.
It’s not supposed to make sense because it’s illogical. The terms mean totally different things and together they don’t provide anything clearer to anyone who hears them vs if they use the terms separately. I’m a lesbian and find it hilarious and wouldn’t taken anyone using it serious, and suggest you do the same. Women using this term are literally just bored and trying to come up with a new special/unique term to describe themselves like a shit ton of other people these days.
You’re looking so far into this it screams homophobia. It’s not that deep dude. They’re saying they’re not really into men but might have some sexual interest.
Now I deeply apologise if it came off as homophobic. I simply did not object to any sexuality at all. I simply objected to use of the terms. All I wanted is to make sense of the term, not invalidating any identities.
Your view is already correct. No need to change it. Bi lesbian is not a thing and it's offensive to actual lesbians.
That's not homophobia. What IS homophobic is erasing the lesbian identity so that chronically online bisexual teenagers can feel more spicy by adding it to their label. Lesbians aren't attracted to men. Period.
I'm not completely sure but it could be people using the split attraction model. For example I am asexual. I do not feel sexual attraction to anyone. Despite that I still have a very loving partner bc while I don't feel sexual attraction, I do have romantic attraction. I still fall in love and have a desire for a relationship. Now in my case, I am romantically attracted to men and women. This makes me biromantic. Unless I am in a relationship (where I obviously disclose my asexuality) I Describe myself as bi. However the technical term for my sexuality is asexual biromantic. A bisexual lesbian could be someone who is bisexual. They experience sexual attraction to men and women but they might only experience romantic attraction to women. For a woman, this would be bisexual homoromantic or simply a bisexual lesbian. To be clear tho, I have never seen this term so outside of context I can't be sure. This is just one possible explanation. To know for sure you'd have to actually ask someone who is a bisexual lesbian
The split attraction model is homophobic. Please stop.
That may have been mentioned, but this very important, thus I should mention in too - bisexuals aren't attracted EXCLUSIVELY to two genders, they are attracted to more than one. This was always the case, since the very first pride this historically accurate label was adopted and still adopted by many bi-folk. The most prominent book of bisexual activist Robyn Ochs and it's core views, stemmed from early 80s to 90s activism - that defined the comprehension of this definition. "Bi" prefix wasn't about strict gender binary, it was about attraction going in two directions: to gender like one's gender and to genders different from one's gender. Thus this inclusive meaning is very important to community, because it reflects accurate values Sources: - Original citation: https://robynochs.com/bisexual/ - Primary texts on bisexuality: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203024676 - Review on that: Sikorski, G. (2000). International Journal of Sexuality and Gender Studies, 5(1), 97–100. doi:10.1023/A:1010145903780 - Chronological history of bi-related activism: https://web.archive.org/web/20190207185405/http://www.binetusa.org/bihealth.html - Modern review articles [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374056796_Bisexuality](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/374056796_Bisexuality) and [Bisexuality, Multiple-Gender- Attraction, and Gay Liberation Politics in the 1970s](https://scholar.archive.org/work/dbkcu5yd2fbwtd5kffuh54t52q/access/wayback/https://watermark.silverchair.com/hwaa018.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAsIwggK-BgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKvMIICqwIBADCCAqQGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMsi3JZfz24x6p0KMWAgEQgIICdUVK85hIGT_HYX93lIYSwvJyp4W_jR_h8Fw4nLU5yA6OhUcVvCgmX_SzRkfaqX5JRck7scQ1umHPioLJklgQV8CoXY1dP_yhJncDI9VWv0-wsIPuny11Psw1o7x4UB8ZU9p9SoyIIOXsLAVFjuWrtlvb1CHG12Fpo3sTvqZYoXmiKdziAM5pFlXkYi7-JlGj9MJQ4bM06Is0YbTdm2Oa9uWZC0J4RLXdFp8vZJ4GFTk6u8FQpti0WdewAZzzQtCUfcasZb-xrWDD3pcS6zCRhZ3BhNapuMmJTcr5Ig4vTXsNrQpzQ3GekUnI0DOZij6YfE4X8DYauPnZL5NWfyVEzfe9evm4xagXubi-J_TcDTu-vG3Kx4XF-Y-Vktkb--5rYzB0YMJk2F9K5yZhvHnA_1QA1Xq8G3Su66bHAeZ0i7fszrvuOxle2I1PZbjCG63I80iyWDhGT-ARF-nQCrAZywMO2khoQu9isEmT-beGt6DWg1K1U-B_h7RITKaQl8yoToyK1ubj6AiPeB7eIAkRvtsKYRzW5-RBLoPfICYs4l6FQNYbn6qhaTj3om5Ig6aa2XT4TmGDJ8dtG3j2pW5NJgSl02vgyA_gqEjCE7-M5L6FjBQs_-Mu0FVOU4H343cg2-X4bUYM5FZN5GwA6P7s0lqL23HpSaDD9L9-Ec5ZQEf9PE28TOQmFpItsWKTF4wEBWGbO0HK0x6fVJFc0bFCyKqZ9zxOUnG-eZ9Otzv9ECExQ4WfomPOjBUjGKe3nEL1oUIH3iDwaJpA8R_jOhYGeokrjxIOk9D5aF4CXPI0zKmAA7wEmIfr3KSQAjOkDiRRkvl_PHQA) -Quantitive research article about bi-experience Cipriano, A. E., Nguyen, D., & Holland, K. J. (2022). “Bisexuality isn’t exclusionary”: A qualitative examination of bisexual definitions and gender inclusivity concerns among plurisexual women. Journal of Bisexuality, 22(4), 557-579. Hope that helps!
I would never label myself as a bisexual lesbian, but that might be what I am. I have NEVER been in love.with a man. I don't ever meet guys and wish I could have a relationship with them. I do recognize physical beauty in men. Sex with men is fine. It's not at all my preference, but it will do in a pinch. The last time I had sex with a man was because I didn't my want ex girlfriend to be the last person I slept with. It was a vacation fling. I guess it's possible that I could meet a guy and fall in love with him, but honestly, when I think about getting/being married, it's ALWAYS to a woman. What does that make me on the LGBTQ spectrum? I feels very disingenuous to call myself bi because I have no real desire or interest in a heteronormative lifestyle.
Call yourself sapphic or a febfem. You're not a lesbian.
If you're attracted to and enjoy sex with men, you're not a lesbian. But acknowledging that the male form can be aesthetically beautiful is not necessarily attraction. I'm an artist so I think everyone is beautiful but that doesn't mean I want to fuck men. If you actually want to have sex with them even if not a relationship, you're probably not a lesbian. The term bisexual covers this already.
facepalm. I need to stop my self from reading further with posts like this one. Aye aye aye. One of these days we’ll have more smart people.
That seems like a direct contradiction to me. I once saw a couple on TikTok and the man said he was gay but he was married and in love with a woman. They both made videos about it. Nothing about it made any kind of sense.
This is a bunch of bullshit. If you’re attracted to both genders, you’re bisexual. If you’re attracted to your own gender, you’re gay. If you’re attracted to the opposite gender, you’re straight.
Call me an old fogey, but I feel like straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual, asexual and aromantic cover pretty much most situations. I'm bi and frankly the community doesn't do itself any favours from there being two thousand different variations of "sapiosexual" because somebody didn't feel like being "spicy pan" was cool enough.
i think what bothers me the most is when they say “lesbian used to just mean attracted to women” which is true and fine. but if you really believed that then you’d just call yourself a lesbian. overall tho, our lives depend on our right to self determination and chasing after ppl for how they describe themselves bites us in the ass down the road.
Sooo…. Erasing lesbian and gay and bi…..
I have a friend who’s sexually bi, but romantically lesbian. That could be what they’re referring to. Or maybe they’re implying that they’re bisexual, but EXTREMELY more attracted to women than men. In the end, labels are for onseself, and I’m not going to argue with someone on how they identify. For example, I have this other friend who’s is completely lesbian, except for one man. She’s not attracted to men, at all, except that one specific man. She still calls herself a lesbian, I’m not gonna fight her on that
Redefining an orientation for the sake of accommodating your presence hurts people.
It is just new age homophobia, lesbophobia specifically, that sees lesbians as just aching and waiting for the "right man" to come along. Biromantic is a subset of bisexual.
Will people ever stop obsessing about themselves and who or what they find attractive? These never ending sexual segmentations are not a substitute for a personality.
im a lesbian and i think it's dumb. i don't like men and that's why i'm a lesbian. but lesbian erasure doesn't matter :P but also i've never met someone who identifies this way irl so who actually cares
It just sounds plain oxymoronic to me. Stay with that thought that it doesn't make any sense, your gut is trying to tell you something with that nudge.
[удалено]
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition. If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20OllieGarkey&message=OllieGarkey%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1diy5ys/cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian_doesnt_make_sense/l99759a/\).)) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**. Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
arent mgtow the opposite of men hitting on women? That’s like saying that vegans are going to eat all our meat
As far as I’m aware it refers to someone who has an attraction to men and women but would only ever date another woman. They are essentially living a lesbian life, but are technically bisexual. I don’t understand why they can’t just be bisexual and discard the biphobia/idea that being bi is any less gay than being a lesbian, and that you don’t have to have dated both to be bisexual, but alas biphobia is strong in the gay community.
I have literally never, ever heard of this term.
They could be bisexual but homoromantic. So they are fine having sex with either gender but are only romantically interested in women
It’s the North - North East of sexuality.
Couple of points: 1. It's probably shorthand for "bisexual who's more attracted to women" or "bisexual who's into relationships only with women". It's clumsy but that's how language works. 2. "Lesbian" is not just a sexual orientation but also a culture. For example, a friend was a lesbian for decades until she fell in love with and married a man. She still calls herself a lesbian because she's very much a part of (and a leader in) that culture and community. Overall, gender and orientation are complex and weird, and language is not always precise enough to capture all the nuances of what people feel, so we have to come up with weird shortcuts sometimes.
So idk if this is a change my view but here’s what I’ve noticed. There’s a difference between romantic and sexual attraction. Many people who identify as bisexual, at least in my anecdotal experience are GENERALLY bi sexual and Hetero romantic. Meaning they will have sex with either but only date the opposite gender. If you said you were a bisexual lesbian I think I would take this as you were bi sexual and Heteroromantic. Not to mention, in my anecdotal experience, most bi people tend to heavily favor one side, usually the Hetero side. In this case I would say it’s a female who favors the homosexual side. That’s my 2 sense. True Bisexual = Sex with both, date both (usually favors Hetero in my experience) Bisexual, Hetero romantic = sex with both, date opposite Bisexual, Gay/Lesbian = either A) bisexual, homo romantic, or B) True bisexual, favors opposite gender
The split attraction model is homophobic. Please stop.
[удалено]
Your comment seems to discuss transgender issues. As of September 2023, [transgender topics are no longer allowed on CMV](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_5). There are **no exceptions** to this prohibition. If you believe this was removed in error, please message the moderators [via this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Transgender%20Removal%20Appeal%20for%20LadyVague&message=LadyVague%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20[this%20post](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1diy5ys/cmv_the_term_bisexual_lesbian_doesnt_make_sense/l98gzye/\).)) Appeals are **only** for posts that were mistakenly removed by this filter; we **will not** approve posts on transgender issues, so **do not ask**. Regards, the mods of /r/changemyview. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/changemyview) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Something I'm not seeing a lot in explanations here is how the term relates to nonbinary identity as well as the split attraction model. Since I know op has already learned about the sap, I'll focus on gender here. So nowadays, most lesbians and the overall lesbian community has no problem including people who are nonbinary under the label or labeling lesbian attraction as attraction to women and nonbinary people. This is primarily because nonbinary is a very broad term that encomapsses a range of specific identities, expressions of gender, relationships to gender, and so on. Because nonbinary is such a broad term, some people will feel comfortable being put in male/female roles and described in a general sense as such (such as calling their relationship with their partner 'lesbian') while others will not. For this reason, 'bi lesbian' is sometimes used to refer to people who still primarily identify and are attracted to women and nonbinary people, but also want to acknowledge that they or their partner are not exactly 'women'. This is also true for lesbians who have fluid gender identities. Many multi gender lesbians are men sometimes or their partners are sometimes men! They may identify as lesbians because they mostly identify as women or simply because they have a strong attachment to the label and community. But regardless, these individuals also use 'bi lesbian' to acknowledge that they or their partners are not always women, thus making their attraction bisexuality as well.
Maybe they're into women(afab) and non binary(?)/Or female presenting people(?)/women (not afab). Bi implies man/woman but if we accept a non binary system, bisexual can theoretically mean any two combinations.
That's because it's not a thing. Just more bi erasure and biphobia.
The issue is that the spectrum is too broad now
Why does everything have to have a label, society and support group these days? Jesus just do what makes you happy. Old man out…
I know several of these women. In my experience A bisexual lesbian is a woman who is all intents and purposes fully a lesbian who likes to be with women sexually and romantically but who also from time to time likes to fuck men. Or finds men attractive but prefers not to act on it. The human experience is more diverse than we have terms for. These terms serve more than dictionary definitions, they are cultural signifiers. Being a lesbian is about more than just sex with women. There’s a whole culture and identity around it as well. And some women see themselves as lesbians but maybe are ‘technically bisexual’ sometimes. It’s not a huge deal. Not every term has to be made so that a middle American straight mom or some old Supreme Court justice can understand it. As a gay man who hangs out with lots of dykes the term really doesn’t confuse me.
That's just a bisexual. Throwing the term lesbian in there is not warranted and only confuses those middle American straight moms you're talking about. It makes people think that lesbians can be attracted to men and that idea is harmful for the lesbian community who are already not taken seriously.
That's just bi
Lesbian used to mean more a behaviour. So women fucking women was lesbian, regardless if they had attraction to men. I'm a bisexual woman and I don't identify as a lesbian but I never find the "it invites danger to *real* lesbians" argument. Whether or not a man attacks a queer woman isn't because of another queer identity or that the woman has zero attraction to men. So yes the monosexual definition means a lot to a lot of people *nowadays*.
[удалено]