I’m a vanilla cis-gendered male who only is physically attracted to people born female. I’m not using the word beginning with “str” and ending in “aight” to define myself, because that seems a poor description, both in implication and reality.
It makes me wonder if “bi-sexual” being called out on prime time is a milestone achievement or a setback?
Shouldn’t we assume the “straight” or the “normal” is some type of gender or sexual fluidity without having to designate a person “bi-sexual”?
Sorry if this earnest question offends people for whom mainstream recognition is a milestone achievement.
I just want culture to admit and accept the complexity of human sexuality and gender without Othering people who like female-identifying people and male-identifying people at different times [or at the same time] in their lives.
If anything, cis-gendered people who only want to sleep with other cis-gendered people of an imagined binary difference all their lives are the other, and even within that group there are different styles and types of attraction which make shard them into something other than a large other.
I know: I know: Kinsey studies! 10% or whatever. And I call it BS. I’ve known enough people who wouldn’t admit to being attracted to men-identifying and female-identifying at the same time or different times [admit to a study, that is] that the 10% of self-admitted whatever is just the tip of the iceberg, not including the large majority of admitted straight women who, by scientific study, are aroused by pornography involving women.
I just think our old school language is not up to the task of representing actual sexuality and gender.
Glad mainstream media caught up to terms it should have been comfortable with 50 years ago, though.