Imho, the bisexuality wouldn’t be the issue. The fact that one partner was not aware of the sexual orientation of the married, on paper lifelong partner, is. Bisexuality, in contrast to pansexuality, has a focus on the, well … sex of the partner. The bisexual duality can not be satisfied by the binarity of one partner, leaving a lot of space for unhappiness, uncertainty and confusion, in a state where certainly might have been exspected.
Lack of communication being a problem - sure. But you’re conflating a few things.
In modern terms, bisexuality and pansexuality are interchangeable, the terms have evolved over the years and most of the community rejects the old distinction.
“The bisexual duality cannot be satisfied by the binarity of one partner” is the stupidest thing ive ever heard. They are bi, meaning their attraction applies to both (or more) genders. They aren’t in heat with an unquenchable lust for sex with multiple genders. Someone can have a preference for brunettes and redheads and marry a redhead and not be “unsatisfied”. The problem with closeted gay people marrying into a straight relationship is that they are denying their own sexuality, and lying to themselves. Bisexual people are not lying to themselves. They are attracted to their spouse. There is no confusion.
Seriously. I’m bi. Like, objectively undeniably bi. I’ve had cis partners of both sexes. I’ve had long-term relationships with both. I’m not one of those people that’s bi on paper but has only ever dated one sex or gender.
And yet, I’m happily married to my husband. We’re in a fully monogamous, exclusive, committed relationship. Been married for eight years. I said “til death do us part,” and I meant it! Still do.
Being bi just means you’re attracted to more than one sex or gender. The idea that I would ever tell my partner something like, “well you see, there are just some physical needs that you as a man are incapable of meeting…” is just a porn fantasy. I don’t have some irresistible need to be with both men and women. I just find some people attractive regardless of gender.
The bisexual duality can not be satisfied by the binarity of one partner, leaving a lot of space for unhappiness, uncertainty and confusion, in a state where certainly might have been exspected.
This is an extremely common and extremely silly take. Bi folk aren’t any more or less “satisfied” in a relationship than mono folk are. People (bi or otherwise) betray their partnership commitments all the time, but for whatever reason bisexuality seems to get conflated with infidelity / general profligacy. It’s an ugly and inaccurate stereotype.
First off people aren’t scared of the bi part just the homo one. Secondly, the stereotyping that BI people are dogs in heat come from both the gay community and the straight community. You still haven’t put a theory forward for the why just the what.
So your argument is basically “lots of people discriminate, so that means that the discrimination is correct”? Because we can find about a million examples from history to learn why that is not a sound argument.
??? No that’s your argument, not mine. I don’t know how much simpler I can lay it out. Lemme put it in terms a child could understand SCABS ARE BAD. Historically speaking.
Sure, I can do that. quick question, by “normal” do you mean someone who has median characteristics across the board, or are you one of those people who define normal by their own tastes and experiences?
I am neither, and I also don’t know what you meant, which is my point. Sometimes I ask pointed questions to demonstrate a flaw in the framing of a proposition. In this case, it’s that there’s no such thing as an objectively “normal person”, that phrase is meaningless outside of a particular frame of reference, and I can’t put myself in the mind of a “normal person” without knowing what the frame of reference is. Which would imply that maybe it’s a more complicated situation than you seem to think.
Why would that matter? If he’s exclusively committed to you then what’s the issue?
Imho, the bisexuality wouldn’t be the issue. The fact that one partner was not aware of the sexual orientation of the married, on paper lifelong partner, is. Bisexuality, in contrast to pansexuality, has a focus on the, well … sex of the partner. The bisexual duality can not be satisfied by the binarity of one partner, leaving a lot of space for unhappiness, uncertainty and confusion, in a state where certainly might have been exspected.
Lack of communication being a problem - sure. But you’re conflating a few things.
Seriously. I’m bi. Like, objectively undeniably bi. I’ve had cis partners of both sexes. I’ve had long-term relationships with both. I’m not one of those people that’s bi on paper but has only ever dated one sex or gender.
And yet, I’m happily married to my husband. We’re in a fully monogamous, exclusive, committed relationship. Been married for eight years. I said “til death do us part,” and I meant it! Still do.
Being bi just means you’re attracted to more than one sex or gender. The idea that I would ever tell my partner something like, “well you see, there are just some physical needs that you as a man are incapable of meeting…” is just a porn fantasy. I don’t have some irresistible need to be with both men and women. I just find some people attractive regardless of gender.
This is an extremely common and extremely silly take. Bi folk aren’t any more or less “satisfied” in a relationship than mono folk are. People (bi or otherwise) betray their partnership commitments all the time, but for whatever reason bisexuality seems to get conflated with infidelity / general profligacy. It’s an ugly and inaccurate stereotype.
Some reason? Come on, not that complicated if you put yourself in a normal person head.
Societally normalized biphobia?
First off people aren’t scared of the bi part just the homo one. Secondly, the stereotyping that BI people are dogs in heat come from both the gay community and the straight community. You still haven’t put a theory forward for the why just the what.
So your argument is basically “lots of people discriminate, so that means that the discrimination is correct”? Because we can find about a million examples from history to learn why that is not a sound argument.
??? No that’s your argument, not mine. I don’t know how much simpler I can lay it out. Lemme put it in terms a child could understand SCABS ARE BAD. Historically speaking.
Sure, I can do that. quick question, by “normal” do you mean someone who has median characteristics across the board, or are you one of those people who define normal by their own tastes and experiences?
Well you clearly know what I meant so you aren’t stupid, so maybe willfully ignorant?
I am neither, and I also don’t know what you meant, which is my point. Sometimes I ask pointed questions to demonstrate a flaw in the framing of a proposition. In this case, it’s that there’s no such thing as an objectively “normal person”, that phrase is meaningless outside of a particular frame of reference, and I can’t put myself in the mind of a “normal person” without knowing what the frame of reference is. Which would imply that maybe it’s a more complicated situation than you seem to think.
No, you’re just disingenuously complicating it. You made my point for me but then instantly walked it back. Again, proving you’re probably the latter.
ok, well, I don’t think either of us know wtf you’re trying to say. I think you’re just being antagonistic for no reason.
If you don’t have an actual point to make, why are you even speaking up?
It’s just am excerise in putting yourself in others shoes, why don’t you take your own advice?
What is, making wildly inaccurate, but harmful statements with nothing to back it up and refusing to clarify?
What a wonderful way to practice empathy /s
Ofc you don’t know how to put yourself in others shoes and it shows.
Way to out yourself as low value
Same you just proved its about equity not equality.
Huh? I’m bi and have been happily married for 30 years
You mean like the sexuality of straight people can not be satisfied because there are other hotter people of the same sex as their spouse?