The following text is from a March 26, 2013 press release from GLBT TAMU student organization.
Texas A&M Student Senate Introduces SB 65-70: Call to Action to STOP Institutionalized Discrimination
On Wednesday evening, March 20th, a member of the Texas A&M University Student Senate introduced S.B. 65-70: The GLBT Funding Opt-Out Bill. This bill proposes “allowing students who object, for religious purposes, to the use of their student fees and tuition to fund this center to opt out of paying an amount equal to their share of the Center’s funding from their fee and tuition bills.” The author suggests that students have the religious right to “opt-out” of the student fees that go towards maintaining the GLBT Resource Center. However, as currently constructed this bill is a direct and blatant attack on the LGBT Aggie community. We hope to do everything possible to ensure that this bill does not pass through the Texas A&M University Student Senate.
“Biphobia in the queer community legitimizes homophobia in the dominant culture. Kicking out the bisexuals doesn’t help you, it hurts you. Telling half of the LGBT population that they don’t belong just shrinks our numbers and takes power away from all of us. Biphobia by leaders in the gay and lesbian communities allows straight haters to use biphobia as a wedge to divide us – and these people are experts at using wedges.”(via Bisexual Bloggers)
I do think that we can define words and use them in ways that are not problematic.
For example, “bisexuality” as a term does have “two” in it. But it doesn’t actually become gender binary until it’s defined as “attraction to men and women” or “attraction to both genders”. Once we define bisexuality differently, its linguistic origins are less relevant.
Likewise for “X-phobia” words - if we don’t use them in a way that’s ableist, and which scapegoats mentally disabled people, they cease to have that meaning.
When was the last time you took a survey or filled out a form where you had to specify your sex, gender or sexuality?
One friend who is transgender and bisexual discovered that their statewide LGBT group was asking people to self-identify on its website donation page, and it was only possible to select one identity when the options given were “lesbian,”“gay,”“bisexual,”“transgender,”“ally” and “other.”
For my friend, marking “other” didn’t seem right … “I really want there to be more bi/trans* visibility,” they told me, “especially since many people think trans* people are either all gay or all straight (depending on who you ask) and, of course, no one thinks a trans* person could be bisexual despite bisexuality being the largest sexual orientation group among trans* people.”
Other LGBT+-specific surveys that one would think would attempt to be extremely inclusive leave certain identities out as well. For example, one survey received by BiNet USA that claimed to be about “Sexual Minority Men’s Gender Attitudes and Wellbeing” ended up having a pretty narrow focus on gay men, despite being promoted as a study that included bisexual, genderqueer and transgender men too.
We still live in a heteronormative and cissexist society, and that is no clearer to me than at the doctor’s office. When I fill out their forms and identify as female, my doctors always assume that that means that I am heterosexual, so they ask me if I am on birth control … In fact, if doctors are making assumptions about a patient’s gender, sex and sexuality without verifying with the patient, mistakes are just waiting to happen … Much clearer questions should be asked on surveys and questionnaires, especially in the medical field, if accurate data is to be collected, and for all people to receive the best medical care possible.
I had an idea, please tell me if it’s stupid, or give ideas to improve it.
Hatred or fear of various sexual orientations are rooted in the amount of sex they are perceived to be having.
For most groups this comes down to the bigot thinking that the hated group has more sex than he does, or at least more than he thinks they should. Let me give some examples:
Homophobia: Listen to any homophobe for more than a minute and they will start talking about the type and amount of sex they have. It’s obvious that they think that all gays and lesbians ever do is have sex, and they would love to have as much sex as they think homosexuals have.
Biphobia: Ask any biphobe what they think about bisexuals, and they will start talk about them cheating. Now I got thinking about why people would get upset at being cheated on. I think why is that they think “you’re out fucking someone else when you should be fucking me!” So, biphobia really comes down to the idea that bis have more sex then their partners.
Transphobia: I have no idea why, but many transphobes I’ve talked to are sure that trans* people can get laid anytime they want to.
Like I said this is a work in progress, so I’ll probably be editing it or reposting in quite a bit, please give me input.
Homophobic sister keeps calling me a faggot. Who else finds this extremely offensive?
Everyone else:
I do; Me too; Wow! So sorry; Offering Suggestions and Support . . .
Bi Guy:
Wow. I'm really sorry she does that. IDK what to tell you other than ignore it and just hope she doesn't bring it up. My mother thinks all queers should be exterminated, so I just try to not bring up the subject. :(
IMPORTANT (becasue was asked):
People this is taken from a Real Dialogue (i.e. TruFax = True Facts), slightly disguised to protect the privacy of the actual bisexual people both isolated from LGBTQ Community and both caught in upsetting family, high school, religious community situations including anti-LGBTQ bullying including statements about violence, even by close family members.
Homophobic sister keeps calling me a faggot. Who else finds this extremely offensive?
Everyone else:
I do; Me too; Wow! So sorry; Offering Suggestions and Support . . .
Bi Guy:
Wow. I'm really sorry she does that. IDK what to tell you other than ignore it and just hope she doesn't bring it up. My mother thinks all queers should be exterminated, so I just try to not bring up the subject. :(
Just two days after opening, BIENESTAR, a nonprofit organization providing services for LGBT and HIV-positive Latino/a communities in Southern California, was evicted from its new offices.
The organization began providing services in its new Van Nuys space on August 13. On the 14th, the landlord demanded the organization take its belongings and leave the premises, and he had the locks changed. On the 15th, the landlord told BIENESTAR he was terminating their lease because they were “bringing disease” to the building.
“We feel that we have been treated unfairly,” Oscar De La O, president and CEO of the organization, said in a press release. “The landlord’s actions are a shocking example of the kind of LGBT and HIV/AIDS discrimination that Bienestar has committed itself to fight against and overcome… This situation is very unexpected and distressing, especially when we have performed these same services half a block down the street from this Van Nuys location for 12 years. We have never faced this kind of situation before at any of our nine Southern California centers.”
Bienestar will offer limited services in Van Nuys from its mobile unit, currently located outside the organization’s former office at 14515 Hamlin St. Services, including case management, rapid HIV testing and referrals, will be available every Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Can’t even put into words how furious this makes me. Holy cow. I don’t know if anything is being planned to retaliate against this landlord’s despicable actions, but feel free to keep an eye on the organization’s website for ways you can help.
GLSEN’s annual poll — which comprised 8,584 student respondents from all 50 states as well as the District of Columbia — aims to “consistently examine the experiences of LGBT students in America’s schools.”
Here are some findings from the survey:
81.9 percent of LGBT students reported being verbally harassed, 38.3 percent reported being physically harassed and 18.3 percent reported being physically assaulted at school in the past year because of their sexual orientation.
A considerable number of students reported discriminatory policies or practices against LGBT people by their school or school personnel. Students indicated the most common discriminatory policy or practice was related to treatment of LGBT relationships (e.g., related to dates for school dances and public display of affection).
60.4 percent of LGBT students never reported an incident of harassment or assault to school personnel.
84.9 percent of LGBT students heard “gay” used in a negative way (e.g., “that’s so gay”) and 71.3 percent heard homophobic remarks (e.g., “dyke” or “faggot”) frequently or often at school.
Transgender students experienced more hostile school climates than their non-transgender peers — 80 percent of transgender students reported feeling unsafe at school because of their gender expression.
Six in 10 LGBT students (63.5 percent) reported feeling unsafe at school because of their sexual orientation; and four in 10 (43.9 percent) felt unsafe because of their gender expression.
LGBT students reported feeling unsafe in specific school spaces, most commonly locker rooms (39.0 percent), bathrooms (38.8 percent) and physical education/gym class (32.5 percent).
The reported grade point average of students who were more frequently harassed because of their sexual orientation or gender expression was lower than for students who were less often harassed (2.9 vs. 3.2). Increased levels of victimization were related to increased levels of depression and anxiety and decreased levels of self-esteem.
Nearly one third of LGBT students (29.8 percent) reported skipping a class at least once and 31.8 percent missed at least one entire day of school in the past month because of safety concerns.
Being out in school had positive and negative repercussions for LGBT students - outness was related to higher levels of victimization, but also higher levels of psychological well-being.
While acknowledging that the 2011 survey ”marks a possible turning point in the school experiences of LGBT youth,” Dr. Joseph Kosciw, GLSEN’s Senior Director of Research and Strategic Initiatives, added, “An alarming number of LGBT youth still face barriers that inhibit their ability to receive an education. And although we have seen an increase in school supports that can improve school climate for these youth, many of these young people reported being unable to access these supports in their schools.”
This issue is Critical to Bisexual People since it uses the excuse of a parent having different gender partners who are then subject to differing marriage & family law to disrupt a child’s relationships and life
“An Ohio appeals court ruled that a lesbian mom who had previously been granted access to the daughter she and her former partner had are now void. Their reasoning: her former partner who was the biological mom is now married to a man who has adopted the child and, due to a 2004 state constitutional amendment, the non-biological parents is legally a ‘non-relative.’
“Pink News reports that a lower court ruled previously that Maggie Gross was entitled to access the seven-year-old biological daughter of her former partner, Jennifer Herrick. But the Franklin County Court of Appeals overturned that ruling, determining that because Herrick’s new husband adopted the child, all previous relationships are now null and void. The court said, according to the report, ‘because the adoption is meant to provide a new family for the child, it in effect severs: “legal relationships with non-relatives, such as [Ms Gross], who attempt to base their claims on relationships in existence prior to the adoption.”’
“Gross told the Columbus Dispatch that this ruling essentially erases half of her daughter’s life.
“‘They’re saying that half of all this never happened, that half of her life didn’t exist,’ Gross said of the 7-year-old girl, who was almost 3 when Gross and Herrick ended their relationship in 2008. ‘That defies logic.’
“While this ruling may be a correct application of Ohio law, it illustrates the harm the state’s anti-LGBT constitutional amendment does to same-sex families. An opposite sex-couple would never be in this situation. Because the state treated Gross and Herrick as legally unrelated, this seven year old will no longer be able to regularly see one of her parents, who is now legally a ‘non-relative’ because of Ohio’s discriminatory law…”
