It's ok. I just find it incredibly reductive, and I've had pan "friends" before criticize, scrutinize, or outright label me pansexual without my consent because I'm not just into strictly men and women.
It's ludicrous, imo. This definition necessitates that bisexuality is inherently transphobic, or at the very least demands that self-identified bisexuals show no attraction towards people of non-binary genders. I don't identify that way and almost every bisexual I know does not identify that way. It is, in my experience, an external definition thrust upon bisexuals by others, and often by pansexuals themselves in order to differentiate themselves from the transphobic, exclusive bisexuals.
It really boils down to semantics, I think, and it's not really a fight worth having -- is pansexuality valid, is it another form of bisexuality, is it completely distinct in some meaningful way -- but I take some grievance with the idea that bisexuals writ large harbor no attraction to peoples of nonbinary genders.
Bisexuality is a whole, fluid identity. Do not assume that bisexuality is binary or dougamous in nature; that we must have "two" sides or that we MUST be involved simultaneously with both genders to be fulfilled human beings. In fact, don't assume that there are only two genders. Do not mistake our fluidity for confusion, irresponsibility, or an inability to commit. Do not equate promiscuity, infidelity, or unsafe sexual behavior with bisexuality. Those are human traits that cross ALL sexual orientations. Nothing should be assumed about anyone's sexuality—including your own.
It goes onto say,
There are as many definitions of bisexuality as there are bisexuals. Many of us choose not to label ourselves anything at all, and find the word 'bisexual' to be inadequate and too limiting.
That's fine. I don't judge people for identifying as pansexual. However, there is a twinge of discomfort, pain, and of being once more made invisible whenever it is claimed that one must be pansexual to be attracted to people outside of the socially constructed gender binary. The oft-stated "hearts not parts" line insinuates, to me, that bisexuals are not interested in those aforementioned hearts, and it circles right back around to the stigma that bisexuals are sex addicts incapable of fidelity or love.
I call myself bisexual because it is more comfortable for me. It has always made more sense. My definition would be something more akin to: attraction to people of genders like one's own and attraction to people of genders dislike one's own than anything to do with two genders.
The manifesto also says:
We are angered by those who refuse to accept our existence; our issues; our contributions; our alliances; our voice. It is time for the bisexual voice to be heard. Do not expect each magazine to be representative of all bisexuals, for our diversity is too vast. Do not expect a clear-cut definition of bisexuality to jump out from the pages.
I'm aware you made it clear these were general definitions, and it is difficult to easily explain the intricacies of sexuality sometimes. These are simply some of my thoughts on the matter.
I have often wondered about the boundaries of horror art... or more precisely, the lack thereof.
There is "tasteless" and there is "should probably be illegal". I may be wrong and all art should be allowed and criticism should reign, I don't know. But you mentioned Terrifier, a film that was marketed as the one making people vomit and pass out in movie theaters.
I don't see the benefit here... for anyone. I see cheap exploitation and majorly creatively bankrupt gimmicks.
I, like you, am also no horror prude, and I sometimes even explicitly seek out gory films. I have a soft spot in my heart particularly for the V/H/S series, which are fictional representations of what are basically snuff films. They don't make me vomit and cry and shit my pants and dream about clowns murdering me in my sleep, though. I prefer it that way, personally.
Also fuck r@pe in horror movies. For every time it's tastefully done, it's done in the most degrading and unnecessary way possible 100 more times. Graphic depictions of sexual abuse almost always evoke in me disdain for the director or creator rather than any involved emotion regarding the film itself. I'm looking at you, "I Spit On Your Grave" and basically every other "r@pe revenge* film.
Contrasting the image of hell on earth presented to us, the DPRK is far closer to attaining paradise than their own crumbling capitalist shitholes. That's simply too much for the colonial mind to bear.
Genuine question. Has there ever been targeted oppression of asexual people in AES states?
I do not mean to diminish the struggles of asexual people by saying this, but them lumping all 'gsm' people together like this and saying we as a group experienced similar or the same types of oppression under proletarian regimes seems blatantly ahistorical. Lesbians were treated far differently than gay men who were treated differently than asexuals who were treated differently than trans and gender non-conforming people, etc. etc.
Poor ace person brainwashed into supporting dictatorships that hate them
Genuinely, in 2024, where in the dprKorean constitution or legal structure or even cultural zeitgeist is this violent acephobia so evident? Does the DPRK "hate" ace people? China? Russia, or even fucking Iran?
Poors only have lateral class mobility. You want minimum wage or a buck or two above minimum wage (that is functionally still minimum wage post-tax)? Sure. An actual, tangible pay increase? Good luck.
I canvassed for the greens once. It isn't so simple as "campaigning" for them, you have to gather thousands upon thousands of signatures for them first before they're really even allowed to run.
They paid $10 per signature, though. Not a bad gig lol. Selling democracy to the highest bidder!
There is but one gamma male. Dr. David Banner—physician, scientist—searching for a way to tap into the hidden strengths that all humans have. Then an accidental overdose of gamma radiation alters his body chemistry. And now, when David Banner grows angry or outraged, a startling metamorphosis occurs. The creature is driven by rage and pursued by an investigative reporter.
The creature is wanted for a murder he didn't commit. David Banner is believed to be dead. And he must let the world think that he is dead until he can find a way to control the raging spirit that dwells within him.
I just realized this tweet was made in 2018. Nearly 6 years ago.
I'm starting to feel old.