[ SECRET POST #4124 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4124 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Digimon]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Black Lightning]


__________________________________________________



04.
(Rahul Kohli who plays Dr. Ravi Chakrabarti from iZombie)


__________________________________________________



05.
[Ruby Tandoh from The Great British Bake Off series 4]


__________________________________________________



06.
[A Wrinkle in Time]


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 09 secrets from Secret Submission Post #590.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I don't agree that's a useful comparison - the two cases aren't really alike.

The point that I would make is that, in general, I don't think it's useful to restrict the way that we identify who we are to fit a strictly logical, definitional, abstract understanding of the vocabulary that we use to express that identity. I'm not saying that it's entirely a matter of personal choice, either, but these are complex issues and it's probably best to give people a significant degree of latitude in interpreting the facts of their life in the light that is most meaningful for them.

And, if you want to talk about the comparison between race and gender, while I don't think that the particular comparison that you drew is a useful one, there are definitely cases where racial and ethnic identities are nuanced, a matter of debate, contested, etc, etc, etc. It's not out of the question that someone who was biracial, or adopted, might actually have a complex relationship with their racial identity, where they might choose to identify one specific way or another, even if that's not what the bare facts of their genetic background would necessarily indicate.

It's very complicated, and working out all the details would probably take approximately a master's thesis worth of writing, but I'm just very uncomfortable with saying, like, "you are attracted to both men and women, therefore you are a bisexual and must identify as a bisexual, no matter what you happen to feel about the matter" and all that kind of thing.

[(Anonymous)]

The race comparison was ridiculous and obviously no one "must" identify a certain way, but I think it's not at all productive to closeted bi/gay women to insist that it's totes possible to be straight and still want to bone your female best friend. Maybe for a handful of women they genuinely are straight (and completely fulfilled and happy identifying as such) despite fantasizing about their female friends, but that's simply not the case for most women who want to love other women, and it's possibly damaging to them to feed into their denial by assuring them that they can totally be 100% straight and still have explicit fantasies about their female friends.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

On the contrary, I've enough vicarious experience with straight-identified guys who bang guys to think that trying to drag them out of the closet is a waste of emotional labor.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not advocating actively dragging them out of the closet, just not going out of our way to validate their delusions.

[(Anonymous)]

I definitely see where you're coming from, it's all kinds of tricky and complicated. It's a really hard line to draw. It is hard to tease out what's internalized homophobia and what isn't, and there are people where that's certainly what's going on. You're not wrong about that.

I guess I just feel like the best thing that we can do for people in that situation who are actually in denial is to be as positive and accepting and all that as we can. At the end of the day, they have to come to their identity themselves; you can't do the work for them. I think that this understanding of identity, where it's fluid and not rigorous, is a better, more real understanding in general, and I think it's probably better to just adopt it for that reason, especially over the long term.

And then the other thing is, I feel like... I'm not sure that you can actually limit the conversation to just talking about women who fantasize about women who identify as straight. And I'm really, really, really uncomfortable about the argument as it would apply to people on the other side of the spectrum - to say, for instance, that a woman who is sometimes attracted to men must identify as bisexual and not gay. I understand that's not what you're saying, but I personally feel like the same logic applies equally to the two situations and so I'm very uncomfortable with using that logic at all.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't intend to do the work for anyone. I just also don't intend to help them deny who they are, and don't think that it is a good or healthy thing to enable people to deny who they are.

My comment specified women who fantasize about women because that is what the comment thread is about.

The logic doesn't apply to the other side, because there's societal pressure to fantasize about or be attracted to the opposite sex, whereas there is societal pressure to NOT fantasize about/be attracted to the same sex.