• insanemantis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Anything but coverage on what’s going on in Gaza, Sudan, or Congo

    Very telling and insulting that this pointless bullshit is what they choose to publish, out of all things

  • tquid@piefed.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    A lot of confused people in this thread wondering why they should care.

    The intention is to keep eating away at the rights of anyone not straight, male, white, and Christian. All the major papers are on board with anti-trans genocide. They have been successful enough to broaden their attacks. This is the “just asking questions” phase.

    • Tiral@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      Is this going down before or after the lizard people of Proxima Centuri B invade?

      I’m not sure what “rights” you think gay/trans don’t have that everyone else does. Unless your crying about people not calling you proper pronouns or something. Which that isn’t a right. You seem like someone that hates yourself to the point of everyone else is always the problem. Get help.

      • SpaghettiMaster@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        Using a fucking toilet without harassment. Even cis women get harassment over it now if they look like they they could be male.

    • cloudshouter@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes. You are only allowed so many sexuals in a relationship.

      Don’t look into pan sexual relationships, they are essentially just playing “Hungry hungry hippos” with two marbles.

  • Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    So? He’s made a commitment to be with you alone. If he’s a decent man, then there’s nothing to worry about. It’s not like straight men have never cheated on their partners.

    Although the fact that this subject never was broached prior to you getting hitched is somewhat concerning.

    • Foofighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

      • dragonlover@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Lack of communication being a problem - sure. But you’re conflating a few things.

        1. In modern terms, bisexuality and pansexuality are interchangeable, the terms have evolved over the years and most of the community rejects the old distinction.
        2. “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.
        • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

      • Honytawk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        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?

      • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        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.

          • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 days ago

            normal person

            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?

              • queerlilhayseed@piefed.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 days ago

                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.

                • beejboytyson@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  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.

            • beejboytyson@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 days ago

              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.

              • Pelicanen@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                23 hours ago

                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.

                • beejboytyson@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  22 hours ago

                  ??? 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.

  • CrimeIsLegalNow@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    Obviously the husband made a mistake, you tell them in the dating phase so the trash takes itself out instead of tricking you into believing it’s a real person.

  • magnetosphere@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    The bisexuality doesn’t bother me. It’s the poor communication. Plus, now there are major trust issues.

        • exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          And the Washington Post has had multiple advice columnists for decades. It’s just a typical division of different sections: national news, national politics, local news, local politics, sports, business, lifestyle, food, arts and culture, advice, editorials/opinion, comics, obituaries.

          They did shut down a lot of those sections, including what used to be a really good sports section, but that’s because they’re in a death spiral. If the advice columns still get clicks they’ll still keep running them. And if that means they have to run advice to clickbait problems, that’s probably what they’ll do.