probably not going to articulate myself very well but itâs interesting how much bimisogyny depends on the assumed purity of heterosexualityâthe innocence and chastity heterosexual women are assumed to have or told they must have. because thereâs still that patriarchal mindset that an impure woman cannot be defiled once her purity is lost. and given that bisexuality is evidence of some corruption or defilement, thereâs nothing about bisexual women to protect which makes them free for all. am I making sense?
I think this is very true. There seems to be some inclination to think of bisexual women as inherently defiled "slut" figures, who are thus inherently "guilty" of inviting moral decay by mere presence.
An extremely misogynist and patriarchal framework, so of course homophobic/biphobic straight people do this the most; they're the ones that calcified this. But this is a problem that extends to all communities because people are not willing to examine how they think of and treat bi women.
Something that comes to mind is a discussion some years ago. Someone brought up that, when encountering lesbophobic misogynistic trans women that were displaying obviously rapey attitudes, it was rather tonedeaf and biphobic to include that "They should date bi women instead" as part of the criticism. And a lot of people that insisted it was an "important" retort couldn't see why that rhetoric -- of suggesting bi women as a consolation to rapey misogynists -- was disrespectful and biphobic. And note, that het women were not suggested because "het women wouldn't be into transbians". So this preemptive consideration overrode the GC central thesis that attraction is based on sex, but couldn't extend to respect for bi women? Hmm!
This is just one example that comes to mind, but I think it comes from exactly the root attitude OP mentioned even if it seems oblique. It just never even occurred to people that maybe it was wrong to offer up bi women in that type of rhetoric and how it affects bi women to be talked about that way even by the side *actively talking against sexual violence*.
There seems to be some inclination to think of bisexual women as inherently defiled "slut" figures, who are thus inherently "guilty" of inviting moral decay by mere presence.
cousin, I think you cooked with this one fr because thatâs exactly it and thatâs why âfeministâ spaces, especially radfem spaces, are notoriously hostile to bisexual women and people as a whole. they madonna/whore monosexuality and bisexuality where they either fetishize lesbians as the good holy ultimately moral example of true feminism, incorruptible by men, female jesus, or heterosexual women as the pure innocent victim of men, whose suffering makes her a mother mary archetype in juxtaposition to her het male counterpart. the feminine (mostly heterosexual) is this divine cosmic good and the masculine the divine cosmic bad. capitulating again to the patriarchal/gender essentialist idea of women as pure, virtuous, soft beings.
meanwhile, bisexuals are the evil whores and temptresses who exist for men and by men. no pure woman with genuine sapphic capacity would fall for the wiles of the evil man without being a traitor of some sort. whatever moral good is held up within a given group (heterosexual or otherwise) we threaten that moral order and invite evil corruption into that midst. for feminists men happen to be that evil, so we become a scapegoat for them and the abuse they exact upon us.
