Discoholic šŖ©
wallacepolsom
Sweet Seals For You, Always
taylor price
DEAR READER
No title available
Kiana Khansmith
Today's Document
tannertan36
Jules of Nature
I'd rather be in outer space šø
Misplaced Lens Cap
if i look back, i am lost
Keni
noise dept.
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
Claire Keane
ā
ā
ellievsbear
seen from United Arab Emirates
seen from Germany
seen from Argentina
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Singapore
@nonb-isexual
am i the only one put off by that post about how saying "i hate men" isnt gender essentialism? maybe im missing context, bc i know its response to some other post which i havent seen, but i genuinely cant believe how the notes and op are acting like not hating all men is inherently antifeminist or sth
the real āproblem with political correctnessā is not that itās considered offensive to use slurs, but that there are now many āprogressiveā environments where saying the right things is more important than doing the right thing. itās why itās so easy for abusers to gain traction in leftist circles (they learn the right words quickly and employ them to frame their own behavior as progressive); itās why so much potential activist energy gets poured into fighting about language; itās why moderate liberals didnāt believe fer/guson had a problem until the police emails with actual racist language were leaked. (you can do racist things, you just canāt SAY racist things.) i donāt have a neat conclusion here but a related point is that iām so much happier since i started focusing on like, being a good kind caring person instead of trying to remove the word ācrazyā from the vocabulary of everyone in my family
Just saying this is truly one of the best ādiscourseā posts on this site likeā¦ā¦this hits the nail directly on the head re: what is going on with language right now and everyone pushing back in the notes only serves to further prove the point itās making
āBisexual women and their boring boyfriendsā I know this is hard for yāall to hear, but I actually donāt give a fuck if you think my boyfriend is boring; āthey want us to roll out the red carpet for their ugly boyfriendsā I actually donāt give a fuck what you think about my relationships and who I date; I donāt know how to explain to yāall that NOTHING WE DO IS FOR YOU!!! Our relationships arenāt not for you, we dont do ANYTHING for you! Weāre not gnc for you (for those of you saying itāll make you like us more), our relationships arenāt for you (you can have your hurt feelings about our ugly/boring boyfriends or us being poly, I do not fucking care), and we are certainly not bi for you or your attention. Nothing bi people do is for or about you, and you can cry to your Twitter followers about whatever it is weāre doing that you donāt like, because I do not care.
āBisexual women and their boring boyfriendsā I know this is hard for yāall to hear, but I actually donāt give a fuck if you think my boyfriend is boring; āthey want us to roll out the red carpet for their ugly boyfriendsā I actually donāt give a fuck what you think about my relationships and who I date; I donāt know how to explain to yāall that NOTHING WE DO IS FOR YOU!!! Our relationships arenāt not for you, we dont do ANYTHING for you! Weāre not gnc for you (for those of you saying itāll make you like us more), our relationships arenāt for you (you can have your hurt feelings about our ugly/boring boyfriends or us being poly, I do not fucking care), and we are certainly not bi for you or your attention. Nothing bi people do is for or about you, and you can cry to your Twitter followers about whatever it is weāre doing that you donāt like, because I do not care.
Bisexuals were essentially accused of murdering women via HIV in the 80s, either because we were intentionally duplicitous or because we were out of control maniacs who couldnāt resist unsafe sex. For many people of that generation, this was their first time hearing about bisexuals. Now folks want to pretend that didnāt influence todayās perception of bisexuality.Ā
I think bi is dead. More pan. I love all.
I rest my case.
yāall just love to skip over that part of the bisexual manifesto thatās like āin fact do not assume there are only two gendersā huh god damn
reading is so fundamental
i mean yāall are also ignoring the fact that this manifesto came from the bi and pan network. when mispresenting this manifesto as anti pansexual/anti mspec positivity but okay then.
really trying to figure out what you are talking about when this was published in anything that moves in 1990. like from a quick google search i see that the bay area bisexual network added pan to the name in 2019 years after the article was published but like. what does that have to do with the point that bisexuality has always meant attraction to more than two genders. how does that disprove that the definition for pansexuality commonly used is biphobic.
As a verdict is possibly hours away, a sense of dread has been building in my stomach for what it will mean for Amberās future, as well as all victims of intimate partner violence (IPV), particularly as womenās basic rights continue to be under attack in the United States. Like many people who are following the case, I have personal experiences with abuse. Much of my research focuses on IPV, specifically, the disparities in resources and services that are available for survivors to leave their abusers, such as economic, social, geographical barriers. Itās a topic which is deeply tied to my own personal experiences and academic career.
I initially was ambivalent to Amber Heard. Before I began to research the case, I was firmly in the āthey both suckā camp, having only briefly glanced through articles. I started to pay more attention to the media coverage over the past six weeks and was really staggered by how Heard was being portrayed as a lying, crazy, gold-digging woman through narratives that were not only going unchallenged, but were heavily perpetuated in the public discourse. Even worse, that the abuse she experienced had been capitalized on by ātrue crimeā junkies and mocked in TikTok videos and Youtube compilations.Ā So I began watching the trial live and found that there was far more evidence and far more substantial evidence which shows that JD was the perpetrator of abuse within their relationship.
The evidence collected through JDās personal texts and emails show an early pattern of abuse. He exerted control over the clothes Amber wore and would become angry when she didnāt dress āconservativelyā. He would consistently accuse her of having affairs with acquaintances, friends, and variousĀ co-stars, even with an openly gay director, Clive Barker. He didnāt like that she was ambitious and would scorn her when she took opportunities to advance her career. He would constantly refer to her withĀ misogynisticĀ language. He also referred to Amber, an openly bisexual woman, as aĀ ālesbian camp counsellorā. He messaged other men to discuss killing her through drowning and burning her, and then raping her burnt corpse to prove that she was truly dead. This all occurred while they were still dating. She was in her early 20s and he was in 50s. All of these coercive, paranoid, jealous, controlling behaviours are deeply and unequivocally abusive.
None of this includes the evidence which shows physical and sexual abuse. There are audio tapes in which heĀ admits to headbutting her, so hard that she was concerned her nose was broken. In another recording, they discuss how her family and friends have seen her bruises, broken blood vessels, and bald spots from her hair being torn out of her scalp. Another shows him statingĀ āI will smack the ugly c**t before I let her in.āĀ A video shows him aggressively breaking and smashing furniture near her. One interaction reveals that Stephen Deuters, his assistant, begged her to come back to him after her assaulted her on a plane in front of his bodyguards, pleading to her that JD was remorseful for his actions. Heard also has stated he sexually assaulted her multiple times. Remember, he previously discussed violently raping her in those infamous messages to Paul Bettany.
As for witnesses, several testified to seeing bruises on her numerous times, including JDās witnesses, such as their marriage counsellor. A makeup artist, Melanie Inglessis, testified to covering swelling on her lip and two black eyes. Raquel Pennington saw several injuries, including bloodied bald spots on her head, a swollen nose, and cut lip. She expressed fear JD would eventually kill Amber if she didnāt leave. Josh Drew also testified to seeing her with injuries, includingĀ black eyes, a swollen cheek, and a busted lip. iO Tillet Wright (who Depp misgenders throughout his testimony) recalled hearing JD assault Amber and screamĀ āoh, you think I hit you? You think I fucking hit you? What if I peel your fucking hair backā. iO then called 911. This was the incident which led Heard to file for a divorce and a restraining order, two days afterwards. It is worth noting that Pennington, Drew, and Wright all corroborated this incident in their depositions, as didĀ iOās 2016 essay.
Is she guilty of fighting back? Absolutely. She never lied about doing so, even dating back to her 2016 deposition. However, fighting back against a man who has beaten you, sexually assaulted you, controlled your career, finances, and who you can associate with does not equate to being an abuser. Itās simply surviving. And yes, Iāve heard those audio tapes, the in which sheās expresses her incredulity at him for stating their fights were fair when she feared he would kill her.
His case has relied upon deeply misogynistic narratives to discredit both her claims and her character. She was after his money all along, even though she refused the 30 million dollar fortune she was legally entitled to, as there was no prenup. She painted on bruises, even though a makeup artist testified to covering up her swollen lip and two black eyes. She cut off his finger, even though multiple texts and even an audio recording showcase him admitting to doing it in the midst of a bender. She didnāt donate her money, even though she and the organization created a 10 year plan for her to make yearly payments (in my personal opinion, what she does with her money either way is nobodyās fucking business). Also worth noting, an ACLU representative testified to her being ahead of schedule until Depp began suing her. She made up a hoax, because she documented her abuse - as we advise all people who are in abusive situations to do. Sheās a liar, because women are inherently deceitful liars.
None of the evidence that JDās attorneys presented has proven that she defamed him through her op-ed piece. Thatās likely because their goal was never to prove that her article - which never explicitly references him or their relationship - impacted his career. Those who watched the trial will know, Tracy Jacobs, his agent of 30 years stated that it was his drug and alcohol abuse, anger issues, chronic lateness (7 or 8 hours late to set each day), and unprofessionalism that led to his career decline. Film crews grew tired of working around these problems, and eventually, so didĀ Hollywood. Tina Newman, a Disney Corporate Representative who worked on POTC stated no one knew of Amberās op-ed until Depp sued her.Ā
The trial was always meant to humiliate, shame, and terrorize her. We are witnessing in a powerful man terrorize his ex-wife through the legal system, all while the world makes TikToks of her sexual assault testimony. JD has a documented history of violence and is due for another court date after assaulting a crew member of the set of City of Lies. To quote his own words, āIf Iām angry and Iāve got to lash out or hit somebody, Iām going to do it and I donāt care what the repercussions are. Anger doesnāt pay rent, itās gotta go. Itās gotta be evicted.ā
I donāt know whether Amber Heard will win her case. Weāre witnessing a radical right-wing political swing to control and criminalize womenās bodies with Roe v. Wade under attack right now. To be blunt, I have very little faith in the justice system and that a jury - in Virginia of all places - will rule in favour of an abused woman over her charismatic, powerful ex-husband. However, I think itās important to remember that Amber did everything right, that is, everything we tell women to do. She documented her abuse, left her abusive partner, and was granted a restraining order - and sheās continuing to be punished for doing so. If Amber, a privileged white woman with access to economic resources, is still struggling to escape her abuser, how can we expect women without those privileges to?
so what's it going to take for mainstream feminism to grow some fucking teeth?
the entire last decade has been an experiment in tearing out feminism's teeth and its guts and its spine and its brain, so now we're left with 1) a group of evil idiots who are too busy blaming trans women for everything to do anything useful, and 2) a group of regular idiots who think any thought deeper than "let women do what they want" makes you part of group 1.
and where'd that get us? roe is on the chopping block and calling yourself an abuse victim is "defamation" and covid has led to women leaving the workforce in droves and employed women still do the bulk of the housework and i am so so tired
i am SO glad to finally see the anti a silent voice rhetoric on my dash these days because absolutely fuck that movie. i dont know how ANYONE can watch it without feeling disgusted by the way the narrative frames an ableist bully as the Real Victim
all in all though I'm very proud of bisexuals especially bi women for speaking out against biphobia and not allowing ourselves to be silenced these past several years, these spaces are obviously still pretty hostile sometimes but I think we've made a lot of progress and changed a lot of people's minds.
like the amount of bi women who are openly using butch/femme, who are unapologetic about their attraction to men and women, who have stopped being self deprecating about being bisexual, who speak out against biphobia, it's genuinely really nice. it isn't perfect everywhere and in every circle but it's no longer this pervasive sense of walking on eggshells to me.
exactly this. nobody was going to start respecting us just because we allowed ourselves to be doormats, if anything it just let people get away with more and more egregious shit.
bi people have done so much in recent years to educate others (and ourselves) WITHOUT having to compromise by walking on eggshells. so much more has changed since people started speaking out unapologetically.
[IMAGE ID: A cropped screenshot of tumblr tags that reads: #real!! #our concerted effort to push back against biphobia in our spaces shows fruit #which explicits that laying down and taking it while acting like 'one of the good ones' wasn't ever gonna work #but actively pushing back and claiming it yourself DOES work #not to go all out but but the change in online LGBTQ spaces I frequent since bi people started to push back is like... #an applicable example of uselessness of respectability politics #and the usefulness of loudly demanding and forcing change" END ID]
Cannot believe that Johnny depp let a grown man rape his teenage daughter and then stopped the police from investigating it. This is actually sickening
For those asking for sources: it is common knowledge that Lily-Rose dated a grown man Ash Stymest when she was 14, itās even on his wikipedia
Also Amber testified about this during the current trial, she said that she and Depp got into a fight because she didnāt approve him spending the night given the age difference between Stymest and Lily-Rose
https://people.com/movies/amber-heard-felt-concerned-when-johnny-depp-gave-his-daughter-lily-rose-marijuana-as-teen/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10788215/Amber-Heard-says-fought-Johnny-Depp-letting-star-daughter-crush-stay-overnight.html
And this is a trascript from a previous deposition that Depp lied to the police over it
i feel like if you want to have solidarity with bisexuals you should think about which experiences you consider gay/lesbian exclusive & whether thatās really the case. like. looking visibly gay or being gnc or having a complex relationship with gender bc of your sexuality or experiencing homophobia or having your experiences āstolenā by being in the closet or having your sexuality be a major influence on your life or wanting to look a certain way for men/women bc youāre mlm/wlw etc., ive seen many gay men & lesbians reblogging bi & gay solidarity posts who treated those things like exclusively gay/lesbian experiences when theyāre very obviously not
genuinely used to believe that butch/femme were lesbian exclusive and bought into the whole "bisexual women are still available to men in a way lesbians arent" and it bewilders me looking back, how much internalized biphobia i had picked up from tumblr blogs
Today is the International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia, a date to fight against intolerance with the revolutionary power of love!
Kills me how so many ppl on here will be like be gay do crimes but then gasp in shock and horror at the very thought that there are Drug Users and Addicts on their Webbedsite
I'm just saying like if ur gonna be on here claiming to be anti police and care about social justice but then cry out in moral outrage everytime you realize there are drug users and addicts in your communities... mayhap you aren't as be gay and do crimes as u thought. Btw you're stepping on some of the most vulnerable people in ur community and you sound like a conservative <3
Oh and just to cut this off at the pass, yes this still goes even if you have trauma relating to drug use for whatever reason like. Your trauma is valid for lack of other words, and youre allowed to make boundaries as you will, but it does NOT give you an excuse to punch down on addicts, who are suffering too.
Also again, addicts are just as every bit as complicated and human as you are and often have trauma around drug use themselves.
And signing off: you are not more righteous or morally pure than addicts, you can end up there too just as easily under the right circumstances. end post š
"let people do whatever they want!!!" you are the weakest link *holds you at gunpoint*
there is now research proving not only that pansexuals are biphobic but that pansexual biphobia has a negative impact on bisexualsā mental health
The study checked how bisexual, pansexual and queer women define bisexuality.
Pansexuals and queer women said that bisexuality is binary and means attraction to cis men and women and they also āfelt that claiming a bisexual identity indicated an outdated, offensive belief that there are only two gendersā.
whereas actual bisexuals defined bisexuality as broad and inclusive of all genders.
Itās also interesting that all the people claiming bisexuality was transphobic were cis whereas the trans people interviewed didnāt have a problem with the bisexual label.
In addition, bisexuals expressed that they found the debates around whether bisexuality is inclusive very upsetting and it made them consider hiding their bisexuality or changing their label.
āWhile experiencing oneās chosen identity as personal and meaningful was not unique to the bisexual women in our sample, bisexual women often described an added layer of psychological distress upon learning that others define bisexuality in ways that reinforce a traditional gender binary, which contradicts their own definitions and lived experiences of bisexuality.ā
i am losing my mind at the people trying toĀ ādebunkā this with scientific sounding arguments such as āthe sample size is too small to mean anythingā - literally the most anti-science thing you can say
1. it displays that you have no understanding of basic research concepts such as the difference between quantitative and qualitative research, what theyāre used for and what kind of sample sizes are viable for them
2. trying to dunk on peer reviewed research with a snappy one liner because the findings make you feel bad or clash with your pre-existing beliefs
As a former PhD level social scientist, I need you all to know that a good sample size for a social science study is 30-50 people. In my extensive experience, itās really only valid to consider the implications of sample size when the study is <20 people (and as OP noted, this doesnāt apply to qualitative research!!! At all!!!!! No numbers, pals!) There is not infrastructure, funding, or other resources to create the kind of massive sample studies you see in medicine. That doesnāt mean you canāt do good research with <10,000 people. Also, if your stats are good enough to make it through peer review, your sample size has likely been taken into consideration properly. If you donāt know much about scientific papers, you can learn, or you can sit down when people talk about peer-reviewed research.
Edit: Iām sorry Iām just REALLY mad about this, the cited study had 25 participants who did interviews. Do you have any IDEA how much labor goes into transcribing and coding that much interview data to analyze? No, you donāt. You donāt even know what coding is if you are sniping about 25 participants. 25 is a lot of people for an interview-based study, JFCCCcccc
a handful of additional points
1. people saying you cant generalize this to mean all pansexuals are biphobic because the small sample size and qualitative nature of this study means it doesnt represent larger trends: sure, maybe. but what it does prove is that it exists. there are pansexual people whose understanding of bisexuality are biphobic and differ from the definitions of bisexuals AND that this difference causes tension and distress to those who do identify as bisexual. it may not be representative of every pan or bi person, but it does prove the existence and lived experiences of relevant people. (as an example, i would not discredit a qualitative study that interviewed 20~ single mothers about their experiences with the available social structures on their city and their effectiveness in supporting single mothers, simply because the sample size is small. their opinions are still reflective of real life issues that real life people experience, and that is worth acknowledging and considering.) so if youāre saying this isnāt generalizable, youāre right! but it wasnāt meant to be and doesnt have to be. if youāre saying it is useless and social sciences are bad as a result, i need you to consider that even the most niche group of people need their struggles considered and validated in the social sciences. small as the sample size is, if its a problem that exists, it deserves to be documented and discussed and if possible fixed. if there are 10 separate single mothers saying social services suck and theyre living in poverty, we need to acknowledge that this is a real issue. the same goes for these bisexual people saying that they experience tensions as a result of biphobic understandings of bisexuality by pan people.
2. people saying ābut iāve never met a biphobic pan personā or āX person in my life is pansexual and i love them, vice versaā: good for you! thats genuinely great and i donāt want anyone to experience biphobia either, so im glad to hear it. at the same time, this isnāt (necessarily/always) a critique of pansexuals as individuals. this is a critique of the label that functions exactly the same as ābisexualā but constantly aims to distance itself from bisexuality. in doing so, the meaning of bisexuality keeps getting muddied because people who are, essentially, bisexual keep trying to define themselves differently. this is how biphobic and tranpshobic definitions of bisexuality come about. and so i have to ask: if bi and pan are the same, why do some people prefer to identify as pansexuality? to say āit just feels rightā ignores the element of social influences that people often subconsciously act upon (in the same way some women will say they get plastic surgery to feel confident, but if you asked them why they get the specific procedures that they do, or why they felt unconfident before, you find that the root cause is the social influence of the existing beauty standards that make them dislike how they looked while also making them want to look a certain way).
we do not exist in a vacuum - our choices are often influenced by the views of society, even when we think they arenāt. it makes sense to want to distance oneself from bisexuality when the label is so vilified. but distancing yourself doesnt allow you to challenge the stigma attached to bisexuality, instead allowing it to perpetuating while the people who do allow themselves to identify as bisexual are further villainized. to concretize this idea, consider the stereotype of bi people being exclusive of trans/nonbinary people. if i were to be someone attracted to all genders, i may feel like bisexuality doesnt fit me as well as pansexuality does. and i may feel this way subconsciously, without even realizing that itās because i donāt identify with the stereotype associated with bisexuality. and so i decide to identify as pan, and when people ask why, i just say āit feels rightā. and so i never question whether or not the stereotype is true, and i never challenge it because i donāt have to, now that Iāve decided to identify as the newer label that i feel is ābetterā, all without ever questioning why it is i feel that way. and if i, subconsciously, judge bisexual people as being transphobic in the future, well then so be it, i guess. and so when someone asks me whats so different between pan and bi, i come up with something that furthers the misunserstandimg of bisexuality, like āi care about hearts, not partsā, or āi dont just like 2 gendersā, which erases the lived experience of decades of people who have called themselve bisexual all while miseducating others on what bisexuality means and furthering the stigma.
so i have to ask, if you identify as pan because it ājust feels rightā, what is it about bisexuality that you feel is so āwrongā? and i am begging you to ask yourself if the reason bisexuality feels wrong is because you have some unchecked stigma, misunserstanding, or bias against bisexuality as an identity. because if you didnt, i dont think you would consider it so bad when people equate bi and pan, or call you one instead of the other.
(reblogging from myself to avoid bringing hate to the person whose addition i have issues with:)
this is exactly the sort of response i was speaking about, and somehow the point is still missed. and i understand that being told someone's identity is worth critiquing feels like a personal attack, but i was also very careful in phrasing my previous post in as neutral a tone as i possibly can. and even still, the reaction is heated. i understand it comes from a place of hurt, and at the same time, conflating my post that critiques the identity with a post that critiques all individuals who use that identity prevent you from being able to hear and try to engage with what i said.
if you go back over my reblog, you will find that nowhere did i say that people can't identify as pansexual. nowhere did i claim that it was an invalid identity to have. nor did i say that all pansexual people were biphobic. and i definitely did not say pansexual people were the enemies to bisexuals. your whole statement of "other queer people are not your enemies" strawmans me as someone who was aggressive and angry and thinks pan people are all evil. i don't, and you won't find that energy or rhetoric in my original response. and in that sense, you're right: it would be inappropriate for someone to tell some kid to change their label. read my reblog again, because i never said that. i never said to do that, and i never said "hey all pan people, just call yourself bi".
what i did say was that if you have a kneejerk reaction against identifying with bisexuality instead of pansexuality, i (as a bi person) hope that you can ask yourself why that is, and identify any unidentified biases you may have with people who do choose to identify as bisexual. even if you dont have a kneejerk reaction to distance yourself from bisexuality, i still plead with you to ask what it is about one label that feels better than the original label that already existed and is still in use today.
and again, i need to reiterate that individual choices dont exist in a vacuum. i am allowed to critique and hold discussions surrounding the choice many women make to put on makeup or undergo plastic surgery, and point out how this just continues feeding into the patriarchal (white, cis, wealthy) beauty standards. and i can invite those who do partake in these things to ask themselves why they do it, and why not choose the alternative option? i am not, in this scenario, saying that these women are the enemy, or that theyre evil, or that they are the scum of the earth for doing what they want. is asking them to consider the reason and repercussions of their actions inherently misogynistic? even when i never told them they were bad or wrong for doing so? even when i'm not doing anything to force their hands? (fellas is it panphobic to ask you to consider your actions have consequences?)
tl;dr: your post was reactive, and i understand it comes from a place of hurt. at the same time, i didnt say or do any of the things your reaction strawmans me of doing. i ask for people to reflect on why they do things and what the repercussions may be of doing these things. i did not ever say "stop doing these things" or that "ppl who do these things are my enemy". if you are getting this worked up over a pretty neutrally-phrased discussion, and getting worked up over an imaginary evil bi person saying all pan people are the enemy: please take some time to do something that feels better than being on the internet and being angry. and then, when you're calmer, reflect on why you got so angry at some bi person pointing out the reality of biphobia that they have faced even when they phrase it without personally attacking others.
there is now research proving not only that pansexuals are biphobic but that pansexual biphobia has a negative impact on bisexualsā mental health
The study checked how bisexual, pansexual and queer women define bisexuality.
Pansexuals and queer women said that bisexuality is binary and means attraction to cis men and women and they also āfelt that claiming a bisexual identity indicated an outdated, offensive belief that there are only two gendersā.
whereas actual bisexuals defined bisexuality as broad and inclusive of all genders.
Itās also interesting that all the people claiming bisexuality was transphobic were cis whereas the trans people interviewed didnāt have a problem with the bisexual label.
In addition, bisexuals expressed that they found the debates around whether bisexuality is inclusive very upsetting and it made them consider hiding their bisexuality or changing their label.
āWhile experiencing oneās chosen identity as personal and meaningful was not unique to the bisexual women in our sample, bisexual women often described an added layer of psychological distress upon learning that others define bisexuality in ways that reinforce a traditional gender binary, which contradicts their own definitions and lived experiences of bisexuality.ā
i am losing my mind at the people trying toĀ ādebunkā this with scientific sounding arguments such as āthe sample size is too small to mean anythingā - literally the most anti-science thing you can say
1. it displays that you have no understanding of basic research concepts such as the difference between quantitative and qualitative research, what theyāre used for and what kind of sample sizes are viable for them
2. trying to dunk on peer reviewed research with a snappy one liner because the findings make you feel bad or clash with your pre-existing beliefs
As a former PhD level social scientist, I need you all to know that a good sample size for a social science study is 30-50 people. In my extensive experience, itās really only valid to consider the implications of sample size when the study is <20 people (and as OP noted, this doesnāt apply to qualitative research!!! At all!!!!! No numbers, pals!) There is not infrastructure, funding, or other resources to create the kind of massive sample studies you see in medicine. That doesnāt mean you canāt do good research with <10,000 people. Also, if your stats are good enough to make it through peer review, your sample size has likely been taken into consideration properly. If you donāt know much about scientific papers, you can learn, or you can sit down when people talk about peer-reviewed research.
Edit: Iām sorry Iām just REALLY mad about this, the cited study had 25 participants who did interviews. Do you have any IDEA how much labor goes into transcribing and coding that much interview data to analyze? No, you donāt. You donāt even know what coding is if you are sniping about 25 participants. 25 is a lot of people for an interview-based study, JFCCCcccc
a handful of additional points
1. people saying you cant generalize this to mean all pansexuals are biphobic because the small sample size and qualitative nature of this study means it doesnt represent larger trends: sure, maybe. but what it does prove is that it exists. there are pansexual people whose understanding of bisexuality are biphobic and differ from the definitions of bisexuals AND that this difference causes tension and distress to those who do identify as bisexual. it may not be representative of every pan or bi person, but it does prove the existence and lived experiences of relevant people. (as an example, i would not discredit a qualitative study that interviewed 20~ single mothers about their experiences with the available social structures on their city and their effectiveness in supporting single mothers, simply because the sample size is small. their opinions are still reflective of real life issues that real life people experience, and that is worth acknowledging and considering.) so if you're saying this isn't generalizable, you're right! but it wasn't meant to be and doesnt have to be. if you're saying it is useless and social sciences are bad as a result, i need you to consider that even the most niche group of people need their struggles considered and validated in the social sciences. small as the sample size is, if its a problem that exists, it deserves to be documented and discussed and if possible fixed. if there are 10 separate single mothers saying social services suck and theyre living in poverty, we need to acknowledge that this is a real issue. the same goes for these bisexual people saying that they experience tensions as a result of biphobic understandings of bisexuality by pan people.
2. people saying "but i've never met a biphobic pan person" or "X person in my life is pansexual and i love them, vice versa": good for you! thats genuinely great and i don't want anyone to experience biphobia either, so im glad to hear it. at the same time, this isn't (necessarily/always) a critique of pansexuals as individuals. this is a critique of the label that functions exactly the same as 'bisexual' but constantly aims to distance itself from bisexuality. in doing so, the meaning of bisexuality keeps getting muddied because people who are, essentially, bisexual keep trying to define themselves differently. this is how biphobic and tranpshobic definitions of bisexuality come about. and so i have to ask: if bi and pan are the same, why do some people prefer to identify as pansexuality? to say "it just feels right" ignores the element of social influences that people often subconsciously act upon (in the same way some women will say they get plastic surgery to feel confident, but if you asked them why they get the specific procedures that they do, or why they felt unconfident before, you find that the root cause is the social influence of the existing beauty standards that make them dislike how they looked while also making them want to look a certain way).
we do not exist in a vacuum - our choices are often influenced by the views of society, even when we think they aren't. it makes sense to want to distance oneself from bisexuality when the label is so vilified. but distancing yourself doesnt allow you to challenge the stigma attached to bisexuality, instead allowing it to perpetuating while the people who do allow themselves to identify as bisexual are further villainized. to concretize this idea, consider the stereotype of bi people being exclusive of trans/nonbinary people. if i were to be someone attracted to all genders, i may feel like bisexuality doesnt fit me as well as pansexuality does. and i may feel this way subconsciously, without even realizing that it's because i don't identify with the stereotype associated with bisexuality. and so i decide to identify as pan, and when people ask why, i just say "it feels right". and so i never question whether or not the stereotype is true, and i never challenge it because i don't have to, now that I've decided to identify as the newer label that i feel is "better", all without ever questioning why it is i feel that way. and if i, subconsciously, judge bisexual people as being transphobic in the future, well then so be it, i guess. and so when someone asks me whats so different between pan and bi, i come up with something that furthers the misunserstandimg of bisexuality, like "i care about hearts, not parts", or "i dont just like 2 genders", which erases the lived experience of decades of people who have called themselve bisexual all while miseducating others on what bisexuality means and furthering the stigma.
so i have to ask, if you identify as pan because it "just feels right", what is it about bisexuality that you feel is so "wrong"? and i am begging you to ask yourself if the reason bisexuality feels wrong is because you have some unchecked stigma, misunserstanding, or bias against bisexuality as an identity. because if you didnt, i dont think you would consider it so bad when people equate bi and pan, or call you one instead of the other.
