Dear Advocate Magazine: A heterosexual, affluent white couple is NOT what a queer family looks like.

Last week, The Advocate (known as the oldest LGBT publication in the United States)  released the cover of their August/September issue, which featured a heterosexual white couple as a “queer family”.


You can read the narcissistic memoirs of this couple here.  Just have some antacids ready (I recommend extra strength Alka Seltzer).

Anyway, let’s look at the definition of word “queer” and how it relates to the aforementioned relationship:


adjective \ˈkwir\

1- strange, odd

Mr. Tortorella and Ms. Meyers represent the predominant demographic in the United States, are more likely than not part of the upper middle-class at the very least  (due to their professions), and are in a union which is typical of the overwhelming majority of bisexuals.

They seem like the antonym of queer which is normal.

2- (of a person) homosexual.

Homosexuality refers to unions and attractions of the same sex.  Where I come from, we call male/female couples heterosexual, regardless of their orientation (as per its definition).

3- A homosexual man.

According to the article Mr. Tortorella “has been described as queer, bisexual, demisexual, and sexually fluid”.  Hmmm….that seems like anything BUT homosexual to me.

The only thing queer about this couple (meaning the strange and odd variety) is that Mr. Tortorella identifies as a word salad of labels and Ms. Meyers identifies as lesbian, despite the fact that she’s been in a relationship with a man for over a decade.

Yes, I know that queer is considered an “umbrella term” nowadays, but the point of the matter is that there is nothing unconventional about a union that most westerners are accustomed to seeing, and to portray it as such is the ultimate insult to LGB activists who have pioneered the way so we can enjoy the liberties we have today.

Apparently, the bi activist community is the only one happy with the cover, and is calling anyone who doesn’t like the cover biphobic.  Unfortunately, this was expected as they’re completely obtuse of the pernicious homophobia, sexism and eurocentrism that infests their circles.

In the meanwhile, I will enjoy watching the cover being dragged to filth on social media.



5 reasons why policing “dating preferences” sets a dangerous precedent (hint- it promotes rape culture)

fdc520933dcd99d8769ea709a8b8d6eaLately,  I’ve come across a load of think pieces all over social media, where the dating preferences (or eliminations, rather) of others are criticized as being “problematic”.  The most recent article on this subject was published on, titled  Dating “Preferences” Are Political, This is Not a Debate (which references everyone’s favorite lesbian stalker, Riley J. Dennis, btw).

As someone that has been romantically rejected for my race, phenotype, class background, orientation, and size,  I completely relate to the pain of being rebuffed; that said, due to the level of intimacy in which romantic partnerships require, I completely understand why one must be highly selective while dating.  In fact, despite my own challenges with dating (past and present), I find articles like the aforementioned incredibly dangerous and dictatorial.

Why such inflammatory words?  I give five reasons below:

Continue reading “5 reasons why policing “dating preferences” sets a dangerous precedent (hint- it promotes rape culture)”

[VENT] The problem with “race women” (and why any black woman who values her life should avoid them).


Let’s talk about “race women”.

These are black women who are so identified with their race, that they carry a toxic loyalty that fails all logic.  They will go through hell and high water to protect BM as if they were the “one true ring”, but will throw other black women and girls underneath the bus in a minute, FOR THE RACE.

The biggest protectors of predatory BM are often BLACK WOMEN.

Yes, black women.  Especially if they are race women.

Race women will often make excuses for predatory BM, such as:

  • “She must have done something to provoke him” (re: domestic violence)
  • “She must have led him on/teased him/etc.” (re: sexual assault)
  • “She didn’t have respect for herself, and the men saw her as easy prey.” (re: sexual/street harassment)
  • “The girl was fast-tailed anyway” (re: pedophilia/ephebophilia)

No matter how young or old you are, to the race woman, the one who has the vagina bears the blame for the actions of feral BM.   To criticize BM for anything is a sin beyond cardinal, as it’s seen as treacherous to THE RACE.

They’ll encourage other BW to be in dysfunctional relationships with fundamentally broken BM for the sake of “black love”, and even goad another BW to stand by a fucked up partner because “our men have it so rough”.

Race women will talk about the many ways that “the white man” has oppressed us, but will flat out ignore the oppressors in our backyards.

Race women will shout to the rooftops how much they “love their brothers”, even though time and time again these men they adore so unconditionally have expressed nothing but pure hatred for us; in the music they produce, the you tube videos they make and the consistent blame game they play with black women.

Race women will spend their money on entertainment produced by misogynoirist BM.  Doesn’t matter if they’ve beaten and/or almost killed women, or were accused (even convicted) of gang rape. They’ll justify their support by saying “it happened so long ago” or “I don’t want to keep a successful BM down.”

They’ll raise their boy children and tell them to stay away from “fast tailed girls”, and badmouth any girl their son has a romantic interest in, then wonder why these males grow up to be men who have absolutely no respect for women.

I advise any black woman who values their lives, their self worth and their mental sanity to get the holy hell away from “race women”.

They will drag you down in the depths of the toxic black collective and the older you are, the harder it will be to pull yourself out.  They do not care about the health and well being of their black women, they do not see you as their sisters.  Their first priority is protecting the BM and upholding the failed patriarchy the latter has created.

I don’t care if the “race woman” in your life is your BFF, your family or even your own mother.  If you’re a black woman who wants a happy and healthy life AVOID THEM LIKE THE PLAGUE!  Keep your distance!  They are the bait waiting to lure you towards the predators.

#BlackQueens, the One-Drop Rule and the systematic erasure of Black Women: a realization.

As many of us know, 90s R&B washout/Fast & Furious franchise leech Tyrese recently married. Called his new spouse (a woman of predominately European extraction) his #BlackQueen and the SHTF.


Less about him, more about the point of this post.

The One-Drop Rule was created during slavery to uphold “white purity” and maintain an oppressive boot on any person with an ounce of Sub-Saharan African ancestry. It is an extremely racist law that has no place in modern society and yet, the very people who were affected by it want to keep it alive- particularly by identifying multiracial people (no matter how minimal their African ancestry is) as “black”.

Every other ethnic group determines who they are on their own terms, whether it’s white people by a standard of European purity, Jewish people by one’s matrilineal heritage and even black people in parts of Africa, who distinct multiracial people as a separate ethnic group (coloured), yet AA people continuously define themselves by a racist law that treats our demographic as a dumping ground.  I didn’t understand why until this “#BlackQueen” debate.

It is predominately the black American male who is maintaining the One-Drop Rule, for a selfish cause.  The majority of AA men desire non-black women as partners and mates, but want to uphold this image of a black king that is “preserving the black community”.  These men will partner with racially ambiguous multiracial women with a few droplets of African ancestry and use the One Drop Rule to assign them blackness (or in an even greater sign of thirstiness, give Rachel Dolezal honorary blackness).

The ultimate goal of the black American male is to create a new black “master race” completely composed of dark skinned psuedo-alpha males and fair-skinned, ambiguous multiracial women, with the unambiguous BW ultimately eradicated.

Sure, black Americans may consider multiracial males, such as former President Obama, Jesse Williams or Colin Kaepernick as “black”, but it is only because they unwittingly serve a purpose to the AA collective; Obama by his historical win as “first black president” and Williams/Kaepernick for their social justice platforms.  Otherwise, multiracial men are not considered essential to the AA collective, are largely ignored and considered “effeminate”, while dark skinned BM are considered the ideal masculine model for “our race”.

Unambiguous BW are reviled and dehumanized by the black collective but we bear something the collective needs: our wombs.  Unambiguous AA women are needed to create black sons (or black daughters who will grow up to be breeders as well), so we are fed a toxic and false narrative of black love by AA-run magazines, blogs and celebs such as Tyrese, who would never consider them as a romantic partner.

There are black women (and multiracial advocates) that have been pushing back against the One-Drop Rule, as it hurts us both.  We need to continue the push back and stand firm on allowing multiracial people to have a separate identity.  Not so much for ourselves, but for young black girls who can’t part from the collective just yet.

AA: African-American

Visibility, erasure and hypocrisy in the Bi community (Or “How I keep getting my Bi card taken away”).

It’s very rare that I actually type up two blog posts in a week, let alone a day, but I’ve been stewing with rage since this afternoon.

I happened to be surfing Facebook during a work break, when I came across this post on BiNet USA’s Facebook group. The post  contains a screenshot, which included some of my comments regarding the aforementioned.  Now admittedly, I was quite firm in my stance, but not rude or belligerent. Regardless, the OP refers to me among a group of “lesbians and gay men” who is posting “hateful commentary”.  And in reference to me- I “claim to be a black feminist” and in her profile she calls herself bi”


Which gets to my point about hypocrisy.

The original debate, was regarding this story– or rather, the orientation of one of the murdered women.  The bi community’s rationale is to automatically label anyone who has partnered with both sexes as bisexual.  As I mentioned in my last post, this is a particular pet peeve of mine because I feel that without confirmation, we’re purely speculating.

Yet, my identity (which is confirmed with my own fucking words) is questioned (as “claimed” and “called”, apparently) because I don’t agree with certain aspects of bisexual community politics.  This wasn’t the first time my identity hasn’t come into question, and I am sure it won’t be the last, but what disturbs me is that such doubts comes from a person that runs a project called “Still Bisexual” and a FB group for a non-profit organization that prides itself on promoting bisexual visibility.

For all the complaining and navel gazing that the bi community does regarding visibility and erasure, it fails to do a good job in promoting a healthy diversity in bi oriented narratives. The bisexual narrative (particularly those by women) is  dominated by middle class, opposite-sex partnered (and often white) women, with little representation (or effort to put forth such) of other races, classes and partnerships.

Since the majority of partnered bisexuals are with the opposite sex , I expect a large number of narratives to come from them, but NOT.NEARLY.EVERY.ONE.  Not to the point where if I google to look for stories of bi women that are married to women, I get a whole page of links of stories coming of bi women married to men (below).



Not to the point where if I try variant phrases concerning single bi women, I either get personal ad links or more stories about bi women married to men- which is not cool considering that we make up 33% of the bifem population.

Not to the point where almost every bi (or queer) female “invisibility” story is written by an angsty 20-something with a boyfriend who hates being seen as “straight”.

The only time I even have any idea that a bi person of color (or a single bi woman) exists is if we’re used as talking points in someone’s tweet or tumblr reblog.  Otherwise, our narratives do not exist, nor does the bi community make an effort to highlight or stories.

Whenever I try to discuss the need for diversity in bi female narratives, I am usually shut down, by 20 other bisexuals.  I’m either accused of being a lesbian, biphobic or  get thrown those grim stats as proof of how bad bisexuals have it.  There is never any room for debate, disagreement or even good old fashioned nuance with the bi community; it’s either “agree with our declaration of oppression or you’re the enemy”.

The bi community should be honest and just say “we seek (preferably conventionally attractive white) people who agree with our agenda to be the face of the community”.

Highlighting biphobia and bisexual erasure; it’s being done wrong.

One pet peeve I have about the bi community is this compulsion they have to make everything about themselves (particularly highly publicized tragedies).

For example, there was this story on Autostraddle about a same-sex couple (two women), who was murdered by the ex husband of one of the partners.  A page I sometimes follow posted the story, and cited domestic violence statistics among bisexual women.  Someone commented that the women could have possibly been gay, and they were accused of perpetuating “bisexual erasure” by the other respondents.

Because sexuality and human behavior is complex, I am not a fan of automatically assigning orientation to people due to past relationships.  Recently, I read an article about a 95 year old man who was gay his entire life, but was married to a woman for 67 years.  This is not an anomaly; many lesbian and gay people enter same sex relationships due to the stigmatization of homosexuality (particularly in the “good old days”).

Also, sexuality is fluid.  I have friends who were 100% straight, without a single interest in the same sex and for whatever reason their orientation shifts to either bisexual or lesbian.  They will tell you that their past heterosexuality was as genuine as their current orientation (and not a matter of finally recognizing their true orientation).

I do not make a case, or debate matters affecting bisexual people unless its confirmed for sure that the subject matter identified as bisexual.  Until then, the topic is purely speculative (and unrelated to bisexual matters).

Another article I can think of was this one on Medium by a young, religious bisexual woman who made the oddest link with biphobia and the Pulse massacre. She is married to a man and was contemplating whether she had a right to grieve the Pulse victims because of this.  In the end, she decided it was OK to feel sadness because possibly, one the the victims could have been bisexual.

This article was panned by many people (and rightfully so), but it went viral among the bi community.  I couldn’t do anything but shake my head (hated the article, btw).

I am not gay, Latinx or a resident of Florida, but was horrified and saddened by the Pulse massacre.  I didn’t have to think about it twice.  Grief and sadness is not something that requires a personal connection to (or make about you).  If something affects you, it’s OK to express sadness, to wonder what the fuck is going in in this world.

It bothers me that so many bi people have to feel personally connected to current events in order to feel something about it, or use them as an opportunity to discuss bisexual matters when there isn’t a solidified confirmation that the people involved are actually bisexual.  And it’s often brought up at the most inappropriate ways, for example, they will accuse someone of performing bisexual erasure on a dead person, and completely ignore the fact that someone was shot dead by their ex (as in the article I mentioned earlier).    Any other person who made such an inopportune comment would be called a self-centered asshole.

I completely understand that there are a lot of unique issues that bisexuals face, but feel that the community’s attempts to highlight these issues are either fallacious or at inappropriate times.  It makes bi people look as if they’re navel gazing or completely disconnected to humanity, and as a bi woman, I find it embarrassing (and quite frankly, unsuccessful).

This could be a discussion or debate, but I expect divergent opinions on this topic.

Loving Women

Radfem Repost

By Natasha Chart

You remember lesbians, right?

They’re sort of like gay men, but they are female people who are only sexually attracted to other female people. They are discriminated against in every society in the world, and often specifically targeted for rape because of their rejection of men. They tend to be gender nonconforming and are economically punished, not rewarded, for the perception that they’re insufficiently compliant with mainstream female sex roles.

They do not, cannot, constitute an oppressor class on the basis of their sexual orientation. Having a vagina is not an axis of power in patriarchy, because it’s a male supremacy, and for two women to love each other and reject all men is a deep revolt against the compulsory heterosexuality baked into the system.

Are we having a dim flash of recognition? Some stirring of memory? I ask because I’ve really been left wondering a few…

View original post 4,478 more words