One of the themes I explore in the Reagan Dubois Duology is a fear of judgement.
Reagan is a fairly sheltered girl. She comes from a conservative home. Her sexuality has always been something to keep under wraps, even from herself. So when she begins to experience feelings for both sexes, she worries about having to choose.
At the end of Pop Goes the Cherry, that is explored a little more in-depth. Reagan is assured by her lesbian roommates that she doesn't have to choose anything for herself that she doesn't want to - including a label. They are very supportive of her, and that support and compassion allows her to begin to come to terms with her fluid sexuality.
Some people, as illustrated in the article "What Lesbians Think About Bisexuals" is Hopefully Not What Lesbians Think About Bisexuals, are not given that chance.
In the same way that trans people are perceived by many as only the butt of some cosmic joke that everyone is entitled to making, bisexuals seem to be perceived as some kind of insidious - or otherwise ignorant - set of people whose sexuality may not be stagnant, but ever-changing. One of the reasons people fear this, I suppose, is the argument that homosexuality is inherent and genetically predetermined. If that's true, then how can bisexuals exist?
Simple enough, really. The same genes that make someone gay and make someone else straight also make another person able to fall in love and lust with either gender.
Stereotypes about these people abound. "They're pathetically misguided," some say, indicating unproven underlying factors manufactured by the accuser, such as "lesbian lite" or "just trying to show off for some guys" or "trying to apply themselves to a movement without applying as much of the consequences." Others say, "They just don't know themselves or what they want," or "they're just selfish," or the best of all, "they don't exist."
The fact that these opinions come quite often from the LGBT community is astounding to me. After all this time and the hundreds of years of oppression (more so in the last few decades, in some ways), it is appalling that members of this community would hurl similar, if not the same, accusations at bisexuals as they may have endured themselves. I don't understand this convenient amnesia, and it infuriates me.
The video in the article is what has inspired my ire this morning, but as you can tell from the ending of the Reagan Dubois Duology, it is a subject that isn't far from the forefront of my mind even when there's no one around to bring it to light. I recall my own experiences with my sexuality, where I was either "confused" or "a lesbian and didn't know it" or just there for someone else's entertainment and pleasure, never my own. I know this struggle well, and the same people in this video should, too. Instead, they bring hate with them to the table, under the guise of it being totally cool and okay to "call out" these supposed impostors, proudly declaring themselves the brave and bold heroes of this dark and twisted tale.
Take a look at the article and let me know what you think. Is it important to sometimes use erotica or porn as a way to include talking points about sexuality? Am I doing it wrong? Or is acceptance something that could be worked into the reeling minds of our readers post-orgasm without preaching it from a soapbox?