Jump to content

"reverse sexist schadenfreude?"


Recommended Posts

(Preamble:  We've received more email in response to this and this and initial posts in this section.  We're offering zero guarantee of a personal reply to anyone sending questions via email, especially non-members.  But if we get same or extremely similar more than a few times, we might write about them here just so we can point to this section as a broader reply.

Questions in quotes were asked via email unless otherwise credited.  Some are approximate with same meaning, as we standardized the language and removed some profanity and a few words many consider slurs for clarity, plus a bit more politeness.)


"Be more trendy!  Get with the queer program!  Be better than bisexual, be metasexual!  Omnisexual!  Be pansexual!  Polysexual!  Be polymorphously perverse!  It's progressive!"


Today, the majority of women who "identify as" bisexual are kind of not, if you define that as having engaged in sexual contact with both men and women.

So "identifying as" bisexual is now extremely popular with women, but the much more popular version is the one that will never be backed up with IRL behavior.  Estimates vary, but identifying as bisexual then backing up with IRL behavior is a lot less common than identification followed by . . . NOPE!

And that's just "bisexual."  

Surveys also say if you're "identifying as" ALL of the above, we can probably also add "Pretend" to the list?  It's alliterative.  But some might find it insulting.  So we won't say these orientations are "fake" exactly, because if everyone is allowed to identify however they like, that's rude?

But if they're not "pretend" or "fake" they're "imaginative" orientations or identities that never engage with anyone else in the same room with you.  We'll go with "imaginative" versus IRL.

So meanwhile, since the extreme left pressured all the pick-me-try-hard-cool-girl XXs into pretending they were pansexuals on the prowl, many XYs can no longer easily locate the XXs that might actually have been interested in banging their brains out the less conventional way they wanted.  

The IRL bisexuals they seek are now like a few tiny minnows in a swarming sea of superhot but strictly imaginative XX sexual identities that IRL couldn't be less interested.

IRL bisexual XXs that want to sleep with each other and/or the XYs that would like a piece of that as well are now like . . . "Where's Wally?"  And the IRL bisexual XXs won't even know to wear red-and-white-striped shirts to assist in their own detection.

When almost all XXs are imaginatively bisexual, the IRL bisexuals go MIA!


Meanwhile, it's increasingly obvious this obfuscation regarding biological reality . . . 

"It should not be a surprise that a generation raised to think of physical reality as secondary to the personalized experience of digital reality would latch onto gender. According to one poll, 21% of Gen Z identifies as LGBTQ+. This is an astonishingly high figure, but it makes sense when you consider that in its current use identity is conceived as an inner essence that has very little to do with sex or the body. The figure is consistent with other research showing teenagers today have much less sex than previous generations. In place of embodied experience, young people increasingly have incorporeal “identities.”"

 . . . actually leads to less sex, less intimacy, less pleasure . . . just LESS for everyone.

Except pretense?


"All of this is happening against the backdrop of a radical shift in how we conceive of sex, sexuality, self. In the age of social media, sexual orientation is something you identify into, a public performance that requires no partner and no physical follow-through. (Consider also the odd proliferation of straight-married women who identify as “queer,” based on what seems mainly like a conviction that they’re just too interesting to be plain ol’ heterosexual.) It’s all identification, no action, a complete decoupling of sexual identity from the act itself. If this is a sexual revolution, it’s the chastest one we’ve ever had."

It's almost like denying biology overall and/or the sexed reality of your partners' actual parts . . . does NOT usually lead to great sex?

(not for most XX, anyway)




"If you're "queer" these days you're currently not allowed to say you're not interested in sex with a penis."

"You can reject vaginas all day every day, but tell a dick no and you're a "sexual racist.""



So I guess I'm no longer "progressive" or "queer!"  

I'm experiencing waaaaaay more JOMO than FOMO with regard to "queer" in the last few years, so I'm going with lesbian, not queer.



""Queer" means no XX is allowed to definitively state that she's entirely uninterested in having sex with men."

""Queer" means pretending you are at least considering having sex with all heterosexual and bisexual XYs, especially anyone calling himself non-binary or genderqueer or agender or gender-free or even just sympathetically non-traditional no matter how obviously untrue absolutely all of this actually is."

"Are large numbers of straight XY getting bullied for their refusal to "even consider" sex with another penis?  NOPE!"

"Meanwhile, gay men can and will remain as uninterested in vagina as they ever were, and no one says boo.  They remain as fabulously 'queer" as ever!"


Right.  That's because this isn't "transphobia" or "sex negativity" or "a failure to be properly progressively postmodern."

It is Still.  Just.  Sexism.



"Lots of lesbians throwing each other under the bus lately, huh?"


Um . . . yeah.  Sadly, gonna kinda sorta have to agree with you on that one.

Throwing other lesbians under the bus in favor of becoming a handmaiden or repeating station for sexism . . . 

. . . in deference to your mythological folkloristic "everybody on my bus" strictly imaginative sexual journey you will absolutely never embark upon IRL due to your total and complete lack of IRL sexual interest . . .

. . . is more popular lately, unfortunately.


Even the idea that lesbians might want to support each other above and beyond supporting men instead is a bit of a shocker for the "queer community" these days.  Many XXs still feel they need XY validation even without any sexual motivation . . . and/or many sexist XYs are so threatening it's hard to stand your ground.

Some have repeated the sexism, gaslit and brainwashed into imagining it would be progressive, brave, and "on the right side of history" to tell easily frightened women that "lesbian" is no longer something they're allowed.  

The general trend of the lie is just relabel any XX some variety of bisexual and pressure her into cooperating.

You'll be "on the right side of history" for sexist men.


So yeah, publicly calling yourself lesbian would be supporting other women who are still willing to be clear they prefer XX.  Just like gay men are forever allowed to prefer XYs without bullying even inside the "queer community" . . . because they're still obviously XY, aren't they?

Supporting lesbians instead of sexism would be your own strike against it too.



"Leave lesbianism now!  Join our Proud Progressive Pansexual Pantheon!"

"IRL bisexuals are now like "Where's Wally?"

"Are any of y'all experiencing reverse sexist schadenfreude right about now?"


Well . . . we won't PRETEND (intentional word choice) that finding an IRL bisexual XX amongst all the "progressive" pretense has now become more like a game of "Where's Wally?" isn't cracking us up.

Because that would be more disingenuous than pretending not to notice all this sexism, huh?


To be clear, strictly referring to anyone sexist enough to crybully lesbians for being nothing other than lesbians.  If you're an XY harassing lesbians for still not wanting to date you, that is sexist.  Also you're a narcissist.

And they're still not dating you.

So yeah, anyone crybullying lesbians gets reverse sexist schadenfreude.


Because for myself, as a lesbian, "I want to have sex with penis" is a LIE.

It's a lie that non-sexist individuals of both biological sexes shouldn't want me to feel I should have to tell.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

I made a post about this sort of thing a little while ago – about a family member who calls herself ‘bisexual’ even though she also admits to having no intention of ever even platonically dating another woman, much less having any kind of sexual relationship. She thinks she can call herself ‘bisexual’ because she ‘finds other women attractive’ … but it’s not called your “appreciation orientation” it’s your “sexual orientation”… ya know, the whole S.E.X. part. I’m not supposed to be questioning anyone’s self-identifications or whatever these days, but why is what she’s doing Ok and other kinds of “cultural appropriation” are not? Or are they now? Is it appropriation or appreciation? I can’t keep up. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...