I enjoyed a hearty belly laugh this morning. Ah, the world can certainly be an ironic place sometimes!
To understand why I am saying this, my dear friends, a bit of historical context is necessary:
A few years ago, I was actively involved in the UK bisexual community. Wanting to give something back, I created Oxford BiFest -- a one-day event following the model used in London, Manchester, and Brighton. In some areas, we wanted to put our own stamp on the event, experimenting with improvements here and there, such as a larger venue. In other regards, however, we saw no need to re-invent the wheel, and so we borrowed enthusiastically from those who had blazed a trail before us. For instance, we adapted our logo from a recent BiFest elsewhere, and we used a catchy slogan that had been circulating in the community for over a decade.
That slogan was "Like Men? Like Women? Like Both?" Seems innocuous enough, right? What's what we thought, too -- especially in light of its long history of use. We could not have been more wrong. Posting a copy of our flier, which featured said slogan, started a massive flame war as we were vehemently accused of being exclusive and making people feel "erased" by our mentioning of men and women. I was personally excoriated as transphobic, discriminatory, and a bigot.
When the attacks ramped up, I was unwilling to risk tarnishing our event by entering the fray to speak up in my own defense. Thus, I immediately fell silent. Those attacking pressed on, however, whilst shouting loudly about how they were being silenced.[*] It couldn't help but call a Monty Python scene to mind: "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
At the time, a precious few spoke up against such unwarranted accusations, for which I am quite appreciative. Unfortunately, many others either joined the attacks or merely kept quiet. Sadly, silence has the de facto effect of resembling acceptance with such inappropriate behaviour.
Happily, the event itself was highly successful, despite all the online drama that preceded it! Yay! Thus, we decided to do it again one year later. When the time came, community leaders expressed concern that we would choose to use the same slogan, indicating that we should bow before the outrageous behaviour and personal attacks of the previous year. I was shocked that leaders could consider harassment as an acceptable means of initiating change in the community. After considerable discussion,
cheshcat and I decided to leave the UK bisexual community in response, rather than condone bullying as legitimate behaviour. We shut down the Bisexual Oxford group, donated all its assets to charity, and found other projects worthy of our time and energy.
Unfortunately, we lost many friends in the process, yet we stood by our principles... which, ultimately, matters much more. I don't think that I could have lived with myself, looked at myself in the mirror each morning, if I had encouraged harassment and accepted intimidation as legitimate tactics. We walked away, but we did it with our consciences intact.
So, gentle readers, that is the requisite backstory -- are you ready for the tale of current irony? Excellent!
Let us now fast-forward three years to the present. One of the people who took part in attacking us for not being inclusive is an organizer for a polyamorous event. She played a particularly active role in the slander, and was the first to hurl accusations of bigotry when she called me "transphobic" for our mention of "men" and "women". Clearly one who strongly believes that we should not discriminate or be exclusive, right? Read on.
Today, I found out that her upcoming event, OpenCon UK, has barred men from registering unless they do so with a partner to accompany them. Say what?? So much for being all vehement about inclusivity -- this rule is about as discriminatory and exclusive as they come! As
da_pupdetz like to say: "Whoops! Somebody screwed up!"
I have been actively polyamorous for over fifteen years, and taking part in poly events for at least twelve of those years. In that time, I have never before seen a bar against unaccompanied men, nor have I seen need of it. Not at the old "Bi Poly Rap sessions" in New York, not at Poly Chicago, not at OpenCon Catalonia -- nowhere. At times, it has been helpful to explicitly mention that a poly event is not the place for cruising, but an outright ban on men who are not accompanied is completely uncalled for!
Here is one last helping of extra-bonus irony: Besides being offensive in all the obvious ways, this ban also reinforces the heteronormative paradigm. Let's all come to talk about polyamoury in our nice little groups of two -- one man, one woman. Honestly, I would never have expected it!
Alas, the event in question has a perennial scheduling conflict with the Sooper Sekrit Pagan Festival, which I am running again this year. This is a shame -- I cannot boycott OpenCon UK for its moronic policy of discrimination and exclusivity, as I was already unable to attend. Le sigh.
Even so, the irony made me laugh out loud this morning, grinning whilst simultaneously shaking my head in disbelief. The world is a funny, funny place, indeed!
[*] Not the main irony promised for this post -- consider it bonus, gentle readers!
To understand why I am saying this, my dear friends, a bit of historical context is necessary:
A few years ago, I was actively involved in the UK bisexual community. Wanting to give something back, I created Oxford BiFest -- a one-day event following the model used in London, Manchester, and Brighton. In some areas, we wanted to put our own stamp on the event, experimenting with improvements here and there, such as a larger venue. In other regards, however, we saw no need to re-invent the wheel, and so we borrowed enthusiastically from those who had blazed a trail before us. For instance, we adapted our logo from a recent BiFest elsewhere, and we used a catchy slogan that had been circulating in the community for over a decade.
That slogan was "Like Men? Like Women? Like Both?" Seems innocuous enough, right? What's what we thought, too -- especially in light of its long history of use. We could not have been more wrong. Posting a copy of our flier, which featured said slogan, started a massive flame war as we were vehemently accused of being exclusive and making people feel "erased" by our mentioning of men and women. I was personally excoriated as transphobic, discriminatory, and a bigot.
When the attacks ramped up, I was unwilling to risk tarnishing our event by entering the fray to speak up in my own defense. Thus, I immediately fell silent. Those attacking pressed on, however, whilst shouting loudly about how they were being silenced.[*] It couldn't help but call a Monty Python scene to mind: "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
At the time, a precious few spoke up against such unwarranted accusations, for which I am quite appreciative. Unfortunately, many others either joined the attacks or merely kept quiet. Sadly, silence has the de facto effect of resembling acceptance with such inappropriate behaviour.
Happily, the event itself was highly successful, despite all the online drama that preceded it! Yay! Thus, we decided to do it again one year later. When the time came, community leaders expressed concern that we would choose to use the same slogan, indicating that we should bow before the outrageous behaviour and personal attacks of the previous year. I was shocked that leaders could consider harassment as an acceptable means of initiating change in the community. After considerable discussion,
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Unfortunately, we lost many friends in the process, yet we stood by our principles... which, ultimately, matters much more. I don't think that I could have lived with myself, looked at myself in the mirror each morning, if I had encouraged harassment and accepted intimidation as legitimate tactics. We walked away, but we did it with our consciences intact.
So, gentle readers, that is the requisite backstory -- are you ready for the tale of current irony? Excellent!
Let us now fast-forward three years to the present. One of the people who took part in attacking us for not being inclusive is an organizer for a polyamorous event. She played a particularly active role in the slander, and was the first to hurl accusations of bigotry when she called me "transphobic" for our mention of "men" and "women". Clearly one who strongly believes that we should not discriminate or be exclusive, right? Read on.
Today, I found out that her upcoming event, OpenCon UK, has barred men from registering unless they do so with a partner to accompany them. Say what?? So much for being all vehement about inclusivity -- this rule is about as discriminatory and exclusive as they come! As
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
I have been actively polyamorous for over fifteen years, and taking part in poly events for at least twelve of those years. In that time, I have never before seen a bar against unaccompanied men, nor have I seen need of it. Not at the old "Bi Poly Rap sessions" in New York, not at Poly Chicago, not at OpenCon Catalonia -- nowhere. At times, it has been helpful to explicitly mention that a poly event is not the place for cruising, but an outright ban on men who are not accompanied is completely uncalled for!
Here is one last helping of extra-bonus irony: Besides being offensive in all the obvious ways, this ban also reinforces the heteronormative paradigm. Let's all come to talk about polyamoury in our nice little groups of two -- one man, one woman. Honestly, I would never have expected it!
Alas, the event in question has a perennial scheduling conflict with the Sooper Sekrit Pagan Festival, which I am running again this year. This is a shame -- I cannot boycott OpenCon UK for its moronic policy of discrimination and exclusivity, as I was already unable to attend. Le sigh.
Even so, the irony made me laugh out loud this morning, grinning whilst simultaneously shaking my head in disbelief. The world is a funny, funny place, indeed!
[*] Not the main irony promised for this post -- consider it bonus, gentle readers!
Tags:
From:
no subject
How very ironic. Personally I would say that you are the least "phobic" person I have ever met, but there you go. They wouldnt have wanted to hear my "more or less straight, heterosexual" viewpoint anyway. But heavens. Reinforcing all sorts of stereotypes there - poor little victim females, wicked predatory single men, couples, exclusivity....the list just goes on and on and on...
How very bizarre.
From:
no subject
Also, thank you for the kind words. I certainly try to be open-minded and accepting, rather than X-phobic with any group. Well, I might be a little intolerant of Republicans[*], especially around election time, but other than that... *wink*
I attribute my open-mindedness to being an Anarchist... or maybe has to do with my Pagan training. After all, the Wiccan rede is: "An it harm none, do what ye will."
Truth be told, though, acceptance has always come easy to me. The first opportunity that I ever had to examine my response to a trans person came when I was fifteen. I was spending a week of Summer break visiting with my friend C, who I had known for about a year. One night, C revealed that he had something to show me, but he was obviously unsure of how I would react. When he came out to me as a transvestite, I simply shrugged and told him that whatever worked for him was fine; then I thanked him for trusting me enough to share. With no forethought or preparation, I just found it natural to accept that my friend was doing no harm, so that which gave him pleasure couldn't possibly be bad.
There is an amusing follow-up to that story. Over the past twenty years, this friend and I have drifted in and out of contact. Sometimes years go by where we are out of touch, then something re-establishes the connection and we pick up where we left off. One such re-connection happened in 2005 though, for the life of me, I cannot remember how we got back in touch. Anyway.
We were having the required Long Chat where we fill each other in about our lives since we last spoke. C informed me that he was no longer a he; she was now L. Okay, no problem. This is fifteen years after C came out to me as a transvestite, so it was no great surprise, and I had known plenty of transsexuals in the intervening years. The conversation continued. In my part of the catching up, I let it be known that I had become a vegetarian, after spending the first twenty-five years of my life as a devout carnivore. L was shocked and replied with a demand: "Let me speak to the real Nomad! Clearly, she thought that I was a pod person or a doppelganger. My reply? "Last time we talked, I ate meat and you were a man. People change." I was rather tickled that she was more astonished by my change of diet than I was by her change of gender.
It's been a few years, actually. I was hoping to find L so that I could invite her to the final Event Horizon party. Haven't been able to track her down, though -- even asked our mutual ex if she knew where to find her. Ah well.
[*] The US-American kind, not folks in favour of abolishing the British monarchy!
From:
no subject
As for that rule? It's a swingers club rule, many swingers clubs that had fetish nights used to use it. I think the "at least one cunt for every cock" rule is pretty sickening tbh.
From:
no subject
As you say, I do remember all-too-well that you were also considered a target for attack once you spoke up. You are probably right that watching you get abused then intimidated others into silence. Seriously ironic -- those who were shouting about being silenced were actually the ones doing the silencing!
I also agree with you about the "at least one cunt for every cock" rule. Besides, rules for a swingers club really don't belong at a social event about polyamoury! Most (all?) poly events that I have been to are pretty explicit about not being the place to come for a hookup; they are about spending time with other people who share similar views that fall outside the cultural default of monogamy.
On a totally different note: Life has been pretty hectic -- I am in Japan now, the UK on Monday, Chicago on Tuesday, New York next Friday, you get the idea -- but I have been meaning to ping you to suggest another group trip for next year. I had a lot of fun with you and B in Germany... and next year we could bring
I hope that life and your new job are both treating you well, sweetie. *more hugs* Talk to you soon!!
From:
no subject
New job is good, possible new romantic interest is good, Jason is still wonderful and so on :-) I really want to see you and the gorgeous Chesh again soon!
From:
no subject
Very glad to hear that life is treating you well, hon. After some of the stuff you went through, this year, you certainly deserve it! *more hugs*
Am particularly pleased that you landed on your feet, job-wise. Chesh is in the same position now that you were a few months ago; her position is coming to an end, for reasons of funding, but she's been doing several interviews and hopefully something good will turn into an offer[*]. I am keeping fingers crossed that it turns out as well for her as it did for you!
Let's talk more in November about possible destinations for the Spring. Meanwhile, we haven't advertised it yet, but if Saturday December 8th is free for you, we are having a party to celebrate Chesh's birthday. She is turning 7... in cat years! *grin* Would love to have you join us, if you can make it! (And I am certain the Chesh would be delighted to see the gorgeous Rhona again, too! *wink*)
[*] Most of the jobs she have interviewed for have been good. One, however, was with a man who gleefully described the position as "the job from hell" and took pride in saying that he made those who worked under him cry. She didn't get offered the job, and we were rather disappointed. She had no intention of taking it, but we wanted the satisfaction of having her turn it down! ;-D
From:
no subject
You know those same community leaders are all over putting postcards o rainbows and unicorns out. Unicorns. You know - the *rape ponies* that are mythology all about *raping virgins*?
Yeah
From:
no subject
(Also, am liking the term "Oppression Olympics"! Very nice -- I may borrow it!)
From:
no subject
I think it is possible to act in a discriminatory way without having had any discriminatory intentions. I know I have, and I've been angry and defensive and hurt when it was pointed out to me. I think it is possible to express concern and a desire for a more inclusive slogan, however long the old one may have been in circulation, without bowing to personal attacks, endorsing harassment, or condoning bullying as legitimate behaviour, though obviously I don't know how said concern/desire was expressed to you. I think it would have been a mistake to re-use a slogan that clearly had made some people feel erased/excluded, however horribly they may have behaved about said feelings.
I understand the exclusionary issue with requiring a man to be accompanied by a partner to attend a poly event, but how is that heteronormative? Presumably one man could be accompanied by another man as his partner.
From:
no subject
You've known me for how many years now? (I lose track) Were I a bigot, I would think you would have noticed by now! :-D
I think it would have been a mistake to re-use a slogan that clearly had made some people feel erased/excluded, however horribly they may have behaved about said feelings.
You and I may have to agree to disagree on this one, hon. The way I see it is that changing as a result of bullying and intimidation just encourages the use of those tactics. If harassment gets results, bullies will keep on doing it. Thus, looking at the issues morally, I found it a much worse offense for me to help legitimize harassment than to explicitly refer to "men" and "women" in a flier for a bisexual event.
I understand the exclusionary issue with requiring a man to be accompanied by a partner to attend a poly event, but how is that heteronormative?
Yes, the exclusionary and discriminatory part is pretty hard to miss, isn't it? ;-D
As for the other half, let me try to answer your question: Because the stated goal was to bar unaccompanied men in the interest of "gender balance" at this poly event, it struck me as leaning hetero. After all, if a poly family of twenty male partners signed up, that would definitely not help the stated goal!
From:
no subject
I am fine with disagreeing on this (and don't need a reply if you'd like to drop the topic). I read your follow-up reply below (e.g., Suddenly, the issue in question is no longer at the heart of the matter), and I get where you're coming from. I agree that opposing bullying is very important, am glad you care to make a stand against it, and understand your choice in your situation.
I am a little puzzled anyway at the idea of anyone getting worked up over the exclusive wording of that slogan for a *bi*sexual event (by definition, if not in intent, itself already rather binary-gendered!). OTOH, I'm the one writes organizations to add "other" or "prefer not to say" options to "male" and "female" in their surveys and forms, as one thing I can do for a friend of mine who was beaten and hospitalized for wearing a beard and a skirt at the same time. When I write, I say that binary gender language reinforces binary gender thinking (and resulting violence), and I've been thrilled to have made a difference once or twice with my little campaign (subsequently fixed forms/surveys).
Thanks for explaining about the heteronormative aspect. A gender balance goal alone leans heteronormative to my eyes. Taken together with the no-unescorted-males ... wow, peoples' selective vision is astonishing sometimes! *laughs*
I hope you have a wonderful trip into the woods (and back again)!
From:
no subject
Writing back quickly now, as
By the way, I'm guessing that we met briefly in 2001, as I have been to every P**T*** since 1997. It's one of those things where you've known someone for so long that the initial meeting is shrouded in time, if that makes sense.
Like you, I am fine with disagreeing on this. My only goal was to explain where I was coming from, to describe why it felt so imperative to take a stand. This is also why I wrote a second time, when I decided that my first response was a pile of poorly-written rubbish. :-D
I am very sorry that you will not be joining us at The Gathering this year, hon! Believe me, you will be missed! It sounds like there may be some plans a-brewing for New Years, though. So hopefully I will see you soon!
Have some virtual hugs for now... real ones to come later! *big hugs*
From:
no subject
You said: I think it would have been a mistake to re-use a slogan that clearly had made some people feel erased/excluded, however horribly they may have behaved about said feelings.
To which I replied: looking at the issues morally, I found it a much worse offense for me to help legitimize harassment than to explicitly refer to "men" and "women" in a flier for a bisexual event.
That's pretty rubbish in terms of expressing myself clearly. I shall try again.
The way that I see it, a bully has a lot in common with a child who is throwing a temper tantrum. Suddenly, the issue in question is no longer at the heart of the matter. Even if that candy bar won't cause all their teeth to fall out, giving in and letting the child have it teaches the child that throwing temper tantrums is effective, and more will follow. The same is true when you give in to harassment by bullies.
There is a critical difference, though: With your child, if you give in to a temper tantrum, the next tantrum will most likely also be directed as you. It is poor parenting, but if that is what you want to choose for yourself, so be it. When dealing with a bully in a community, giving in encourages and legitimizes the behaviour... but the next episode will almost certainly not be directed at you. So changing as a result of such tactics would constitute positive reinforcement, making it all too likely that the bully will harass somebody else later. In that case, I would bear part of the moral responsibility for that harassment, as my actions had encouraged it.
This is the "moral offense" that I spoke about earlier, even if I expressed it incoherently. I find the idea of encouraging such harassment to be so ethically repugnant that I chose to leave the UK bisexual community, losing a goodly number of friends in the process, when it became clear that the community leaders expected us to submit to such tactics. It was a decision that came at some cost to us, but I strongly believe that it was the right thing to do. I won't be responsible for somebody else being put through that.
Hopefully, this explains where I am coming from better than I did before. You are still free to disagree, of course... but at least you might have a better understanding of my reasons. *hugs*
From:
no subject
I've seen that kind of behavior poison other communities. Giving in definitely means further problems down the road. Although they could have picked you as a target again, and scapegoated you. I've seen that happen to people, who eventually left the community in question, and the bullies went on to scapegoat someone else.
From:
no subject
Oxford BiFest was conceived with a mission to do outreach and bring in new people, not solely catering to the existing UK bisexual community. According to feedback we have received, a catchy slogan like "Like Men? Like Women? Like Both?" did that job rather well. Proposed alternatives like "Hearts Not Parts" or "Like Men? Like Women? Like People?" come from a more sophisticated and intellectual deconstruction of gender and sexuality; such a catchphrase might not be so effective in attracting folks who are still figuring out their own gender and sexuality issues.
On the other hand, we also did not want to exclude genderqueer or genderfluid people... and it was certainly not our aim to offend. Had we been approached respectfully with these concerns, everyone invested could have worked together towards an ideal solution. It's a trickier issue than it first seems, to be sure, but it is by no means an intractable problem!
Unfortunately, none of this happened. Instead, there was mocking and derision, escalating into a flame war and personal attacks. That's not the atmosphere of trust required to sit down and solve problems in good faith. At that point, giving in would have been rewarding the harassment... and I think I explained above why I feel that I have a moral obligation not to encourage bullies.
In the end, the result was exactly what you describe in your last paragraph. Those who used intimidation and harassment got their way, and those who tried to give something back to the community in a spirit of love ended up leaving the community entirely. And, just as in your example, the bullies probably did go on to scapegoat someone else. The sole consolation that I have is that I know I did nothing to encourage or legitimize their horrendous behaviour.
*hugs* Thankfully, I belong to some pretty awesome communities -- like my Chicago network, or the P**T*** gathering in the NorthEast, or Lansing (where I consider myself an "honorary" member of the LPV! Hooray!
From:
no subject
Secondly, I don't see how mentioning "men" and "women" as discriminating against transgendered people. I am not trans, but as far as I know someone who is trans believes that the body they are in has the wrong gender and want to transform into the other one.
I would expect the people who would be offended are the "gender queer" or "gender fluid" folks who don't consider themselves to be a particular gender. I have to admit that, as liberal as I am, I have a hard time understanding the GQ folks as I equate gender to physiology, not a "state of mind". I can express my feminine side but that does not mean I am not male.
I guess I need to have some long (or maybe short) talks with GQ folks so I can better understand the concept.
From:
no subject
*hugs you* (a lot)
Secondly, I don't see how mentioning "men" and "women" as discriminating against transgendered people.
Yes, I was puzzled by the same questions when the fit hit the shan, way back when. So I asked some trans friends for their perspective. Obviously, different people will give different answers, and you can't generalize for a whole population any more than you can with any other identifier. But, looking at trends, the answers that I got was mainly along the lines that the attacks were not only poor citizenship, but also poorly informed. In general, my discussions on the topic with trans people indicated that they were more invested in the concepts of "men" and "women", as they had gone through great efforts -- not least of which is perpetually fighting discrimination -- to switch gender.
Whereas, in contrast, I'm not particularly tied into "male" as an identity. It's useful for some physiological aspects of my life, but I don't identify strongly with things that I was born into by chance (e.g., being male, US-American, a person of colour, et cetera). I had no say in any of that. The identities that matter to me are the ones that I chose for myself, sometimes requiring great efforts of my own: Anarchist, physicist, Pagan, bell ringer, and so on.
The way I had it explained to me was something like this: Being male isn't a big deal to me, as it is just something that happened with no choice or effort on my part. But to a transgendered male, it did take a choice and it requires an ongoing effort. So it matters much more to that person... just like being an Anarchist or a physicist matters to me.
From:
no subject
Our culture tends to force us in to binary gender representations based on sex characteristics, and that's kind of silly. Man/woman and male/female are shorthands that do not represent how people may think of themselves. For example, I am definitely a woman - but I see myself as more gendered male than female, based on what our cultural norms of gendered interests are.
From:
no subject
This is true... but, to first approximation, XX and XY does cover the species. From what I've read about genetic research on the topic, 99.9% of the population is one or the other. About one in a thousand is an exception.
Thus, I can understand why people automatically assume a binary here -- it is a valid approximation, even if it isn't absolutely true. For better or for worse, it is natural for people as individuals, and society as a whole, to approximate the dominant cases as the whole of the population. To use a less politically sensitive example, take the case of us left-handed folk. We make up about 10% of the population -- at one in ten, we are a hundred times more numerous than the population that is neither XX nor XY. Still, since 90% of the species is right-handed, society makes the approximation that all humans are right-handed. Effectively, then, as a left-handed person, we face implicit discrimination throughout all of our lives. Given the the world is designed for right-handed people, we just have to adapt to it as best we can.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
The sound you just heard was my jaw hitting the keyboard :oS
From:
no subject
Remind me to give you a big hug next time I see you. Speaking of which, it has been far too long! I'm away travelling until the start of November -- do you have any plans to be in London after that? Meeting up for dinner was loads of fun last time; I would be delighted to do it again!
P.S. LOVE the icon!
From:
no subject
Feel free to steal the icon- I did from somewhere or other! :o)
From:
no subject
Not only will it be good to see you again, but the Vietnamese food sounds delicious! :-D
From:
no subject
The restaurant is up in Pimlico just behind Victoria station and is called Mekong.
Their website is here:
http://www.mekongrestaurant.co.uk/
From:
no subject
Thanks for making the arrangements -- it will be great to see you both again!
From:
no subject
I can see a bit of a conflict - if the slogan bothers some people, should it be used? But not using it would appear, at least to the bullies, that they "won" and therefore give them additional motivation to keep up that sort of behavior. That's a hard call to make, and I think walking away was probably the only reasonable option. What a poisonous environment, and over something purporting to do with love!
From:
no subject
Thank you, sweetie! *big hugs (and a cuddle)*
I can see a bit of a conflict - if the slogan bothers some people, should it be used?
I just typed a long comment to
And, yes, your last line is rather astute, and sums thing up quite nicely! "What a poisonous environment, and over something purporting to do with love!" Indeed!
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Ahem. Right. Now that I'm done being distracted, let me actually read what you wrote.
*reads*
*giggles*
*nods*
Liking your slogan. It's a good one, for sure!
P.S. Eight more days!!!
From:
no subject
If human beings keep getting their knickers in a knot about minor details of sexual behavior, whatever are we going to do when we run across other sentient life forms whose notions of "sex" (if they even have such a thing) are going to be completely unlike anything we've ever imagined?
And you know that, while I may be mostly-straight, mostly-monogamous, and mostly-vanilla, I have very dear friends and even dearer familys members who are straight, gay, bi, transgender, genderqueer, "none of the above", poly, kinky, and "tri-sexual" (they'll try anything sexual). I basically agree with Samuel Clements: "As long as they don't do it in the road and frighten the horses."
From:
no subject
Terry Pratchett's giggleworthy use of the redoubtable Mrs Whitlow, housekeeper of Unseen University, to explain the concept of 'sex' to a god creating a new universe is well worth a read if you haven't.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
[*] P**T*** is just 2 hour train ride, a 6000 mile flight, a 4000 mile flight, and a 900 mile drive away!
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
I have seen the "no unpartnered men allowed" rule at exactly one event, and I don't believe it ran again after that. In any case, it torqued my gears quite a bit that there was social exclusivity at an event that was supposed to be open to all.
From:
no subject
That said, it really just made me laugh when I saw that the same person who gave me such grief over being exclusionary and "transphobic" is being far more discriminatory and exclusive than I ever was. (Recall that my great transgression was borrowing a slogan used, with nary a fuss, at a similar event two months earlier -- the horror! *wink*)
As for the "no unpartnered men allowed" rule, I can understand why it torqued those gears of yours! It is demeaning and insulting. Personally, I could attend OpenCon UK, as
Meanwhile, the Event Horizon party is open to all of my friends... and their friends... and so on! Should be gangs of fun, with no discrimination or exclusion allowed! *grin*
Oh, it will be soooooo good to see you again! *big smiles*