Biphobia, DIVA Magazine - gulgbt

If any of you read DIVA magazine, you may be aware of the biphobia article included in the April issue. Having read another article on page 22, a few members of the committee have (quite rightly) taken offence, and a complaint has been written from the society. Please take 2 minutes to read the article (at the bottom of this post), and the letter we have written, so we can write the complaint from the whole association. If you have an suggestions, comment on the blog or email kirsty (welfare@gulgbt.co.uk)

To whom it may concern,

As a society, Glasgow University LGBT was impressed to see anti-biphobia a major concern in your April issue of DIVA. Having not only a biphobia awareness article, Why Do You Have to be a Heartbreaker? , but also featuring it on the front page made a major step in a community in which biphobia is so present and in which biphobic comments and even bullying are far too common.

We congratulate you in your effort to combat these notions.

However, on page 22, you had your ?Satire? page, as normal. As much as we are aware that satire is supposed to push the boundaries of what is PC, we found this unacceptable.

DIVA has never done much to push its content outside of binary, monosexual issues. Things are addressed to as being ?gay?, ?lesbian? or ?dyke?; other labels or points on the Kinsey scale are rarely referred to; even in the form of an acronym such as LGBT.

This is why we were so impressed that you took a step to fight biphobia, or at least to bring your readers? attentions to it.

To have, in the very same issue, an article with comments such as ?stop dithering and make a decision between being exclusively heterosexual or lesbian?, ?greedily open to relationships with men as well as women?, ?afflicted bisexual before being informed of her inherent sexual inconsistency and untrustworthiness?.

To have both of these articles in the same issue undermines what little you have done to stop biphobia, and also looks foolish and ignorant.

The Open University have released a bisexuality report (bisexualresearch.wordpress.com/reports-guidance/reports/thebisexualityreport/). From their list of things which could be biphobic, we believe the one you have committed the most here is ?Assuming that bisexuality is an acceptable topic for humour in a way that lesbian/gay sexualities are not.? On top of this, we have included a list of biphobic things you have committed at the end of the email. This is so you know how to prevent this in the future.

The LGBT people experience enough prejudice as it is. We don?t need it from with our own community.

We hope you will take our comments on board, and look forward to hearing from you in the near future.

Regards,

Kirsty Smith

Welfare Officer, Glasgow University LGBT Students? Association,

On behalf of Glasgow University LGBT Students? Association.

?

Forms of biphobia in this article:

• Believing that bisexual people should ?make their mind up? or ?stop sitting on the fence?.
• Seeing bisexual people as ?confused? about their sexuality.
• Viewing bisexual people as greedy, or wanting to ?have their cake and eat it?.
• Assuming that bisexual people are promiscuous or incapable of monogamy.
• Believing bisexual people to be manipulative, evil or tragic.
• Thinking that bisexual people will always leave their ?same? or ?other? gender partners.

?

Forms of biphobia elsewhere in your magazine:

• Referring to ?same gender? relationships as ?lesbian relationships? or ?gay?relationships? and ?other gender relationships? as ?heterosexual relationships?, as this?misses the fact that such relationships may include one or more bisexual people. This applies to words like ?couples? and ?parents? as well as ?relationships?.
• Assuming that attraction to more than one gender, or identifying as bisexual, is a?phase on the way to a heterosexual or lesbian/gay identity.
• Providing no bisexual-specific services but expecting bisexual people to use a?combination of heterosexual and lesbian/gay services.
• Claiming to speak for LGB, or LGBT people, and then failing to include ?B? in the?name or mission statement of a group, neglecting bisexual-specific issues, and/or?dropping the ?B? within materials.
• Allowing biphobic comments to go unchallenged when homophobic comments?would be challenged.
• Prioritising lesbian and/or gay issues over bisexual issues.

Source: http://www.gulgbt.co.uk/blog/biphobia-diva-magazine

al franken al franken mary did you know seattle seahawks philadelphia eagles vince young vince young