I've been here with cis male partners before, as a bisexual non-man. however, i consider any relationship I'm in to be queer. queer as a concept describes non-normative, non-binary locations & can't be threatening without that context. let me explain: https://twitter.com/jaowrites/status/1380284193356255234

using queer as an umbrella term or as a synonym for gay erases trans/non-binary identities and encourages assimilation, silencing more marginal voices in the process. queer was made an umbrella term to quell the conflict around people with penises & people who have sex with men.

queer was perceived as dangerous, it was a "threat" to the community, particularly the cis lesbian community. in letters from lesbians to "on our backs" and in essays, cis lesbians decried the intrusion of sex workers, trans women/men, and GNC people, because "men are dangerous."

the word "queer" is meant to be challenging. it is meant to be destabilizing and dangerous. it is meant to center those of us who are considered threatening to the community. this is why monosexuals are threatened by it. they're supposed to be.

this history (around "queer") is why i firmly establish that I'm in a queer relationship, regardless of the sex or gender of the partner I'm with. i refuse to engage cis-heterosexist, misogynistic cis(het) men. whether I'm a cis person or trans person, the relationship is queer.

I'm not in a lesbian relationship when I'm with a woman. I'm not in a heterosexual relationship with I'm with a man. I'm not "half-gay" or "half-straight." my identity doesn't became static or transformed when I'm with a straight man, nor do i shift in my queer bisexual politic.

bisexual doesn't mean "either a woman or a man will do." it means "anything that moves will do, anything i choose." trans/nonbinary means "i refuse to conform to your normative, cissexist standards. these concepts inform my queerness, and make me a clear and present danger.

when you look at me and my partner, you will want to assign gender to us. you might even decide that, regardless of what we say, we are in a heterosexual relationship. and you would be wrong. i will not adhere to your assumptions nor your bio-/gender essentialist praxis.

the "Q" is by itself for a reason. y'all don't get to determine what other people's interpersonal relationships are. i know it's scary because (y)our rightful contempt for homophobic/transphobic cisgender people, has made you retreat into a turtleshell of regressive politics.

as someone educated on abuse btwn LGBTQ folks that don't involve cishet men, i take issue with the idea that cisgender heterosexual men are inherently more dangerous than cisgender women, instead of differently dangerous. this extreme focus on hypervisible cis bi women is myopic.

this use of cis bi women avoids necessary convos around bio-/gender essentialism & y'all's real issues with the word "queer" (the idea that people with penises whom you can't readily gender & those who love or fuck them present a danger to lesbian/cis-het women's "safe" spaces).

I've said too much in this thread, but a lot of y'all are saying nothing at all so... back to work i go.