Skip to main content

Bisexuals Do Exist! We need proof for Dr. Ruth meeting.

From the Bi Resource Center in Boston.


PLEASE POST ! PLEASE DISTRIBUTE!
We are preparing for a meeting with Dr. Ruth the famous sex “expert.” Her recent statement in her syndicated column that “Everyone is either straight or gay…there really is no such thing as being bisexual” needs to be refuted. We need your help. We want to bring a large stack of letters from bisexual people to the meeting. We need you to write a brief letter. It will only take 1-2 minutes! (We especially need letters from people who have been bisexual for 2 years or longer to counter her just-a-phase theory.)

The letter should say:
1) How long you have been bisexual.
2) If you can identify bisexual feelings you had in childhood, (or anytime before you chose a bi identity) but couldnt put a name to at the time: describe those feelings and say at what age they started.
3) Sign and date the letter. If you don’t feel comfortable signing your whole name feel free to sign your first name only.
4) Feel free to add more information or statements if you wish. Such as your occupation,your education, your city and state, your relationships past or present, parenthood etc.
Please email the letter to fuscialadybug@netzero.net

SAMPLE LETTER
Dear Dr. Ruth:
I am a 30 year old male and have identified as bisexual for the last ten years. I have been in love with and attracted to men, women and also a few transgendered people during that time.
However, I remember that back in kindergarten I had a crush on a little girl in my class. I used to chase her around the playground and try to kiss her. In first grade I had a crush on a little boy I met in Little League. I told my mom that I would like to marry him. She told me “No you dont! You cant marry boys, you can only marry girls!”
Sincerely,
Joe JonesJersey City NJ
[you can also use a nickname if you want]

Comments

LaReinaCobre said…
I spread the word to my friends.

Popular posts from this blog

Swords into Ploughshares

  "They shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." Isaiah 2:4 Palestine Action are doing just this: beating swords into ploughshares i.e. putting weapons out of use. In doing so they are fulfilling this biblical mandate. They are expressing God's peace as expressed in the Jewish tradition and the Christian tradition. God desires that our swords shall be beaten into ploughshares, that we should unlearn war. That the government wants to make this action illegal has to be confronted in the strongest terms. To rush to condemn attacks on weapons but not attacks on children is perverse. To call attacks on weapons terrorism but not attacks on children is perverse. When government comes to such an extreme position - legislating that peace is war, that weapons need more protection than children - then they have fundamentally gone wrong. This is the definitio...

Is humanism theologically tolerant?

OK, well this might be controversial, but I feel the need to say it. Is humanist tolerant? Please note I'm not asking about humanism within society. Clearly humanism certainly believes in tolerance within society and I'm forever glad they are often the only people in the media calling for a separation of church and state. No, what I'm talking about is descriptions of Unitarianism like this and adverts like this , discussed at Peacebang here , which say that humanism is one option, Christianity is another, God is one option among many. The trouble is, humanism, by definition is theologically opposed to theism. This is very different from the relationship between Christianity and Buddhism. These two traditions may be vastly different, but Buddhism, by definition , is not opposed to Christianity, and Christianity, by definition , is not opposed to Buddhism. But humanism is consciously defined in opposition to Christianity and theism. So to say that humanism and theism can bot...

Clergy-wear during protests

OK, I'm wandering into the territory of Beauty Tips for Ministers here, but a couple of recent conversations have brought up the issue of what clergy should wear for protests. I know a number of Ministers who only wear clerical collars for protests. The logic is that it's important to identify as a Minister when you're supporting something society doesn't expect clergy to. So Ministers will wear a collar at gay prides or pro-choice rallies to make this point. Now I could understand this if it you wore a collar going about your general business, and also did during a protest, but I'm quite uncomfortable with the idea of wearing clerical wear ONLY for protests. The seems to be something worth exploring. I have said before that I'm not in favour of special titles or clothing for religious leadership, mainly because Jesus explicitly said this was a lot of nonsense. Religious leaders should not need these articial crutches. I have no problem with certain liturgical c...