As a kid, one of my favorite things to do was to make my parents and grandparents tell stories … But in my Southern Baptist family, the few stories about people like me were shrouded in euphemisms or shame … Eventually I found that the word to describe myself was “bisexual.”
I came out, found the LGBTQ community, and became an activist. But still stories about other bisexual people were few and far between. Bisexual people were barely visible … prominent bi celebrities were either closeted or assumed to be gay …
Our stories in popular culture were stereotypes and clichés.
Please come and share your stories good as well as bad of being a bisexual/non-monosexual person. Include experiences of discrimination as a bisexual person, because if we don’t clearly delineate what is wrong we cannot fix it.
i love sapphic women. i love trans sapphic women, i love sapphic women who don’t experience womenhood in a binary way. i love fat sapphic women. i love sapphic women with mental illness, i love sapphic women with “ugly” symptoms. i love sapphic women of color, i love sapphic women who are questioning their identity as a sapphic woman. i love sapphic women who are angry and yell, who aren’t “soft uwu”. i love you all
- how to tell if you’re bi or just confused
- hot girls
- hot guys
- what’s the gay scale called
- kinsey scale quiz
- am i bi quiz
- buzzfeed sexuality quiz
- definition of attraction???
- does wanting to date and hold hands with and kiss girls make you gay
- how to come out
“Bluebell or Cluedo”: Ghosts, Garridebs, and the Watson Family History
Hello everyone! This meta is pure speculation based on the subtext and time discrepancy within series 2. I wrote about the wibbly-wobbly timeline of series 2 here, claiming parts of A Scandal in Belgravia happened between scenes in The Hounds of Baskerville. Regardless of whether or not the discrepancy is intentional, for the sake of this argument please suspend disbelief momentarily and treat this misleading timeline as fact. Therefore, the four chunks of time rearranged into correct chronological order are as follows: The opening montage of cases in ASIB, the opening morning/afternoon in Baker Street in THOB (harpoon, lack of cases, need for nicotine, Mrs Hudson’s new man), the rest of ASIB starting with Irene touching the newspaper, the rest of THOB starting with the morning Henry Knight comes to London.
This analysis focuses on the subtextual answer to the question in THOB - “Do we Investigate what happened to Bluebell or do we play Cluedo instead?” Sherlock is fed up from not having any cases to solve and it’s getting on his last nerve. Bluebell is the only thing on his website and he’ll be damned if he’ll go out of his way to investigate a glow-in-the-dark missing rabbit. But we all know what happens later - he solves Bluebell’s case! Obviously, finding Bluebell is the answer to the ultimatum Sherlock gives John earlier in the episode. Wrong. Sherlock solves Bluebell’s case on accident because John picks Cluedo again. These two men play Cluedo twice - the first time being when Sherlock deduces the victim to be the murderer (even though it’s not in the rules) and the second time being when Sherlock stabs the board over the mantle (presuming our boys had another row while playing). If the time discrepancy is to be believed, that means complaining about the idiotic Cluedo game happens BEFORE we see the board stabbed into the mantle, therefore Cluedo was played twice. So what does that mean? What’s the big deal about playing Cluedo twice? Choosing to play Cluedo a second time instead of finding Bluebell shows that when given a subtextual choice, the characters picked Sherlock’s fall over the 3 Garridebs moment, foreshadowing both in the process.
~Are you guys ready to follow me down the rabbit hole?