A Bisexual Theory of Fluff

(or perhaps a fluffy theory of bisexuals)

From: Albert Lunde

It is obvious after reading Foucault, Boswell, Suzie Bright, and Anais Nin, that sexuality is socially constructed. (nibble nibble)

Bisexuality as we know (lick) it today (lick) did not (lick) exist yesterday. (meep! meep! meep!)

Likewise, (tickle) fluff is a creation (tickle) of the social context. It exists (tickle) in relationship (bite) to the Western denial (touch) of the body and (taste) glorification of the (smell) individual intellect.

As Susan Griffin (*hug*) has pointed out, woman, nature (*snuggle*) and the human (*snuggle*) body are all (*hug) objectified and (*hug*) treated as alien (*huggity*) by partriarchal ideology (*hug*). In the context (Slurp!) of our society, (Slurp!) then bisexuals cross the lines drawn (Slurp!) by the dominant culture (Slurp!) between sex roles (Kiss!) and between (Kiss!) body and mind.

It is this ("Lower") that has given us our ("A little to the right") reputation for being ("Ahh!") attracted to "anything that moves" ("Right there!") and at the same time ("oooh..") has denied us a social space ("Oh! Yes! Yes!") to express our sexuality.

Thus, fluff. ("Mmmmm...") By blatantly (*snuggle*) reveling (*hug*) in our polymorphous ("MMmm...") perversity we (lick) celebrate what (bite) our culture has (tickle) denied and (*hug*) counterbalance the (kiss!) seriousness of the ("mmmmm....") intellect.

However, the _true_ nature of bisexuality is deep, almost ineffable...

;) ;) ;)

This page last modified