My favorite definition for bisexuality so far is the one popularized by (the wonderful) bisexual activist Robyn Ochs. Ochs says, “I call myself bisexual because I acknowledge that I have in myself the potential to be attracted—romantically and/or sexually—to people of more than one sex, and/or gender, not necessarily at the same time, not necessarily in the same way, and not necessarily to the same degree.”

This is by far the broadest and most enabling definition of bisexuality that I’ve found to date. Its strength is in the way it enables anyone who wants to identify as bisexual to do so. (In other words, it reassures people.)

In a world in which bisexuality is usually very narrowly defined, many people who experience bisexual desire, and want to identify as bi, often feel afraid to start (or keep) identifying as such, as they feel as though they “don’t qualify.” The role that an enabling definition for bisexuality can fulfill to counter these feelings of internalized biphobia is invaluable—and I feel that Ochs’s definition does just that. It reassures people that they are “allowed” to identify as bisexual if they wish to do so.

Shiri Eisner, from her 2013 Book ”Bi: Notes for a Bisexual Revolution” (p. 21-22)

spytap:

If not murdering a surrendering man…

If not murdering a child one and a half seconds after arriving on scene because the kid was holding a toy…

If not choking an unarmed man to death on the street…

If not murdering a seven year old girl asleep in her home…

If not murdering a man for talking on the phone with a bb gun in his hand – in an open-carry state…

Then what the fuck does it take for a police officer to be held responsible for the death of an innocent civilian?

And lest it be said that body cameras are the solution: 3 of the 5 above cases had video that directly contradicted the official reports and statements made by the officers involved. Put more plainly: those motherfuckers killed someone, lied about what happened, the footage proved they were lying, and they still didn’t get indicted, let alone tried or convicted.

So what will more video evidence do if District Attorneys remain unwilling to bring charges against officers of the law? What will more video footage of police performing unreasonable, unconscionable, and undeniable acts accomplish, when they’re protected by the very justice system they purport to serve – thus validating and reinforcing those actions?

So again: what the fuck will it take for a police officer to be held accountable?