“But What About Us?”: Assumed Inclusion, Backlash, and Why Lesbian Spaces Trigger Panic

A Joke That Wasn’t Supposed to Become a Case Study

It started with a throwaway line in a TikTok. I was talking about the Caudacity of a group of white supremacists attempting to build an all-white town in the United States, and how telling it was that they had to pay for press coverage because almost no one cared. That’s how normalized white dominance is in this country. Systemic racism needs indifference to survive, and the lack of national outrage over an all-white town is proof that the system is working. 

I added as a joke: “Can you imagine if lesbians tried to build a lesbian-only town? No way in hell.” It was a thought experiment, my dream town, and a callout of whose autonomy is tolerated and whose isn’t. I didn’t expect what happened next.

The Immediate Bi & Pan Assumption: “I’m Living There Too”

Almost immediately, bisexual and pansexual people began commenting variations of:

• “I’m bi but tired of men, count me in”

• “That sounds great, I’d move there.”

• “Why would you exclude bi women?”

  
  

This is where the real issue revealed itself. I’d thrown out an imaginary lesbian-only space, and people who are not lesbians assumed inclusion without asking, listening, or reflecting.

That assumption is the problem. I stand 10 toes down when I say: bisexual and pansexual folks are non-negotiable members of the LGBTQ+ community. But I was clearly and specifically talking about an all-lesbian town and non-lesbians assumed they’d be in the population.

Lesbian Is a Specific Sexual Orientation Based With Unique Lived Experiences

This is the part people keep tripping over.

Lesbian isn’t shorthand for:

• “woman who dates women”

• “sapphic”

• “WLW-adjacent”

• “queer, but no men right now”

  
  

Lesbian means exclusive attraction to women. Bisexual and pansexual people experience attraction across genders. That is a real, valid, distinct sexual orientation with its own culture, history, and needs. Those two experiences overlap, but they are not interchangeable.

When a lesbian-only town is imagined and non-lesbians immediately place themselves inside it, it reinforces a long-standing pattern: Lesbian spaces are treated as communal property instead of specific cultural spaces.

The Backlash: What People Accused Me Of (and What It Was Actually Doing)

Once I clarified that only lesbians would be residents of a hypothetical lesbian town, the backlash escalated quickly.

I was called:

• biphobic

• exclusionary

• a TERF

• a “white woman acting oppressed”

• accused of promoting segregation

  
  

Let’s unpack what each of those accusations was actually doing.

“A Lesbian-Only Town? That’s Biphobic”

What it sounds like: “You hate bisexual people.”

What it was actually doing was conflating lack of access with hostility. Naming a lesbian-only space is not the same thing as devaluing bisexual people. It is a boundary, not a hierarchy.

This accusation relies on a false equivalence fallacy: “If I’m not included, you must be against me.”

But bisexual people deserve spaces that center bisexual culture, not conditional access to lesbian ones. The real question isn’t: “Why won’t lesbians include us?” It’s: “Why does the system make bisexual people rely on lesbian spaces instead of supporting bi-centered ones?”

“Lesbians Are The Only Residents? That’s TERF Language”

This one hurt because it was built on an assumption. Why people said it: They assumed trans lesbians wouldn’t be included.

Let me be clear, unequivocally: Trans lesbians are lesbians, and up until that moment, I didn’t realize I needed to specify that. The fact that I needed to state the obvious is the point. What this accusation revealed wasn’t my exclusion, but how much damage has already been done. 

I REPEAT: Trans lesbians felt the need to ask whether they’d be welcome in a space that literally names their sexual orientation. And let’s be clear on this: that’s not because lesbian spaces are actually inherently hostile.

That’s patriarchy. The system that thrives on:

• sowing fear

• flattening definitions

• pitting marginalized people against each other

  
  

This accusation used a strawman fallacy: inventing an exclusion I never made in order to discredit the entire idea.

“Here We Go, Another ‘Oppressed White Woman’ 🙄”

This one tried to shut the conversation down entirely. What it was doing: Using my whiteness as a way to dismiss a critique of power, even though the critique was about white supremacy and systemic racism. 

I wasn’t claiming equivalence between racism and lesbophobia, I was pointing out something uncomfortable (and proven in my comments): The U.S. tolerates white separatist fantasies more easily than lesbian ones. It’s not oppression if there’s data to back a cracker up.

This move relies on derailment: redirecting attention away from structural critique and toward personal invalidation.

Why Bisexual and Pansexual People Don’t Have Enough Spaces (And Why That’s Not Lesbian Fault)

Here’s the part I want to say clearly, calmly, and without blame: Bisexual and pansexual people deserve spaces that center their experiences. And historically, those spaces are rare, underfunded, or treated as temporary.

That’s not because lesbians took something from bi/pan people. It’s because the same system that marginalizes lesbians also:

• erases bisexuality as “confusion”

• pressures bi people to “pick a side”

• rewards straight-passing relationships

• underfunds anything that doesn’t neatly fit a binary

  
  

Anger makes sense here, but it’s misdirected. The solution isn’t forcing inclusion into lesbian spaces. It’s building alongside, not insisting on access.

A Brief Note on the History of Bi/Pan Erasure

Across history and cultures, bisexuality has often been:

• absorbed into heterosexual norms

• re-labeled as experimentation

• erased once monogamy or marriage enters the picture

  
  

In many societies, same-gender behavior existed without stable identity categories, which meant bisexual people often disappeared into dominant structures, while lesbians (women refusing men entirely) were more visible targets.

That pattern continues today. Visibility comes with cost, and invisibility comes with erasure. Both deserve attention.

Why This Thought Experiment Worked

The “lesbian-only town” was never a policy proposal. I held up a mirror. And the reflection is clear as glass:

• White supremacy can imagine autonomy without national outrage

• Lesbians cannot imagine autonomy without interrogation

• Bisexual people are taught to seek belonging through access, not sovereignty

• The system depends on confusion to survive

  
  

That’s the real issue.

I’m in the Lesbian Cohort of the Rainbow Army

I will always fight for the entire LGBTQ+ community, and I am a lesbian. I will advocate for lesbian spaces, i.e., spaces that center lesbian experience without apology.

If you are a lesbian (cis, trans, nonbinary, or intersex), you belong in lesbian spaces. Period. And if you are bisexual or pansexual, I want you to have spaces that center your culture too, not as guests or exceptions, but as the focus.

Fellow queers, our anger belongs aimed upward, not sideways. Lesbian specificity is not the enemy of solidarity. It’s one of the conditions that makes real coalition possible, and I’m done pretending otherwise.