imakeupthingstogetsadabout

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Unrealistic dreams

I think.. I think the best gift I could get for Christmas is a wheelchair. I think me having difficulty even writing that down is very telling of my current situation.

I have a family that vehemently denies me being anything even remotely close to disabled. Despite the fact I have fatigue and moderate joint pain. Despite the fact I almost always use a cane, because I have a very justified fear that otherwise I would collapse while walking around the house. Or god forbid, on the stairs. Stairs which, by the way, have really fucking sharp metal edges. That I tripped on multiple times, and ended up with bruised feet.

But no, I cannot even muster up the courage to ask my mother to 'please please please get me one, it would help me sooooo much', because every time I mention my pain and fatigue, I get some variety of: 'Don't worry, it's just growing pains!' or 'Don't worry, you'll be healthy again in no time!'. I don't have it in me to tell her I've been dealing with fatigue since I was ten, and that I've just learned to ignore the complete darkness that consumes my vision for several seconds when I stand up/move too quickly.

The only cons of using a wheelchair I can think of are the inaccessibility of my home (since I sleep upstairs) and of school (it's on a fucking hill that they stuffed with cobblestone). But honestly, I would gladly move all of my stuff downstairs if it meant I could move without the feeling that someone is slowly cutting my tendons open with a chainsaw. I would gladly suffer my painfully long way up to the semi-accessible pavement that is by the school if it meant I didn't have to move my useless fucking legs, that everyone so KINDLY insists MUST BE Fiiiiine, because I'm 'too young to have a chronic illness'.

So, yeah. I kind of think I need one, but I probably won't get one because, if you either didn't know or live in some sort of accessibility paradise (if so, man, I wish I was you so much..), they are ridiculously expensive among other reasons I mentioned above. It's still nice to dream, though. Even if it hurts.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Hi guys! Here’s some advice from a cane user on how to spot a fake cane user/disability faker!

YOU CANT

You can not spot a “fake disabled” cane user. You can not know if someone’s “really disabled”, much less by just looking at them. Here are some common misconceptions.

“Cane users always need their canes. If they walk without it or put it away when it’s inconvenient, they’re faking”: WRONG! Many cane users are what we call “ambulatory” cane users. This means they don’t always need their canes to walk. I’m an ambulatory cane user, and I experience really horrible leg pain on the daily. However, I don’t always use my cane, and when I don’t need to walk or stand a lot in a certain place I don’t use it. And when I do use it, I may lift it off the ground or carry it in places that are sandy, gravelly, or otherwise hinder my cane.

“Cane users walk abnormally without their canes, someone who walks normally without their cane is faking”: WRONG! Many ambulatory cane users can walk in a way that seems “normal”. This doesn’t mean they’re not in pain, or not “really disabled”. This just means that their condition doesn’t cause a noticeable difference in walking, and likely manifests in a different way.

“Cane users always need their cane, someone who doesn’t use their cane at home is faking”: WRONG! Cane users may not use their canes at home, because at home they may be able to do things like sit down wherever and whenever, regain more spoons, and use other mobility aids. Additionally, some ambulatory cane users only need or use their canes when they are doing something physically taxing, like going on a hike or standing in a long line.

“My cane user friend told me this person looks like they’re faking, so it must be true”: WRONG! Being a cane user doesn’t immediately make you an expert on all different conditions and experiences. Your friend does not know the random cane user walking down the street, they are going off looks and stereotypes. Disabled people are not immune to being ableist.

“They enjoy their cane too much/they’re too happy/they decorate their cane, so they can’t actually be in enough pain to need a cane” WRONG! We’re people like everyone else, and we experience positive emotions too, even if we go through a lot of pain. To me, customizing my cane is like getting a tattoo or putting streaks in my hair, it’s a way of self expression. And we deserve to be able to talk openly about our full experience, which include the parts we’re neutral or happy about.

“They’re one of those cringey teenagers who name themselves arson and like dsmp, so they’re probably faking” WRONG! Do I even have to explain why saying someone isn’t disabled because of their name and interests is messed up and also stupid? Or did you already know that and just wanted to make fun of a disabled teenager?

“They’re too young to be using a cane, so they must be faking” WRONG! there are lots of disabilities or injuries that can cause young people to need a mobility aid. For example, I use a cane for my fibromyalgia.

“They only use it in private places, and never in places where people recognize them, so they must be faking” WRONG! In a world where anyone can just randomly take out their phone, take a picture of a cane user, and post them online to be made fun of, it can be stressful to use a cane in public areas. Also, they may not want people to ask questions, or they may feel embarrassed about it.

“I saw them switch hands, so they must be faking” WRONG! There are different reasons a cane used might do this, but I’m going to use my experience as an example. My fibromyalgia is not consistent. Sometimes one leg hurts more then the other. But as I said, fibromyalgia is inconsistent, and sometimes my other leg will start to hurt more or need more support, which is when I switch hands. And when both my legs hurt equally, I may switch my hand if it’s getting too sore.

“They told me they feel like they’re faking when they use their cane, doesn’t that mean they don’t really need it?” WRONG! Imposter syndrome is strong in a lot of disabled people, especially when for a lot of our lives we were told by doctors that we were fine and just being dramatic. Anxiety is also comorbid with a lot of physically disabilities, which only strengthens this. To add to this, something that I’ve felt and seen other disabled people talk about it, when their disability aid lessens the pain, they start thinking “well I’m not in that much pain so I don’t really need it” even though the reason they’re not in that much pain is because of the aid. I know it seems dumb, but imposter syndrome can be that strong and affects disabled people a lot.

“They don’t have a diagnosis, so they must be faking” WRONG! First of all, diagnoses are expensive. On their own they’re often already expensive, but counting the tons of tests you have to take to confirm the diagnosis? Absolutely ludicrous. Some may also choose not to get a diagnosis, so that they don’t have to deal with the prejudice and setbacks of being diagnosed. Also, some people use a cane for injuries, and for stress or fatigue related pains.

These are only a few of the things I commonly hear from fakeclaimers, and I wanted to just put out a reminder that fakeclaiming hurts the disabled community much, much more than it does ableists. Next time you see someone with a cane switch hands, or someone with a wheelchair stand up, or someone with crutches put them down, before you immediately call them out to a friend, take a picture, or write a post: does your fakeclaim rely on stereotypes? Are your reasons things that apply to ambulatory aid users?

If so, just stop. Be mindful. Please.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

"low support needs disabled people are often not believed to have a disability at all and therefore struggle to get accommodations."

"high support needs disabled people's accommodations are often seen as 'too much' and therefore are not met."

"neurodivergent people's needs are often dismissed because nothing is physically wrong with them."

"physically disabled people people often cannot physically access buildings and people refuse to do anything about it."

"invisibly disabled people are seen as lazy by society."

"visibly disabled people are ostracized from society."

IT'S ALMOST LIKE THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A SOCIALLY ACCEPTABLE DISABILITY

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Good trope: Character yelling, "It's not what it looks like!" while doing exactly what it looks like.

Great trope: Character yelling, "It's not what it looks like!" while doing something so unfathomable that the person who interrupted them can't even begin to attempt to figure out what the hell it is they're seeing.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Not every character needs to be in a romantic relationship reblog if you agree

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

I just saw a post on my Tumblr feed. It's overarching argument was "love is what makes us human, but everyone experiences some kind of love. There's lots of types of love, ex. Love for family, friends, pets, food, hobbies, etc and everyone experiences love for something in some way"

Okay. So. No ! Like I understand the full point that you're trying to establish, but I think it's wrong (and ofc, no hate to OP).

(Large rant under the cut)

Firstly, some people simply do not experience love. Some people quite literally cannot/will not ever experience love. That's okay. It's something that lots of people are comfortable with, and nobody should feel like their lack of love needs to be supplemented with other things that they enjoy

Second, you can't define people's very own experiences of love for them. Lots of people (myself included) reject the word love. That being said, I personally do use the word love to describe some aspects of my life. I use the word love towards my family, my hobbies, towards random passive objects, whatever I want. HOWEVER, other people may not. Other people might feel exactly the sensation that an allo person feels, but they don't need to call it love. That's how platonic attraction works for me: I feel what people normally describe as friendship, but it feels wrong for me to call that love. That doesn't change what I feel, I just don't want to call it love.

Last, and in my opinion most importantly, is that it's not the point. That's never been the point. It's not about whether someone feels love or not. The real question is why is anyone trying to impose their own opinions of humanity on anyone else. It shouldn't matter either way, and I don't need love to justify my humanity - I am inherently human because I am human. I refuse to define anyone's humanity for them, with or without love, and I refuse to be defined by others. Love does not make us human, our humanity makes us human. Anyone who can't understand the value of inherent humanity shouldn't be talking about anyone else's.

So the next time you feel like someone just "isn't admitting that they love" and that "all people love something, so that is what makes us human", remember that it's not up to you. Who are you to define me. Who are you to tell me that I'm human because I don't feel love. Who are you to tell me that I'm human because I do feel love.

I know what I am, and don't need anyone's permission to be human.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

I've grown tired of posts that 'affirm' queer sexuality that throw asexual queer people under the bus. I'm tired of puritan sanitisation being blamed on the boring sexless frigid queers and not the long history and system of sexual puritanism which, spoiler alert, never supported sexless queer people ace or not regardless. I'm tired of 'progressive' compulsory sexuality being promoted and supported with a 'oh yeah some people are ace' slapped in at the end. I'm tired of every single post about how the sexless uwu pink sapphics and flowercrown gay boys or whatever scapegoat we're picking today is causing the downfall of the community and representation and not y'know, actual lesbophobia, homophobia etc. I'm tired of everyone assuming to be an asexual and/or sexless queer person means being white, feminine, delicate and soft because they can't imagine Blackness and masculinity as something compatible with being ace and/or sexless. I'm tired of asexual and/or sexless queerness being acknowledged as long we accept we're a niche minority and different from 'normal' and 'real' queerness. I'm tired of every recognition of asexual queerness being adlibbed with 'this is valid but remember most queer people are NOT like this' 'you're valid but remember the real queers fuck and we're not boring like these lot!' because the idea of a lesbian, gay, bi, pan or trans asexual is that uncomfortable and 'bad representation' for people to comprehend apparently. I'm tired of asexual and sexless being used as insults to attack other queer people and characters who 'fail' to live up to their queerness. I'm tired of queerness being that needs to be lived up to in the first place and not just something you are. I'm very tired of every post that's supposed to affirm my identity always degrading the other. I'm tired of being an other in a group of others.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Its raining...

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Look, a random meme! Can i just post this on tumblr like that? I guess we'll see...

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

happy 9th anniversary undertale!!!

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

I still find it very weird that wanting aroace characters to not be in any sort of relationship and not wanting them to be shipped is something that some people have a problem with. That is the entire reason why I want anything to have aroace representation, to show someone being entirely alone and happy that way.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Being aromantic is fun until I interact with the outside world for one (1) second

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Here are some facts about the aspec community whereas if you struggle to grasp or comprehend them, you probably still have some amatonormativity / allonormativity to unlearn:

Asexual people can have and desire romantic relationships even if sex is off the table for them.

Some asexual people like sexual content in fiction but not in real life.

There's a difference between an aroallo person and a non-committal cishet. No your cheating ex boyfriend who only cares about sex isn't automatically aromantic.

Being aroallo is not synonymous with a high libido.

Queerplatonic relationships can look exactly like an allonormative romantic relationship and not be one because things like kissing etc. aren't inherently romantic.

Asexual people can wear and like clothing that is revealing or commonly regarded as sexual without it meaning that they desire sex.

NOTHING but literal intercourse is inherently sexual. Kissing isn't inherently sexual. Not even french-kissing or making out. Neck kisses aren't inherently sexual. Flirting isn't inherently sexual. Hell, I only found out like two weeks ago that some people, even in the ace community, consider these things to be inherently sexual.

No form of affection is inherently romantic either. Kissing isn't inherently romantic. Hand-holding isn't inherently romantic. Cuddling isn't inherently romantic. Even all of these things in combination aren't automatically indicative of a romantic relationship.

You define whether something is sexual or romantic to YOU. This does not mean it is to everyone else.

Some aspecs just don't want a partner at all

Some aspecs aren't aromantic but don't mind not having a partner either.

A QPR isn't the only other option aside from platonic or romantic relationships. A QPR also isn't romance lite or the aro version of a romantic relationship.

Being demisexual or gray ace doesn't automatically make someone sex-favorable

Frayromantic people feel romantic attraction until they develop a close bond with the person. The romantic attraction fading does NOT necessarily mean they care about that person less or don't desire a committed relationship with them because relationships and attraction isn't hierarchical.

Some people don't want to engage with sexual content at all.

If you read these and you realize these never occurred to you or that you have been assuming some things, that's not a judgement of you. We all have internalized allonormativity and amatonormativity. It just means there's work to do.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Sigh. The response to "asexuals are actually just childish and scared of sex" isn't "well actually you're wrong because we write the filthiest smut in existence" or "what about asexuals who know all about kink" or "I'm asexual and I love making sex jokes", NO, that's not the fucking point. I don't care. The point is that regardless of how an individual feels about sex they deserve to be respected and treated as an adult, even if the thought of sex grosses them out. I am asexual, reading smut makes me cringe (feel cringe as in the original sense of the word) and looking at anything nsfw makes me mildly uncomfortable at best, and I only like sex jokes to a certain extent. This doesn't make me a fucking child because sex is not what makes someone an adult in the first place.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

I’m aromantic but not asexual so most people think I’m evil or something which is fine but I’d rather they think I’m evil for real reasons. Like my plans for world domination

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Kind of horrible and terrible that so many queer activists, I daresay even most of them, completely ignore or put down people who are sex-repulsed and will never NOT be sex-replused. Like, it is actually disgusting. I hear lots of 'kink belongs at pride' and 'pride includes love AND sex', but I never, EVER hear people saying that pride involves people who refrain from sex just because they do not want it and not because they have any trauma or medical related reasons. I only see people saying shit like 'if you can't handle sex then you do not deserve to be at pride.. And also you are a horrible person by the way :) and you are immature :3'. It actually grosses me out so much. Being sex positive means you also have to support people who are not at all interested in anything sexual with no exceptions, or you are just as bad as people who are sex negative. Being sex repulsed does not mean sex negative. I daresay people who idolize queer people that have sex or participate in sexual things and ignore, put down or do not believe in people who will never want anything sexual are actively contributing to sex negativity. People will accept you if you are asexual until they realize that you are asexual AND fully repulsed to sex, and most of the time, pride is not fully accessible for these people. It is gross. It is 2024. Learn that not everyone needs to do sexual shit and learn that just because someone doesn't want sex or anything of the type and never will doesn't mean you're better than them. Plus, I have seen people force sexual things onto sex repulsed individuals, and somehow people do not see that as sexual assault, regardless of if it's actual rape or shaming someone for not liking sex and telling them they either are faking it or that they need to like sex. Of course they are different degrees of sexual assault, but they both are to some degree. It is horrifying. Even at pride events, I have seen people who were made uncomfortable by people around them discussing sexual topics and then getting teased for wanting to go somewhere without any discussion of sex. Are you serious? Really? In the year 2024? Where everybody is supposed to be accepted regardless of sexual or romantic orientation? Do people not realize that 'accepting everybody regardless of their sexual orientation' means accepting people whose sexual orientation is not only not experiencing sexual attracting but ALSO not WANTING sex by their own choice, even when close with someone or even when and if they get a partner. I am not sex negative, but if someone who participates in sexual activities thinks they are better or more mature than someone who doesn't, I am going to get mad. We will support your sexual orientation so long as you support our sexual orientation. Everybody in the LGBT+ community has to support each other, or there will be no pride and there will be no unity.

[imakeupthingstogetsadabout]

Nah cuz personally, fuck the whole "aro and ace people can still love in other ways, they're not heartless!" thing

Because respectfully, no, I don't. I don't owe anyone queer-platonic love, I don't owe anyone platonic love, hell I don't even owe anyone familial love. How about we separate the idea of loving someone and caring for someone. I care about my friends. I care about my family. But I don't owe it to anyone to describe that feeling as love, even without a romantic or sexual context. Love loses is not purely for rose love. It is the complete disregard of the concept. Love loses. Love loses. I don't owe anyone love to be considered a real, living, deserving person.