#// and just like with my main--- if you don't specify I will consider it invalid. I'm sadly not a mindreader.

[sungiftedbard]

𝐒𝐇𝐈𝐏𝐏𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐂𝐀𝐋𝐋!!!

To drop the anxiety and the wondering if they do or they don’t, here’s a post to make it nice and clear to me (and you) that you wanna ship with my muses.  All I ask is that you 𝐏𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐒𝐄 𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐂𝐈𝐅𝐘 for which of your muses this would be directed at (especially if you're a multi-muse!)

By liking this post, it means you are okay with the following:

Romantic shipping: Kissey kissey, romantic dates, and possibly intimate things. I send you all the romantic shippy memes and we drown in it.

Platonic shipping: Friends. Pals. Allies. Besties.

Familial shipping: Family. Siblings. Maybe adopted? Could be good or bad.

Enemies: I hate you and you hate me. Rivalry. It's complicated.

[corgisocks]

wait just curious, why don't u believe in the concept of sexuality? like what do u mean

warning: very long post incoming because i got carried away oops

POINT A: it doesn’t work for everyone

what we think is uncertainty actually isn’t, but we’re afraid of it anyway. it’s referred to as ‘questioning’ and that makes people feel like they have to leave that ‘stage’ of not having a label. but i find that the most certain thing in the universe is that we can’t know anything for certain, and that comforts me. it’s also what’s helped me accept myself as well as others–i’m not inclined to make assumptions or jump to conclusions anymore, so i have more potential to actually understand people. i think.

in regards to ‘sexuality’? i don’t need to know what my preferences are. it’s not like i’m seeking people out based on them; i’m just letting stuff happen. and i’m acting on my feelings genuinely, too–like, i’m not confusing attraction or wanting to ‘be with someone’ with anything. i have no standards for any kind of bond; i’m open to anything, really, as long as it doesn’t harm anyone involved.

i’m not saying i’m like ‘above’ having a sexuality or that my way of existing is the ‘right’ way or whatever. it’s just what’s worked best for me (whereas attempting to label myself has actually been detrimental in many respects). and from there, i’ve reached this conclusion:

POINT B: sexual preferences are a thing, but sexuality doesn’t have to be.

you might be going “wtf???” right now, but hear me out:

labels are fucking CONFUSING. it’s like people can’t always find labels to fit into, so more often than not, they settle for an imperfect one. and then others incorrectly judge them based on it. or like people who also use the label might not accept you if you’re not like them. or like…they misunderstand you. and from there you stop understanding yourself. granted, this isn’t what happens to everyone, but the fact that it IS happening is a problem. it’s happened to me. it’s happened to people in my life. heck, it’s happened to a lot of people in my friend group–they were too scared to speak up about it until i did, and even then, they don’t trust the queer activist/very openly bisexual/social justice enthusiast of the group (who still assumes that all of us are exclusively heterosexual and complains that they don’t have enough non-straight friends) to know because they’re terrified that they’ll be shut down by them like i was. 

that one friend assumed i was ‘too pansexual to be able to get it’ or that i was ‘claiming not to be straight in order to make it seem like [i’m] a good person.’ 

she was so set on sticking to the concept of everyone having a sexuality that she felt more inclined to invalidate me than she did to support me regardless of her own views. and it fucking hurt.

POINT C: sexuality is a fabricated concept based upon heteronormativity

sexuality, from what i can tell, is primarily related to gender (re: homo vs hetero vs bi vs pansexual/romantic, etc). then it’s based upon extent (i.e. demi, allo, lith, asexual/romantic, etc). then categorisation is considered.

but like…how does ‘gender’ actually apply to it? do we even know? like, does being gay include attraction to people who aren’t cis? if it does then, does that mean those people’s concept of gender is not good or that they’re immoral or less valid or WHAT? and does it depend on one’s personal definitions of things? like…it’s mind-boggling. it probably prevents people from expressing themselves fully. it keeps people from actually understanding themselves and staying true to that. and it’s caused me and many others a lot of confusion.

you don’t have to identify as straight to only want to date people whom you perceive to be belonging to the opposite sex, and you don’t have to specify romantic vs sexual attraction in order to prove it. you don’t have to identify as bisexual in order to make it known that your sexual attraction isn’t necessarily limited by gender.

unfortunately, there is something that prevents people from actually believing this, hence the importance we place upon ‘coming out’, representation, and the like. that something is called heteronormativity.

here is an example of heteronormativity:

person a: i’m not like all these people getting married to the opposite sex and having kids. i like the idea of marriage but i don’t want a husband; i want a wife

person b: you’ll come around one day and have beautiful children with a lovely man. you’ll be such a good wife and mother…

person a: no…fyi……i like vagina.

person b: you’re delusional. one of these days you’ll realise that you only want to be with men and you like the idea of having a husband and–

person a: no. i’m not like that. i’m DIFFERENT.

see what i’m getting at here? heteronormativity, in some cases, can lead to the need to explicitly differentiate from others in order for them to actually be understood. that is why sexuality exists instead of something similar to it just being an aspect of one’s sexual preferences.

here is a timeline (of sorts?) of the most frustrating concept of all, aka heteronormativity:

- a very very long time ago, on this wonderful planet we call earth, life was created.

- pretty much every life form’s goal was to survive and/or carry on its species because that’s all they were equipped to do. they didn’t have the time or energy to do other things.

- as such, many species have mating rituals/events. our counterpart to that is partnership, and it’s probably because humans value interpersonal connection AND it’s generally easier to work with someone than alone when it comes to optimising one’s chances (whether in regards to a group/species/an individual) of survival.

- we WANTED to optimise our chances of survival, so we’ve been trying to. that’s why humans have become the 'most advanced’ species on the planet even though many species that are technically 'smarter’ than us have remained content with doing what they’ve been doing for millennia.

- that is also why couples have always tended to consist of people who can reproduce with one another. sex happened to be pleasurable for some people, sure, but partnership was about reproduction because reproduction contributes to the continuation of a species. since specific types of sexual intercourse are directly linked to reproduction, the two things became intertwined to the point where it became a norm, hence the existence of heteronormativity. just because it exists doesn’t mean it’s actually biologically normal; in fact, there probably IS no normal as we each have our own individual preferences that don’t have to depend on anything. THAT should be the norm.

- sexual intercourse can lead to reproduction and/or pleasure (or even neither of the two). however, reproduction is directly linked to neither pleasure nor all types of sex, so the concept of 'a->b and a->c so b->c’ (sex->reproduction and sex->pleasure so reproduction->pleasure) does not work at all here because not even the first two situations are always true.

- most people in first-world countries don’t need to worry about reproduction anymore unless it’s in regards to making the choice to procreate. our main goal has shifted from survival to surviving comfortably. as such, our long-surviving 'norms’ for being in relationships (and the norm of valuing being in a relationship at all) are obsolete because the things that led to their existence are obsolete.

we still have instincts, though. they are connected to survival/reproduction/fertility, but we’ve passed that point as a species. we don’t need to worry about dominance or 'who will have the best kids’ or having kids at all anymore.

instead, people who are already equipped to survive generally need to worry about living their lives to the fullest or living their truth or just living well enough, whatever that may mean to them. and when an outdated version of that prevents them from achieving that and even makes their lives worse in the process, that’s how we know we need to change. it’s not just about morals; it’s about logic, too, especially considering that that logic is meant to validate people.

how does this apply to sexuality? 

well, it’s simple: it stemmed from the fabrication of heteronormativity and the gender binary (which kept being reinforced by religious establishments, etc, because they’d been 'normal’ anyway). heteronormativity and the binary didn’t apply to everyone, so those people were labelled as being different, and umbrella terms serve to cover those who don’t conform to societal standards that don’t even need to exist. by using such terms, even with good intentions, we might be reinforcing those standards; we’re inadvertently differentiating ourselves further from what is supposedly typical. we’re giving ourselves more of a voice and making ourselves more visible, sure; people don’t doubt that we exist anymore, but we need to improve upon that. we’re connecting over similar experiences, too, which is part of the reason why umbrella terms usually refer to communities (and why people can be a part of them without having to label themselves). but that’s not the same thing as normalisation–we’re just becoming a more vocal and more confused 'minority’ that isn’t actually a minority at all.

we’re confused as fuck. and we’re angry; we’re upset; we want change. but most importantly, we NEED change for everyone’s sake. this is my justification for it.