#<- of defending a cis guy's masculinity to be a guy. there is literally no pressure for them to be trans why make it such a big deal

[dude-iloveu]

yea seriously whats with this site and protecting cis men's feelings on their masculinity

[lurksunderthebed]

Funnily enough i had a long ass convo with one of the dudebros that just decided to drop by and comment how Ghost and Soap are NOT GAY!!! on one of the comment's that initially didn't even mention anything about them like that other than saying "they could have been friends or something more like romantic", and this guy just lost it. Problem with them is they wanna latch onto their "role" models so desperately it threatens their masculinity when someone dares to read these characters as anything other than cis het man.

Bear with me it's gonna be one long ass essay; The need to gatekeep a certain character because their views don't aling with how the rest of us choose to interpret them because according to them, their view is a fact but ours that's not aligning with their bias is a headcanon, make it make sense. Saying and seething that "Ghost isn't GAY!!!" isn't a fact, that sounds like an agenda to me because seeing Ghost as a bi/pan anything else doesn't count in the "manly man" category for toxic dudebros because masculine men only are allowed to dominate and bang women, right? It just shows how simple minded and uneducated the lot of them really are. Cannot fathom man and a woman having a platonic bond without saying "yeah they're polygamous, that's a thing in military for men to have side bitches" whilst defending fiercely Ghost and Soap as being anything other than "bros" because they feel attacked.

Don't get me started on the whole double standard issue either; it's very hot and cute when Ghost threatens Milena but it's disgusting and no no for Ghost and Soap who literally have an established bond between them and clearly care for one another. Same goes for Valeria, they were ready to pair her with Soap just because it was a woman and a man. A man has to bang chicks lol/ This philosophy is so tiring and dumb that it just shows you how a cis het man actually sees women. And i'd go as far as to say it implies misogyny aswell. Take that as you will. But this issue is present in every sort of fandom whose target audience is mostly basement dwellers that rely on their mums for a brand new GPU.

I think the whole thing has to do with projection. When it comes to people who lash out and get ridiculously upset about these sorts of things, especially about a FICTIONAL character it's cause they view it as an attack on themselves.

Which is all sorts of sad, because we're not talking facts here or canonical events, it's about how those fans see themselves in their fav characters.

As I said earlier, you could read into people's sexualities all you want. Aside from Laswell hilariously enough, there isn't any definitive proof of het/gay/etc in any character in 141. If there was, you bet my overly analytical self would find it and make a note of it for Ghost or Soap.

There's arguably more proof on Ghost being queer than him being straight/het which is the funniest thing. The easiest read is him being just not interested in people as a whole, especially with how much he doesn't really interact with others personally (outside of Soap).

Personally, I think when it comes to those sorts of people it's best to just leave it be. No amount of actual factual basis or any sort of reason will change their minds. Because it's not the characters in question that is the issue, it's themselves as people that push their own agenda into it.

Again irony at its finest. For all the people out there upset at those pushing the "gay agenda" onto these characters, it's really themselves pushing their own values onto them. Realising this would require more self reflection than most of that vocal fanbase actually have.

[vitalconviction]

genesis for the ask meme :3

Sexuality Headcanon:

gay queer generally unlabelled, to the shock of no one who actually knows him personally but more shocking to people who only hear him out of context speaking in what's essentially gayer riddles than the riddler himself has put out

Gender Headcanon:

honestly, i like him being either ftm or just generally male adjacent with more masculine inclinations, he finds power in the manipulation of the imagery of what a 'man' is and so he runs with it. im personally flexible with this so im applying that back onto genesis as someone flexible with something like gender. this dude spends his time dissecting a centuries old unfinished text writing dissertations on it, he could without a doubt dissect the notions of gender along the way because of how gender is something potent in literature and poetry--linking it back to what it means to be a hero in a story about a female goddess where the modern depiction of heros is abundantly male

A ship I have with said character:

sephesis, strifesodos, valenstrifesodos, gentseng, genvin, GSC + Vincent too, if I feel like he's too lonely and start MISSING MY BOY!

I think he's almost versatile in how he could theorhetically romance anyone, but it's himself who stands in the way of that. If anyone could actually make him get out his own way, even if just a slight moment, I think these are the people who could.

A BROTP I have with said character:

gengeal, angenesis -- They're literally like. they fufill a brother dynamic to me. That's what I mean by broship. Of course people have made the (increasingly likely) argument that they actually are brothers on a semi-real-world-impossible scale, but I don't even care about the biology. Truly and fully they have such a strange dysfunctional relationship that is founded on both love and a resentment on some level. It's really strange and provoking. I think their bond is something like siblings raised to go against each other but despite everything still try to love one another. Of course an added romantic element would further complicate this and I fucking love interpersonal strife and drama so I'm not completely turning away from the idea of it, but it isn't my favourite ship inclination. I also love the idea of them horrifyingly finding out they're somewhere like 0.7% related to each other in some way but that's just my personal LOL session fuel (holdover from being in the dc fandom half my life and adoring all the batships HAHAHA)

A NOTP I have with said character:

eeh sometimes gengeal? Otherwise, mostly cis women characters because I just. I can't see him going for a non gender queer or GNC person, he is baked in queerness and so are his tastes! cant take the gay out of the gaylord LOL

A random headcanon:

His birthday has to be on a new years celebration day or start of a season change for me! For example, he could be born January 1st, literally a genesis i.e. start of the new year! That or he's born March 21 as the start of spring and the start of a new season.

I also like to use Tibetan influences in his crafting, reasoning being Banora is partially inspired by Tibet with the fruit and all, alongside Ryukyuan (Gackt W for once) + Minnan :D

Also, as for the aforementioned ships, he's very inclined towards neurodivergent people as well clearly LOL all his love interests are so off the walls non-neurotypicals it makes my heart sing and swell with pride

General Opinion over said character:

This guy are sick!!!!!! His designs gorgeous and I love his motifs, I don't get why people don't like him other than just not liking such obviously autistic people in media LOL like he's always been so endearing to me! I won't ever stop defending this dude

[coolspork]

I hate to defend men but uh. Sometimes when I (bi butch transmasc) am in sapphic or afab dominant spaces/around other xlw queer ppl the misandry gets a little out there and then they hit me with the "don't worry tho when I'm talking about men I don't mean *you* you're different" right after spending like 20 minutes saying some of the most objectifying and dehumanizing blanket degrading statements about not just men but ppl who are attracted to men?? And it's never about any of the actual toxic masculinity or dangerous gender roles they're quickly brushing past to just dunk on men as a category.

Like yea sure I'm not a cis guy but it's weird to me that you're drawing arbitrary lines in the sand that divide the human population between morally pure genders and morally corrupt genders. I think you have a problem

Editing this so no one gets the wrong idea: the point of this post is that trying to assign morality based on gender identity is literally how TERFs target transfems and to a much lesser extent transmascs. Transwomen, transfems, and amab non-binary people are actively harmed by this kind of arbitrary line drawing because it legitimizes the TERF idea that there is a valid reason to be suspicious of someone based on their gender. TERFs don't care how you identify, they're bioessentialists. Validating their belief that one gender is inherently more trustworthy or morally upright than another just opens the door for them to try and claim that someone belongs in the "bad" category because of "biology". The vilification of masculinity has been used over and over again against queer folks even by other queer folks. Transfems and sapphics are almost always on the receiving end. The point of queer liberation is to decouple ourselves from cis het ideologies about "masc strong and violent and scary, fem weak and helpless and innocent" the latter is easily more visible because feminism really shines a spotlight on it. Femininity, regardless of its wearer, is ascribed traditionally as weakness, and feminism seeks to combat that stereotype. On the other hand though Masculinity is getting the opposite treatment and while there is certainly not as much stigma around masculinity the idea that femininity can be decoupled from gender roles while masculinity must remain rigid basically just gives terfs, racists, and anyone else who wants to find a way to put ppl down a new box to throw folks at. Allowing masculinity to become an innately oppositional identity means throwing a lot of people under the bus whether or not they choose to identify with it. Anyone that straddles eurocentric gender lines is at risk. The point here is not "oh no men oppressed" the point is that in seeking our own liberation from labels and tradition we shouldn't put someone else further back into that box because the existence of the box means there's somewhere for bigots hiding behind our communities to try and dispose of members they don't like.

You want to escape the meat grinder? Great. Now get rid of rhe meat grinder all together so no one uses it while you're not looking. And maybe don't throw other people into it while you're escaping.

TL;DR: Demonize the patriarchy, not the masculine.

[dwarf-vader-of-middle-earth]

Someone made a post asking what makes you unattractive. And well... For me, that's everything.

I'm fat, hairy, short as a literal Dwarf, trans man, masculine to my death and beyond and not the slightest bit feminine, gay, stronger physically than most men.

This is all horrible because: gay men that I've met tend to go for hairless femboy twinks, of which I am nowhere near being myself nor do I desire to be any of those things. They want a partner to fetishize, who really is more of a woman than a man, and then they'll proceed to turn down actual women (both cis and trans), further proving they just want to fetishize a dude and nothing more. Additionally, men don't like to feel undermined in strength, and therefore, they don't want a dude half their size who can bridal style carry them, and be unable to do so themselves to the guy who only reaches their stomach. They don't want a man who lands every axe he throws into a target, and who can craft him an iron blade upon request. They don't want to be defended with love, they want to possess their partner and call that love.

Like, I clearly was born in the wrong time. In medieval days, I'd have thrived with crafting and fighting to defend the people and land, I'd impress men easily who were raised to admire strength rather than undermine it, and though our love wouldn't be protected by law, it would be by society who would appreciate me and my partner, whoever he would be. And that's more than I get here, in modern days, where I'm just seen as a letdown and false man born and made to be someone's fantasy that spends his life satisfying his keeper's desires.

I sincerely feel unloved romantically, and undesirable romantically. I just want to have a man who sees me as a man instead of a fetish, who sees me as I am and accepts that instead of trying to see what he wants to see and isn't really there. Some guy who will appreciate all my qualities instead of trying to change them to fit his fantasies by making me shave, lose weight, whatever. I want to take my man axe throwing and not feel bad if he loses to me. I want to take him to LARPs and go exploring in the woods where we fight together to defend each other against enemies because of genuine love for each other, not desperation of one and fetishization of another. I want to make trinkets and blades and maybe even armor if I'm risky enough, fit to him and have him appreciate what I make instead of finding it weird that I'm blacksmithing in the grand year 2024. I want him to love me for who I am how I am, as I'd do the same to him.

But in 6 years, I've yet to find a single one who sees me that way. All men see when they look at me is a fetish, a fantasy, and a sexual desire. Someone to undermine for being lesser just because he's trans.

[ponderosapineneedles]

Not "not all men" but also I feel like having close friends who are men (even cis men!) and watching them grow and become better people just like I did in high school and after, is good for me

Like men are just people, and capable of being selfish and self-absorbed, but also capable of reasoning through things and examining the world around them

And like they might need a little more explaining to see how misogyny works, but they absolutely can and do acknowledge it and actively try to resist it (sometimes clumsily, sometimes with remarkable clarity of insight)

And I think it's cool when a cis guy can examine his gender and go "yep, I'm still a dude, but I feel a lot more confident about that now and it's good to know I don't have to defend my masculinity or define it oppositionally to femininity or women"

Like it gives me hope to know that men can genuinely be our allies in the fight against misogyny? And even if there's some self interest in there, like how toxic masculinity is miserable to perform, a lot of people were first like. "Wow what's happening to women is so unfair, those are my friends and thats fucked up" before they even got to that point.

It also kind of gives me context for when men are genuinely just being selfish assholes. Like refusing to acknowledge basic instances of misogyny is, at this point, just acting in bad faith.

And BECAUSE it's "not all men" I have a lot less patience for that kind of thing, because I know that men actually can have empathy and relate to the position women are in, and don't literally drop 50 IQ points when you explain basic ethics to them. They are just being an asshole and it's probably not worth the time you will waste.

[projectilecry]

i have no formal training and i’ll fight this bitch. comfortably. no hesitation.

will it be a Rules Fight? no. i don’t know the fucking rules. i couldn’t win if i played by the fucking rules because i’m five feet tall and that’s it. but i have teeth!! this creature bites in self defense!! and honestly fighting scrappy to actually defend oneself will always be more ‘manly’ in my books than making up silly rules for it. to me it’s either like. go for it or don’t. y’know. not to be toxicly masculine but like. man up and bite me bitch. or don’t. your choice.

anyways. yes i have a hubris. i am aware. but he looks silly (negative) and very biteable (negative). like look at all that surface area for my teeth. and since i’m five feet tall and squirrely as hell? i’ve got weaselly little limbs. perfect for kicking dick. you may have a gmo-free cock but you also have a weak point my good sir!! and i do not suffer from such ailments!! physical balls are only an unnecessary evil that holds you back!!

also like. has he ever seen a trans man. like a buff strong trans man. i looked him up and he’s 6’0” 170lbs apparently. which isn’t that big. like sure you’re Stereotypically Man Sized. but there are plenty of trans guys out there similarly sized and even bigger. there are plenty of trans guys over six feet. sure not as many proportionally as there are cis guys, but c’mon you’re only asking for ten representatives. there are way more than that. like. the first public figure trans guy that is coming to my head is taller than that and was even before transitioning at all. and weight can be changed nearly completely with muscle and effort if you’re actually into that type of shit. plus ‘women’ can have advantages over ‘men’ in fights because of differing weight and mass distribution making them harder to knock over, have naturally more powerful legs, etc, and also because it makes them an opponent that the cis man who fights cis men isn’t used to taking on causing there to be a need for slight change in fighting style, etc. individuals assigned female at birth sure can be slightly different from the average man he’s used to fighting, but that puts him at a disadvantage, not an advantage. i’m 100% sure that there are cis women who could beat him easily. he’s not some god, he’s not seven feet tall and 400lbs, he’s Just A Guy. with some money and a little training.

(also have you even seen street fights with women. they’re brutal. like wtf that’s a whole seven new ways to violate the geneva convention i haven’t thought of before. anyone raised with adjacency to that is going to come at things from a different angle. and i’m pretty sure the Literal War Crimes angle is going to win out?? just a hunch.)

anyways that bitch sucks, unless he’s willing to concede gracefully when he (expectedly) loses, in which y’know what you just gave some rad trans guys an opportunity to show their strength which is cool and didn’t complain about it so we’re even i suppose.

[the-somwthing]

Hey anon, I deleted all those messages for your sake. I figured that maybe you didn’t realize the implications of what you were saying, (and I feel like you still don’t? but I feel like you have honest intentions) but like, you GOTTA loosen up.

You know what a lot of ppl probably don’t care about this so I’ll put a cut here v

First of all, it was not “one instance of dressing like a girl”. Otherwise I’d headcanon the entire male empires cast as some form of transfem (remember that party lol). Which AGAIN leads me to wonder if you’re this harsh on the millions of transfem grian headcanoners? Because (and anyone can expand on it if they want) it looks like it’s just that one instance of Ariana Griande that caused the hc? Which, as I literally said in the post, I don’t share that headcanon, so it’s again REALLY WEIRD that you’re accusing me of seeing a man dress feminine once and headcanoning them as a trans woman when you literally JUST saw me NOT doing that.

It’s like… you said you love transfem headcanons, but then how are YOU making them? Because like… do you think you can only make transfem headcanons when they NEVER dress femininely? You can only headcanon it with NO BASIS otherwise it’s claiming that men who dress femininely must all secretly be women? Like yes I’m aware there are other things characters can do to make you think that, but you GOTTA ADMIT that liking feminine things IS ONE OF THEM. And that can coexist with “some men like feminine things and aren’t women at all”.

You know what the normal thing to say would’ve been? “I personally see Joel as just a guy who likes to be feminine sometimes”. And I would’ve said “yes!!! Absolutely!!!” because A) I’m chill like that B) my headcanons aren’t universal even to myself and C) like I said my headcanon was that he was a man AND a woman so I ALSO see him as a man that dresses femininely. He is just also sometimes a woman that dresses masculinely. Or a feminine woman or a masculine man. I like to think he would mix it up a lot for fun. But again my headcanon is that he’s closeted so maybe not 😭

It almost feels to me like maybe the problem is that it’s Joel? I don’t want to make assumptions about you, but like, idk maybe Joel’s masculinity is really important to you or something and the fact that he has his characters wear dresses sometimes while still identifying as a man brings you some sort of comfort. I get that, I am a trans guy who enjoys feminine things. So maybe my headcanon felt like an attack on that idea. But it’s not. You can’t just assume the worst of people. If someone told me they can’t see Joel as anything other than a cis man then as long as it’s not accusatory like your message then I would be like “cool! I can see that!”

I understand what you were getting at, of course. It is suspicious if someone headcanons every single guy who dresses femininely as a girl… but that’s the thing, you saw ONE of my headcanons that was like that and decided that I do that all the time??? It’s ONLY suspicious if it’s EVERY TIME okay. And also let people have fun lol, this doesn’t really mean anything.

If we start making a bunch of rules and requirements in order to have transfem headcanons then it’ll start to be like those headcanons aren’t allowed at all. If you REALLY loved transfem headcanons you’d let people make them on a whim, because it shouldn’t be controversial. You shouldn’t scrutinize everyone who has that headcanon.

And TRUST ME, I get it. I have OCD, as do a lot of people who fall into these traps. You get told that something ultimately harmless and at worst mildly questionable is a huge moral failing and you freak out. You feel like a bad person. Hell, that’s the only reason I responded to your messages AT ALL, because I felt a need to defend myself otherwise I’m a bad person! I wouldn’t be a bad person, but I can’t shake the feeling. Plus RSD, I need to defend myself or else haha. RSD is another thing that gets people into these traps, you get told if you don’t headcanon the Right Way then you’re problematic, and if you’re problematic then everyone hates you. It sucks. Then the cycle of cyberbullying continues.

Maybe this is all a bit much, I’m an over explainer hahahahahagah… I hope it doesn’t seem like I hate you. I was annoyed at your messages sure, mostly because I saw it coming but HOPED that people would be reasonable, and of course you were accusing me of being incapable of seeing men in dresses without thinking they’re secretly women… but I’m a real chill guy okay, I’m not mad at you. We can move on from this.

[beautifulblooms]

Eddie Munson General Headcanons

Male! Reader, holy shit y’all really liked that last one, although I can’t blame you I love him too so here’s some headcanons for y’all, literally rewatching season 4 as I write this, just some fluffy headcanons, might do a smuttier version when I wake up tomorrow on my nsfw account, but for now let’s get into this shall we?

CIS Women and Female Aligned people, please DNI, this story and all of my others are for non-binary, masculine aligned and male readers!

He’s just great

Eddie for sure is a weirdo

But to the people he loves? It’s like weirdo but sincere

He cares so deeply about those close to him that he would go to the ends of the earth to protect them

But his boyfriend?

Don’t even get me started

He would defend him from any asshole that decided to pick on him/beat him up

Such a delicate man

If the hellfire club was cool with it his bf would chill in Eddie’s lap during sessions

Granted none of them have much of a choice given that Eddie did what he did and no one could stop him

He doesn’t do too much PDA because it’s a small town in Indiana in the 80’s, pretty much no one is cool with the gays

But in private this man is all over his bf

Cuddles

Kisses

Hugs

Holding hands

He always wants to be touching him

Ed’s also definitely loves movie nights

Cuddles, a couple movies, popcorn, candy, ya know the works for a proper movie night

He loves every second of it

“What movie do you wanna watch?”

“It’s up to you Ed’s, you always pick good ones”

Without realizing it he definitely blushes a little at comments like those

Hearing tiny praises from the person he loves the most? He is more than signed up he’s running the organization

If he’s interested in DnD, Eddie is immediately getting him a Hellfire shirt, helping him make character sheets, get a set of dice, understand the base rules of the game, and somehow finds a way to get him into the current campaign

Like he’s so deadass about DnD that having a bf who’s also interested might break him

He’s genuinely a sweetheart

Besides the whole “hellfire is a cult”, “he’s a vessel for the devil” bullshit that the rest of the town is convinced about, Eddie’s so down to earth

Especially when he’s high

For the sake of this we’re just talking about weed

Best to smoke with 10/10

Always has snacks and drinks prepared for the inevitable munchies

His trailer is a safe space for everything too

Need to have a breakdown? Eddie’s trailer

Wanna get high and forget the day? His trailer

Just need to sleep in a comfortable place? He will make it as comfortable as his bf needs it to be

Complimenting his rings is like #1 best thing to do

Like I said he loves subtle praise, so complimenting his style is perfect for that

His hair, his clothes, rings, eyes, guitar skills, DM abilities, hell just his dramatic flair

Loves any compliments that he can tell are genuine

Such a sweet man

During his hiding phase he definitely felt bad that anyone was involved

And especially bad if his bf gets involved

It’s inevitable but he still feels a lot of guilt

Definitely the type to just shake off any pain and keep going

He would literally get socked in the face and have a broken nose and still get up just fine and keep going

Insane levels of adrenaline

Speaking of adrenaline

He’s a junky

Loves anything that gets his heart going

At least, in a safe manner

Like not Chrissy dying in front of him racing, like rollercoasters, skiing, skating, good DnD campaigns

Usually the first to ask about dates

He’s very forward with his tactics and doesn’t like to just let his feelings fester

Overall, great guy, 100000/10 I do in fact recommend

[demonfag69]

I was actually taking to someone about our experiences with this type of person and it’s so common and infuriating. I remember talking to a man who claimed to be bisexual but literally only follows women and pre-op/ super feminine trans men. He couldn’t wrap his head around me looking like a man as a trans man, even though I’ve been on T for over seven years. He couldn’t interact with me as a man, and when talking about feedism, would compare me to cis women. He’d send me pics of cis women my height and tell me that’s what I’d look like at a certain weight. For some reason I kept talking to him, and to get any response from him I had to send him images and videos of women (I was super depressed and compromised my morals). Every now and then he’d complain about how scared he was to talk to other men, even though he was talking to me. But I don’t think I counted as a “man” even though I pass, am masculine (for a faggot), and literally have a penis.

He’s not an isolated case. I see blogs from men who are “bi” that only reblog cis women, pre-op/ super fem trans men, and maybe like one person who looks masculine. These blogs never ever interact with trans fems…I wonder why (transmisogyny).

Anyways I can only speak about my experience as a gay man in fetish spaces on the internet. It’s truly insane that these dudes think they’re fooling anyone. Maybe you guys should try fucking men so you can stop being weird about it.

And before the biphobia allegations come in: this shit literally hurts other bi men. Imagine having to defend your identity because some dude on the internet is using your identity to get trans masc pussy because he thinks trans mascs are a different kind of woman.

Not to be mean but some of you cis bisexuals on here are kind of suspicious. It is very fucking strange to post/ post about cis women and pre-op/ pre- everything trans men. If you’re a Kinsey 1 or 2 at least be brave enough to post cis and trans women?

[wolf-queer-discourse]

Adventures in Aphobia #1

So I was scrolling through Tumblr the other day (a regrettable mistake as always), and I had the great pleasure of seeing this joyous post.

*deep breath*

Not gonna lie, posts like this make me real pissed. Pissed because the person who posted this exists in a space where they feel comfortable enough to post this online. Pissed because these posts are so common and often face little backlash. And pissed because there’s nothing better than allosexuals condescendingly explaining to asexual people why they’re dirty attention whores who invent their own oppression. Ace people deserve to be defended against this horseshit. Young people see these posts, and it’s extremely damaging to have your identity be nothing more than fuel for people in discourse to mock you and demand you bled in order for them to notice your pain.

Anger aside, many people do not see why this post is wrong, so why is it? Let’s unpack this clusterfuck of bigotry:

“would love to see substantive evidence of systematic “aphobia” that isn’t actually just misogyny, toxic masculinity, or rpe culture.”

God damn, we are not mincing our words here XD. A few things: systematic in bold, which tells you if you do not make a blood sacrifice on the altar of queer pain you will not be taken seriously. Potential nitpick, but systemic and systematic are not the same thing. I believe systemic is the word they’re looking for. Systematic implies a lot more intentionality that can be hard to prove. Systemic merely means that systems, in their current state, do aphobic things, which they absolutely do.

“Aphobia” in quotes is absolutely rich. Not only will this person refuse to acknowledge systemic aphobia, which is only one type, but this poster casts clear doubt upon the mere concept of aphobia in and of itself. We love to see it.

There’s a lot to unpack here. The statement, as clearly condescending as intended, is sort of correct, though it doesn’t mean a whole lot. Systemic oppression is about the systems in a society (government, healthcare, etc) discriminating against people. Systemic oppression is not bigotry faced on a person-to-person level. In short, systematic oppression is something a person experiences in their overall life, while personal discrimination is experienced on a personal level by people who are not singularly in control of the systems. This post boils down the negative comments ace people face into being called “weird”, which is an understatement for sure, but calling a gay person weird isn’t systemic oppression either.

It’s still bad and discriminatory.

This is such a snotty way to dismiss aphobia as some mere, insignificant comment with no meaning as if it doesn’t reinforce society’s painful aphobic views in the same way casual homophobic comments reinforce heteronormativity and society’s hostility toward gay people.

Ace people face discrimination in healthcare, most notably, which is systemic discrimination, but the systemic discrimination of asexuals really ought to be its own post if I’m to nosedive into it. Even if ace people faced no systemic discrimination, it wouldn’t make this point anymore correct. Discrimination is a perfectly valid reason to feel disregarded by society, and often only ace people are denied the right to feel this way and are instead gaslit into admitting what they face is no big deal and they’re just making it up for attention.

The experience of being pressured to have sex when you’re allo vs ace is very different. The vast majority of allo people do not plan to be celibate their whole lives. Many ace people do not want to have sex, ever. “Waiting for sex” in much of western society and in Christianity is seen as pure and honorable. Yet being asexual and never wanting sex is seen as a deviant disorder and people are accused of robbing their partner of sex forever.

There’s really a specific flavor of sexual pressure that is unique to ace people. Sex being to “fix” someone or because they “just need to try it”.

In this respect, aphobic sexual pressure is better compared to that faced by gay people and lesbians. Lesbians especially often can face this same struggle, men pressuring them to have sex because they think lesbians just need to “try it” or to “fix them”. I can imagine this poster would have no issue acknowledging lesbophobia being the root of lesbians coerced into sex with men, yet she does not give ace people the same.

Imagine if someone said (and knowing our fucked world, someone probably has): “Lesbophobia doesn’t exist. It’s just misogyny. Straight women are coerced into sex too!”

It’d be pathetic bullshit. Toxic masculinity, misogyny and many other issues can all tangle into combined messes with other forms of bigotry. Lesbophobia is an experience that deserves to be recognized apart from misogyny, even if the two are linked. Please stop erasing ace people’s experiences with this when it’s not the same thing.

Honestly, though, this post, as trashy as it is, if anything, is perhaps, really asking: Is there any type of aphobic experience that’s inherently exclusive to ace people?

I still wager to go say, yes, yes there is, but I must make an important point first:

Most experiences of queer discrimination are not limited to queer people.

Homophobia and transphobia are both experienced by cishets in certain instances. Feminine straight men can be victims of homophobic harassment. This does not disprove the fact that it’s homophobia just because a straight man is the victim of it. A tall cis woman with broad shoulders and a lower voice may be the victim of transphobic remarks or comments. The basis of these comments is rooted in transphobia, however, so the fact that the victim is cis does not erase the transphobia.

People who argue that experiences ace people complain about can be experienced by allosexuals are not poking a legitimate hole in doing this. Certain experiences related to aphobia can and are experienced by allosexuals. If you do not acknowledge this, then homophobia and transphobia aren’t real because cishet people have sometimes experienced them.

Despite cishets sometimes experiencing queerphobia, most of us acknowledge that their experience of that bigotry, however unfortunate, is not the same as that experienced by actual queer people. It’d be quite homophobic for a feminine straight man to claim he knew just as much about the gay experience as an actual gay man. Similarly, when allosexual people relate experiences that were rooted in aphobia, it’s overstepping a line when they claim asexual discrimination isn’t real because they experienced elements of it too.

Cishet (cishet including allosexuals) people do not experience their doctors telling them their sexuality might be a disorder or caused by trauma. Allo queer people can experience this with their sexualities too.

“using sex appeal to sell products is misogyny, it is not engineered to gross sex-repulsed people, it is meant to objectify women.”

This is a strawman thinner than my last nerve. Uh, what? What ace people are you seeing that literally think sex appeal was engineered to gross-out sex-repulsed people?? I don’t think this is a core argument??

Yes, sex-repulsed ace people sometimes complain about sex appeal in media being uncomfortable. But that’s it. Every time an ace person shares a discomfort of theirs doesn’t mean it’s the entire basis of their oppression. For the love of God, let ace people discuss their experiences without being blow-torched over not being oppressed enough with an individual discomfort. 

BONUS ROUND

(This was in the tags)

“Completely vilifies celibate individuals” 

...no…? What…? Huh…? 

The most charitable interpretation of this vague accusation is that the poster means celibate people face aphobia as well, due to not wanting to have sex. I have no idea how this “vilifies” anyone, but that aside, as said before: people who are not queer can face aphobia. Also worth noting that society treats celibate people way better than ace people, which is really another example of aphobia. Celibate people can be told they’re missing out (which could be at very least related to aphobic ideals), but they’re rarely called broken. Celibacy is seen more as a respected, controlled ideal in allo people, but when ace people want to do it, they’re just mentally ill.

Anyway, the post was aphobic trash, and it needs to be debunked more often. Mocking ace people online is not a good look anymore, guys. Don't be ugly.

[max--phillips]

Hey again. I wanted to reach out because I am absolutely dreading thanksgiving with my family. I’ve been out as trans for 6 years and I’ve literally broken down in front of my parents multiple times about basic things like pronouns and transitioning stuff (Ftm). I have long hair because honestly it looks good on me and I pass with it so why not but my parents always have something to say about my appearance. Like Im not masculine enough or “That I can’t commit”. I’m 20 and live alone so I don’t have anyone to judge or have expectations of me that I can’t meet. It’s so frustrating and I’ve brought it up enough times and literally sobbed my eyes out to try to get them to understand but my father stayed with my over the weekend and it was. Hard. It’s good to see him but the misgendering is like. A lot. And I know it’ll be hell with my family because I’m not out to my distant realities but even with my close realities they don’t respect the pronouns anyway. so. but I don’t want to have to fight this fight again. I don’t really think it’s hard to respect your son that you’ve had for his whole life and just. Say the right thing. I’m struggling.

Any tips to get me through?

As always I love you endlessly and I appreciate you more than you know.

Hey just know that given the opportunity, I would gladly physically fight your family

I’m sorry you have to go through that every time you spend time with your family. That sucks ass. I don’t really have much advice that will not be seen as… petty or potentially antagonistic ? But I will tell you what I would do if I were in your spot.

1) Don’t respond to misgendering or your deadname. Don’t even look their way. If they’re clearly talking to you, ignore them entirely. Do this until they either start using your correct pronouns and name, or they give up.

2) Correct them every time. Loudly. Be rude. And don’t defend yourself or do it nicely. Don’t explain yourself. You’ve explained yourself before. They should know better. Don’t “um… it’s he, actually.” Do interrupt with “He.” Again, do this until they either start doing it right, or they give up.

3)

Literally just leave. If you want, you can warn people that if they continue to misgender you or use your deadname you will leave because you won’t be subjected to their shitty behavior, but you also don’t have to. If anyone asks why you left, you can give them the real reason, make up an excuse, or continue to ignore them! If they make you out to be the bad guy in this situation, tell them that if they had any respect for you or actually wanted you around, they’d use the right name and pronouns!

4) This is less petty and antagonistic, but you can also just not go. Say you got sick or something and don’t go. Better yet tell them you no longer want to observe a holiday made by and for colonizers. Or tell them the real reason tbh, either way you’re probably going to get someone saying “I cAnT bElIeVe YoU dIdNt CoMe To ThAnKsGiViNg” and being weird.

5) if you decide you can manage, but you get weird ass questions about your hair or how you’re dressing or whatever, just turn their question back on them. “Why do you wear your hair so long” “I don’t know, why do you wear your hair that length?” And if they say “because I like it that way” then you tell them “exactly.” That kind of thing. You’re probably not going to be able to have the nuanced “gender is complicated and contradictory and weird” conversation, so boil it down to something they can understand. Better yet, ask them if they’d be asking you that same question if you were cis.

Ultimately I guess my advice boils down to: if you don’t want to fight this fight again, don’t. Your mental and emotional health is more important than the, if I may be so bold as to assume, dry ass turkey your family’s gonna serve.

I love you too and I hope that your family doesn’t torment you over the holidays my dude :/

[kuromichad]

trans guys cant even JOKE about toxic masculinity without people being like im going to take this seriously as an excuse to get indignant about Men Bad... like they always assume that these jokes are Men showing their True Colors and not like. vulnerable trans people self-deprecatingly joking about the gender dynamics that make their lives difficult. not to be making a whole thing out of this but i do think it really is that deep. like do you ever really consider that trans people frequently dont get to actually enjoy or celebrate their gender? that expressing excitement or making jokes can often be met with snotty comments, or you’ve internalized a lot of shit that makes you too ashamed to try? no matter what it is, trans men celebrating themselves gets ‘why do you hate women’ and trans women get ‘why are you fetishizing women (who you also clearly hate)’ and it’s exhausting! 

all trans people suffer misogyny, as non-men, failed men, wannabe men, pathetic men-things that make for ugly women in need of correction, and yet despite this experience we also have to spend all our time worrying about and building our discussions of gender around the feelings of cis women as if we’re threats to them. trying to express or defend your gender as a trans person is fucking humiliating and will inevitably get you accused of misogyny unless you go out of your way to make yourself so nonthreatening that youre basically cis again (which only afabs actually get to do lmao). i literally feel guilty and ashamed that hrt has stopped my period because why do i get to be exempt from Female Suffering, why do i think i get to ‘identify out of oppression’, etc etc etc and then at the end of the day i worry about making jokes to cool off because people are like Cant believe you said dudes rock 🤢 cant believe you dont think mlm-only suggestion blogs are a serious issue of misogyny 🤢 twisted fucking cycle path

[oceanmonsters]

the problem with Tall Girl

this turned into more than an essay than I was expecting so get comfy:

Look, I get it, I know I’m a short bitch so I don’t know what it’s like to be tall etc. etc. and I’m sure there are a lot of tall girls who do / have felt insecure about their height, and maybe there are even girls who’ve faced problems similar to those in the movie. But this movie... I had so many problems with it, from the plot to the cast to the writing.

First off, the premise: a movie about a tall girl who gets picked on and harassed for her height trying to find love. On the surface, doesn’t seem too bad. And I’m not gonna deny that the main characters life isn’t harder because she’s tall than it would’ve been if she was short. But here’s the thing: tall women aren’t insulted considered less attractive for being outside what’s considered normal (if it was about that, tall guys would face the same thing) - it’s specifically about not being considered feminine enough, or rather conforming to the standard that women are supposed to be smaller and more petite than men. Jodi, however is played by a blond, cis, white girl who conforms to typical female beauty standards in pretty much every way other than being taller than average. And I’m not saying that her height or any problems she may faces because of it are invalidated by those things, but in the movie it’s like all of the rest of those things are invalidated on account of her height. WOC (especially black women) are far far far more likely to face adversity for not looking “feminine” enough and for years have been insulted and degraded for looking “masculine” - being too hairy or too tall or too large or our features not fitting eurocentric female beauty standards. The same point stands for trans women and even more so for trans woc. So while I’m not saying the kind of situation in the movie could never ever happen in real life, the fact that they’re making a movie about overcoming adversity faced due to not conforming to female beauty standards and making a thin, cis, white girl out to be the one facing the most adversity with the woc in the story either bullying the protag for not conforming to those standards or being the best friend who defends and supports the protagonist is pretty tone deaf. This isn’t just a normal movie situation where I think that it would’ve been nice for it to be more diverse or have a main character of colour - the premise would make much so much more sense with, for example, a tall black girl or trans girl at the lead because they’re so much more likely to face the problems faced by the main character in this movie.

Those were all thoughts I had even before the movie even came out, just from watching the trailer and reading the description. I tried to go into the movie with an open mind, thinking it would maybe exceed my expectations and I was being too harsh based on two minute trailer. However, almost straight off the bat the movie really tested my good intentions. Less than 5 minutes into the movie, Jodi is narrating how hard her childhood. And I could sympathise with her - children can be cruel and it can be tough to stick out like that in such an obvious way. I don’t doubt her childhood was harder on account of her height. But any goodwill is immediately destroyed by Jodi asking the audience “You think your life is hard?” and challenging them to “beat” her struggle. Because yes, while I’ll admit being tall has probably made her life harder up until this point, she’s still a straight, cis, rich white girl! Her height doesn’t make it harder for her to get a job or make her more likely to lose her job or to be the victim of a hate crime or be murdered by the police. And yet she still thinks her life is harder than anyone else in the school - where her main problem is apparently being asked “How’s the weather up there?” constantly. Jodi’s friend Fareeda even completely goes off at some random guy for saying it to her. Is it annoying to be asked that, constantly? Yes, probably. But the movie treats it as if it’s literally a slur. The movie constantly goes on about the “adversity” Jodi faces, but other than being picked on by one other girl (who is an asshole to Jodi and only Jodi for seemingly no reason whatsoever other than that she’s a Mean Girl) the “How’s the weather up there?” comments are literally the only “adversity” she ever faces over the course of the movie. Apart from said mean girl, there’s no one else making mean comments or laughing at her behind her back - she’s largely ignored by her peers. By teen movie standards, she’s not even receiving the typical treatment faced by the unpopular and bullied protagonists - no one’s spreading rumours about her or trying to ruin her life or throwing slushies at her or really harassing her in any way. But the movie still tries to push the narrative of Jodi facing so much adversity. There’s a part in the movie where Jodi’s mom tells her she has to stand strong in the face of adversity, and starts talking about all the problems she faced in high school for being so beautiful and popular - for example that she once had 10 guys ask her to a dance. Jodi looks completely incredulous that her mom considers this adversity and emphatically responds “No, it doesn’t.” when she’s asked if it is. The screenwriter somehow fails to see the irony in the fact that Josie herself is shown interest in by three different guys over the course of the movie (yet still continues to lament throughout the movie that “tall girls don’t get happy endings” and that all people see is her height and not her or something along those lines). This scene is so lacking in self awareness about the movie it’s in that it’s almost a metaphor for me watching the movie - me as Jodi, watching the movie and thinking “She really thinks THIS is adversity?” Another thing the movie seems to fail to consider is that Jodi’s problems are very much limited to high school. Yes, some people are assholes to her and she feels insecure but that’s definitely not a unique experience in high school. And once she actually moves into adulthood and the real world, she’s not really gonna face the same issues. As I said earlier, her height is not going to make it harder for her to get a job or make her more likely to lose her job or to be the victim of a hate crime or be murdered by the police, whereas these are issues that POC and LGBT people may have to deal with for the rest of their lives. The only way that being tall is going to significantly affect the rest of her life is in dating & finding a romantic partner, but even within the movie her height clearly doesn’t hold her back that much because 3 GUYS pursue her over the course of the movie.

While I do think the premise was bland anyway, the movie could’ve been somewhat enjoyable if they stopped trying to convince us and shoving down our throats that Jodi’s life is harder than everyone else’s and actually made the issue to be Jodi’s own insecurities and shown her overcoming those, instead - and maybe they would’ve had more time to actually focus on developing the relationship between the eventual endgame couple.

I was really hoping at some point there would be a scene where Jodi is being self-pitying and Fareeda (or hell, even Kimmy) were to sit her down and say “Look, I know you have problems, I know some people have been assholes to you because you were an easy target to make fun of for being different but you’re still a rich abled conventionally attractive cis white girl. I’m not saying your life hasn’t been more difficult because of your height, but it doesn’t make your life more difficult than everyone else’s,” and then maybe made a point about the adversity they face as WOC. I was so expecting Fareeda to do something like this in the bathroom scene but all she does is try to be Jodi’s emotional support which Jodi is ungrateful for. Which brings us up to the last point of how badly the characters of colour are treated in this movie. Fareeda is literally a walking “angry black girl”+”sassy supportive black friend” stereotype. Her only purposes in the plot are to go off at people when Jodi’s being “harassed”, support and uplift Jodi constantly even though she’s completely ungrateful, and be her friends’ dumping ground for their emotional problems. We literally know nothing about her other than this. She only exists to support the white characters. Kimmy, once again, is a one dimensional stereotype. She’s basically a caricature of a movie Mean Girl, with absolutely no reason given to why she’s such an asshole to Jodi. She’s not shown being a dick to anyone else, she’s not shown to be the queen bee of the school trying to consolidate her power, she’s just a pretty girl who apparently only has two interests - hating Kimmy for literally no reason, and being crowned homecoming queen. Her only purpose in the plot is as a device to prevent Stig from being with Kimmy. In fact, that’s the only purpose of the remaining two characters of colour as well - as romantic obstructions to create drama in the central white love triangle. There’s literally a scene where each white character (Stig, Jodi, Jack) is kissing their respective love interest (who each happen to be POC) but are distracted by / looking at each other instead of their love interests. They have no character or development or anything beyond being eventually rejected love interests to the white people. The only thing we know about Liz is that she’s gluten free, but the only reason for that is for her to have something in common with Jack. The school they go to looks very diverse - a lot of the extras & background characters are POC which imo just makes the movie worse because they’re making Jodi out to be the poor girl who’s life is harder than everybody else’s while all the people making fun of her & making her life difficult are POC. Literally all the people in the movie who ask her how the weather is up there are black. Most of the girls laughing at her while Kimmy makes fun of her are WOC. It was like they wanted the movie to look diverse for woke points but didn’t actually bother to have any of the characters of colour be developed or have any complexity or actually be relevant to the plot other than to obstruct the white romances and help the white people realise what they really want. They literally only existed as plot devices, not as people. And yes, Stig’s only purpose was to have Jodi realise her worth and that Jack was the right person for her but his character has some kind of emotional depth and character arc. He’s given a motivation and reason behind his actions - he likes being the popular kid and he lets it get to his head. Nothing of the kind is afforded to Kimmy or Schnipper.

I think the worst thing about this movie is how inoffensive it seems on the surface. It’s racially diverse, it’s about a girl overcoming her insecurities and learning to lover herself, what could be the problem? Which is why I don’t necessarily blame people for missing how shitty it actually is beneath the surface. But what I definitely don’t appreciate is (white) people insisting that the people who are rightfully pointing out this movie’s flaws are just being mean or bitter or being “discriminative” for “hating on the movie just because the main character is white” when that’s just so far from the actual point. I think the moral of the story is that it’s not enough to just think critically about the media you’re consuming, sometimes people need to actually listen to marginalised people when we’re telling them that something is not okay and not just insists that we’re being mean for no reason and then maybe we can avoid more movies like this in the future.

[queermediastudies]

C.R.A.Z.Y. and the Search for Identity

C.R.A.Z.Y. is a 2005 French Canadian film from director Jean-Marc Vallée.  The film itself centers on Zac, a character that his going through an identity crisis over the course of the film.  Zac also has four brothers.  Christian is something of an egghead who reads everything and is (assumed) to be very smart.  Raymond, whom Zac declares his enemy and is the films problem child.  Then there is Antoine who is the athlete of the family.  Finally there is Yvan, the youngest in the family and the one who speaks the least. The movie itself, focuses on the relationship between Zac and his father. While the movie clearly shows the struggle for identity, and acceptance, this is all the movie really does. It is not actually interested in taking on the greater LGBTQ issues throughout. 

Zac is the fourth born son in the family.  When arranging the brothers in order of birth it is, Christian, Raymond, Antoine, Zac and Yvan.  The first letter of their names, in birth order, spells out C.R.A.Z.Y., which the film uses to symbolizes the dysfunction of the family as a whole.  The boys have all grown up under a strict, incredibly masculine father.  The father’s name is Gervais and he wants all of his children to grow up to be big strong men.  Zac is fortunate enough (or unfortunate enough) to be born on Christmas day in 1960.  He is constantly reminded that his birthday is the same as Jesus Christ (which is significant with him growing up in a very Catholic family) and that because of that he must have a gift.  He is, the film points out, not like other boys.  The film leads audiences astray by saying Zac must have a gift.  If he thinks of people while they’re in pain they’ll get better.  What the film is really alluding to, however, is Zac’s homosexual desires.

The film plays around with the identity crisis a lot.  While Zac is the main character and his identity throughout the film is front and center, the film is really about a father’s love for his sons, but also the toxic masculinity of that father.  As the film begins Zac is a child, and his father’s favorite son.  But as Zac gets older his father wants him to be a “man.”  He doesn’t want Zac to be soft or feminine. A key scene in the film is Gervais stumbling upon Zac wearing women’s clothing and enjoying himself. This moment, Zac narrates, is a moment which “declares war” on his father, unbeknownst to him.

The film goes through three different periods of time.  First the early 60’s when Zac is a child.  The film then jumps to the mid 70’s when Zac is in adolescence and finally ends in early 1981 when Zac is an adult. It’s in adolescence that the film primarily pays attention to Zac and the “problem child,” Raymond. 

Raymond, who represents a lot of toxic masculinity, is shown as Zac’s sworn enemy throughout the film.  Raymond picks on Zac, tortures him, and calls him homophobic slurs. But it is also in adolescence that Raymond begins to develop a drug addiction. Like Zac, Raymond disappoints his father, but it’s due to his drug addiction, not sexuality. On the other hand, Gervais actually sees Zac’s sexuality as more of a problem. 

Zac spends a great deal of the film wanting to desperately win his father’s approval and he does so by trying very hard to repress his homosexual desires.  The movie has a way of communicating Zac’s identity crisis as he explores who he may be.  In one particular scene the audience sees that Zac is a David Bowie fan in the 1970’s.  David Bowie was said to be undergoing an identity crisis during that time.  In 1972, David Bowie said he was a homosexual.  Of course, over the course of his life, Bowie has been quite ambiguous about his sexuality (with the most common answer now being that he was bisexual).  With Zac undergoing his own identity crisis, David Bowie is definitely the perfect symbol in the 1970’s.  In a scene where he’s singing David Bowie in his room the audience can also see the Pink Floyd rainbow spectrum in the background.  Though Pink Floyd has nothing to do with homosexuality, the rainbow is a symbol of gay pride.  The camera makes sure you don’t always see the whole Pink Floyd symbol and mostly shows the audience the rainbow.  

In another scene Zac is seen interested in other boys and trying not to let that show (in one instance he feigns having an infatuation with his cousin when it is, in fact, her boyfriend he’s actually interested in).  

The most important part of his identity crisis comes from wanting to please his strict Catholic father.  Gervais has a Patsy Cline record where he listens to his favorite song: Crazy.  Part of how Zac “declares war” on his father is also because he accidentally broke that record. However, this symbolizes their destroyed relationship. A major subplot of the film is Zac constantly trying to find this record in hopes that this will please his father enough to accept him. 

Catholic guilt, another trait associated with homosexuality within catholic households, is also a major theme in the film. There are several instances of crosses seen throughout.  The mother is devout in her prayers and Zac even takes a trip to Jerusalem where he is able to accept his identity.  The fact that the film spends so much time with a son getting right with his father is likely another Catholic symbol.  Catholics often have to confess sins and ask for forgiveness to get back into the circle with God the Father.  This is exactly what Zac has to do throughout the movie.  Instead of having to get right with the Lord, however, Zac has to get right with his literal father. This can only happen by confessing his homosexuality to his father, and himself. Something Zac spends the majority of the film trying to repress. 

Another interesting aspect of the film is that throughout, it is clear that most of the other characters are aware of Zac’s homosexuality. Zac’s mother is quite supportive of him throughout the film. Even Raymond the “problem child,” ends up defending Zac from homophobes. The only character in denial is Gervais, who spends much of the film suggesting that Zac couldn’t possibly be a homosexual because in late adolescence and early adulthood Zac manages to get himself into a relationship with a woman. During this time in adulthood, it seems like Zac is able to please his father, but this means lying to himself. 

C.R.A.Z.Y. definitely takes the issues of identity and acceptance quite seriously and without a lot of sex.  There are implied sexual acts, but nothing explicit. C.R.A.Z.Y. isn’t out to shock the audience, it is out to show a very real struggle that happens with those who identity as LGBTQ.  There is nothing presented about Zac’s identity crisis that’s funny. His process of coming out and acceptance isn’t treated as a joke, but rather torture. Whether that’s from his father or his brother.  

C.R.A.Z.Y. was a huge critical success, but it was not necessarily a mainstream one. Being a foreign film meant that it was not widely distributed in the United States. It was also a smaller independent project. C.R.A.Z.Y. also came out the same year as “Brokeback Mountain,” but this film’s lack of media publicity makes it feel less like a moment where the culture pats itself on the back, and more like it was trying to present something more authentic. C.R.A.Z.Y. doesn’t rely too heavily on stereotypes. As well as it handles the identity crisis, however, the movie shows that it is firmly a product of its time by refusing to be too political in any sense of the word. 

C.R.A.Z.Y. came out eight years after Ellen had literally come out. The approach that Ellen took was a means of depoliticizing queerness, and focusing on identity (Dow, 2001). C.R.A.Z.Y. is similar in that it does not spend a lot of time focusing on any particular political issues of the day, or even struggles beyond identity. This is especially baffling within the film, as the majority of it takes place in the 1970’s, but has little to say about the ongoing gay rights movement that was taking place in Canada at the time. The movie seems to care little for actually discussing the political climate that Zac is finding himself in. This suggests that the struggle for identity and coming out is one done in isolation, with nothing from the outside creeping in. 

It is also worth examining who created the film. Director Jean-Marc Vallée is known more today for the movie “The Dallas Buyer’s Club,” but he is a straight, cis-gendered, white male. This will often bring about the question who the movie is made for, and why. As Doty (1993) reminds us, the director of a film can actually influence what the audience sees and experiences on screen. Vallée is actually quite known for his attempts at allyship through film, but he has also been criticized for his handling of some of these issues. C.R.A.Z.Y. is his most praised work for how well it dives into identity, but it also shows the reality of who is able to have their projects funded. Could C.R.A.Z.Y. have been made by a queer man? It is unlikely that this would be the case. 

On the other hand, as Joyrich (2014) points out, such displays of identity can still help in smaller ways. I do believe this to be true of C.R.A.Z.Y.. The film came out in 2005 when such topics as gay marriage and visibility were greater topics of discussion throughout Canada and the United States. Nevertheless, the film would still be considered “safe,” by all accounts. C.R.A.Z.Y. is a fairly sexless affair. One that is able to meet the “approval” of most straight audiences. In fact, until the very end, one might wonder if C.R.A.Z.Y. even is about identity simply for the fact that even after Zac fully realizes his homosexuality… the movie doesn’t explicitly state this. The climactic discussion between Zac and his father is one in which “homosexual” or “gay” is never stated, but is explicitly implied. Much like the 2016 film “Moonlight,” C.R.A.Z.Y. is one that largely meets approval based on how little sexuality is on display. This might refer to Guy Lodge’s (2017) criticism that in order for queer cinema to succeed in the west it needs to be sexless. In discussing “Moonlight” Lodge pointed out “it’s hard to imagine an equally accomplished yet more explicit film receiving the same acclaim.” The same can be said of C.R.A.Z.Y. Even though C.R.A.Z.Y. is a French-Canadian film, it is still quite Americanized in its presentation. Homosexuality can be talked about, but it can’t fully be on display. 

This also means that the film risks being part of what Suzanne Walters (2014) refers to as “the tolerance trap.” Walters argues that gay visibility alone is not a sign of progress. “Acceptance is the handmaiden of tolerance, and both are inadequate, and even dangerous, for accessing real social inclusion…” (p. 3) C.R.A.Z.Y. has been praised substantially. It is one of a small number of films on Rotten Tomatoes to have a 100% rating (it is the only LGBTQ film to have such a rating). This praise may not have the same back-patting praise that a film such as “Brokeback Mountain,” has, but it still has the air of “tolerance,” to it. Zac spends the majority of the film either in the closet or repressed--unable to act on his sexuality in any regard. The main point of the movie is his father’s acceptance. This is the goal of the movie--to establish Gervais’s acceptance of his son. Once this is achieved and the “war” between them is over, the movie concludes. Considering that the movie itself ends in the year 1981, this means the movie does not have to deal with the AIDS crisis that will soon follow. 

C.R.A.Z.Y. is a film more concerned with visibility and identity, but does not seek to apply this in a manner that would deem the film too “political.” This approach more to acceptance and identity helps a little, but it isn’t quite enough, even in 2005. It’s certainly better than what the the championed mainstream film “Brokeback Mountain” was. However, the obsession with tolerance, acceptance, and the lack of engaging politically with struggles beyond the personal makes a film like C.R.A.Z.Y. only really appear daring at what it does. It’s feels like more than window dressing because it comes across as more authentic. This certainly allows audiences to empathize with Zac, but it also stands to leave the audience with the belief that empathy and acceptance is all that is required when engaging with LGBTQ people. It’s a lot like saying, “I don’t care if your gay, bisexual or attracted to buildings! You’re still my son and love you!” From a personal standpoint this sounds just fine, but it does not show that one would stand up and fight for LGBTQ rights, or fight to enact change. Rather it shows that one can engage in individual forms of acceptance and tolerance, but that once something more is required than simply the personal, audiences may not necessarily be willing to rise up and do something. This could be, as Doty (1993) notes, because the “queer operates within the nonqueer” (pp. 3). C.R.A.Z.Y. may not have been as big of a mainstream hit as “Brokeback Mountain,” but the intent was still to reach a much wider audience. This is something that the film cannot do if it’s “too political.” This would risk alienating a section of the audience. In order for a film like C.R.A.Z.Y. to find mainstream success, it needs to be seen as acceptable by dominant power structures. This involves not necessarily challenging those structures, which is why the film’s messages are more individualistic and personalized. 

References

Doty, A. (1993) “Something queer here,” in Making things perfectly queer  (pp. 1-16). University of Minnesota Press.

Doty, A. (1993) “Whose Text is it Anyway,” in Making things perfectly queer  (pp. 17-38). University of Minnesota Press.

Dow, B. (2001) Ellen, television, and the politics of gay and lesbian visibility, Critical Studies in Media Communication, 18(2) 123-140. doi: 10.1080/07393180128077

Joyrich, L. (2014). Queer television studies: Currents, flows, and (main) streams. Cinema Journal, 53(2), (pp. 133-139). doi: 

Lodge, G (2017, January 5). “Does Moonlight show gay cinema has to be sexless to succeed?” The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/jan/05/does-moonlight-prove-that-gay-cinema-has-to-be-sexless-to-succeed 

[naidhtbomb]

feminine cis straight men need a pride flag, honestly. They face about as much discrimination and oppression as LGBTQ+ do, in some cases more.

Think, Can a cis man go to work in a dress? Can a woman, trans or otherwise, go in a suit? there are at least some laws protecting a trans woman' rights to have her gender respected in the workplace, and most wont bat an eye if they choose to wear a dress or a suit; cis women can wear a dress or a masculine suit with minimal and rare discrimination, and they certainly wont fire her over it. but cis men get fired for wearing makeup.

straight feminine cis men are constantly bullied, mocked, told they "must be" gay, shamed about not being manly enough, even told theyre embarrassments and failures. they literally fear for their LIVES going out in public in a dress. and even if the only thing feminine about him is he likes barbies or pink or simply talks like a girl, he's scorned and shamed and bullied. meanwhile, straight cis women can like cars and military and dinosaurs without fear, and can dress and behave masculine with little to no scrutiny. feminine cis guys need to be defended, their self-worth affirmed, and society needs to start working on its attitude towards men and their right to express themselves and be who they are

as a transman, i feel the pressure too, that i cant be "a real man" if i cry easy or like pretty pink things or want a princess dress. i can get away with expressing those sides of me cuz i look female, but my cis brothers cannot. i wish there was more advocasy for them. i think a flag would be a good place to start.