#I didn't include myself in this statement cuz I don't have a gender

[fuckedupsociety155]

"If you love Barbie, this movie is for you. If you hate Barbie. This movie is for you."

I think this line is not just about making sure the movie is for everyone, but it is an acknowledgement of all those girls who saw all the prejudice and hate around girlhood and anything girly and decided to find strenght in forcing themselves to hate that stuff too. All those girls that never wore pink and played football and hated dolls and twilight and boy bands and the idea of motherhood (not saying that girls couldn't just be like this, but I'm talking about the ones who felt a pressure to exhibit certain behaviours to avoid being picked on, or to fit in with others as most girly things have always been ridiculed and mocked) And I think this movie might just be calling them back, to say that it's okay, to find some reconciliation with the childhoods that were forced on them and the childhoods that they were forced out of.

Girls didn't choose to have Barbies forced on them and girls didn't choose to be belittle for liking the only things that they were allowed to have. And I think this movie is trying to be for them.

[asexual-means-no-attraction]

Oh, goodness. The recent asks reminded me. At some point I tried to define whom I liked through the genitals (I.e. specified which I liked). I sincerely thought it would be more inclusive, because there were a lot of gender labels I couldn't understand, and choosing some sexuality label always seemed to exclude someone, so getting down to basics seemed at least like something I could wrap my head around.

I can understand that sentiment. With mogai and everything else it can be REALLY confusing. So trying to define attraction by the physical characteristics of male and female without using the terms man or women... Would lead you to the path of using genitals to define your attraction... I get it. But it's not the right direction to go.

No one wants to be defined by their genitals. It's one of the reasons why I hate the "inclusive" language of "people with uturuses" to describe women's issues. As a man with a uturus, I'd much rather someone just say woman. I know which issues involve me personally and which ones don't. It's not leaving me out to talk about the health concerns of periods by using "she" and woman to describe them. Calling groups of people by genitals or organs or bodily functions... It's just dehumanizing. It makes you feel shitty and uncomfortable. You're attracted to a person, not a body part.

That said. I know there was some discourse for example about lil naz x saying "I like dick" or something like that. And people were calling that out as transphobic. IT'S NOT. He still calls himself gay and says he likes men. Him having fun and expressing that by saying he likes dicks isn't him defining his sexuality as attraction to genitals. A majority of men have dicks. And people shouldn't have to watch each and every word they say just to include every possible group in every single thing they talk about. It's ok to say generalized stuff-- like men have dicks. It a generalized statement. It's not excluding anyone cuz its general.

I can say the sky is blue. That's a general statement. But the sky isn't always blue. Sometimes it's white, sometimes it even looks red. Sometimes it's dark. That doesn't mean I'm wrong for saying the sky is blue. It's a general statement. And I don't need go on and on to include every single color that appears in the sky for people to understand that hey! Sometimes it's not blue. But the general statement that is blue is still correct and there's nothing wrong with it. It's common sense.

Saying you like dick is not defining your attraction around a body part. However, specifically saying "I'm vagina/dick sexual" DOES define your attraction to a body part rather then a person. And that's where it gets dehumanizing. Especially since I can see a lotta people using that sorta logic to devalue and misgender trans folk. Like... Its one of those things that is very much a slippery slope. And unfortunately, like with you, it's become a more common thing to see thanks to all the mogai shit going around making gender so much more confusing and complicated.

Honestly, if you're worried about not being inclusive and shit... Just don't use a label. You can literally just say "I like who I like" and leave it at that. You don't have to use any label and you don't owe anyone any information about who you do and don't like. It's better to just live your life and let yourself like who ever you end up liking rather then worrying 10 times over about if you've included everyone. Before when I wasn't out to someone as a man I wouldn't use labels to describe my sexuality. I would just say "I like chicks" and let them make assumptions. Because I didn't want to say I was straight and out myself but I also didn't want to call myself a lesbian since I'm not a woman.

And honestly... The reason why we have different sexualities is because they exclude certain groups. If gay and straight included all the exact same people, then there wouldn't be a reason to have separate sexualities in the first place. It's ok if your sexuality excludes someone, cuz that's the whole point of having different sexualities. The only sexuality that includes everyone is bisexual lol.