#YES I know bisexual means 2+ please no discourse

[swordshapedleaves]

A friend of mine is reading a book I told them to read and live reacting at me and I am so excited about it because it has the greatest moment of all time and they haven't gotten there yet

[alexwilltellyouthings]

Ok I have so many thoughts about painland ending up canon or not and I. Just.

Listen I AGREE that their bond goes beyond being romantic or not. It's obvious, it's beautiful, I love it and I love them and their friendship and I truly do think it is important that media has this kind of relationship portrayed.

But.

But.

I would be lying if I said I wouldn't be disappointed if it doesn't turn romantic. It involves a lot of things.

1: I want Edwin to have that. He'll still be happy without it, yes, but god can't he have that? He's been through so much. He had a speedrun through his sexuality issues and confessed in hell. Like wtf. Can't he have that???

2. Bisexual Charles would actually be so important to me. And yeah he can be bi and not in love with Edwin but come on lol. The thing is, there's not many bi men in media. Even less bi men figuring out their bisexuality. Even less bi men figuring out their sexuality when they were raised in the 80s and knowing their best friend is in love. Do you see how many layers exist here? How amazing his story could be? Charles has so much we still don't know about him. And yes, I would like that one of those things could be something I relate to. Besides trauma. Call me selfish. And like he's so bisexual coded it would be offensive for him to be straight I'm sorry.

3. They exist in other universes. Let them be platonic there. Let them be romantic this one time.

4. I know falling in love with a straight person is a very common story and I don't think it's wrong for it to happen in a show, but honestly, it's not what I sign up for when I'm watching queer stuff. Think Our Flag Means Death. It probably changed my brain chemistry because anything less than that gets really hard to swallow. I know, we all have queerbaiting trauma, and I know this wouldn't be the case, and it never claimed to be something as queer as OFMD. But I got so attached that... Well, I wouldn't stop watching if this happens, but it wouldn't sit well with me. It's a bitter feeling, you know?

5. They didn't have anything be explicit, but come on, they did set us up. Charles got jealous at Monty, and only Monty, for that matter. I wouldn't say his thing with the Cat King is necessarily jealousy, more like protectiveness, but that can be disputable. And both George and Jayden said more than once that Charles' response to the confession let things open. So I mean if that door wasn't closed, then please don't close it now! The road until things happen can be long, dramatic, tortuous, whatever, there's many ways to tell a love story. But if I'm sitting for it, then I don't want to get shot in the face later on (unless it's for plot reasons which ok).

6. Have I mentioned that bisexual Charles

Anyway I feel kinda bad for wishing so much they get romantic because I see and agree with the whole platonic discourse. But yeah those are all the reasons why I can't stop myself. Have a good day everyone

[northlight14]

Since it’s the first day of Pride, thought I’d share something that I’m very passionate and opinionated about, that being

What Makes for “Good” Aromantic and/or Asexual Representation

Essentially I’m just sharing my own personal standards for when it comes to aro and/or ace rep. And you’ll notice a lot of this is the bare minimum. You’ll also notice how very few pieces of media actually do any of these. This isn’t to attack any particular creators (though some will be mentioned as being bad at this sort of rep not as an attack but as an example). Think of this as more for any aspiring writers or creators who want to include aro or ace rep in their work. Because idk about y’all but I’m kinda tired of just settling for the sort of rep we do get

And of course I don’t speak for all aro/ace people and some may disagree with me and that’s ok! These are just my personal opinions based on experience

1. Say it, don’t code it

A lot of asexual and especially aromantic “representation” is just coded but never explicitly stated. Characters will show disinterest in dating or even repulsion in some cases (see Saiki from Saiki K or Senkuu from Dr Stone). And while that’s all well and good, I barely even count that as representation

Showing a character is aromantic and/or asexual is fundamentally different from showing a character is gay or bisexual. And that’s because it’s a LACK of attraction, not the presence of it. You can have a character show interest in the same sex and nothing more really needs to be said because that’s you telling your audience what that characters preferences are. But you can’t have a character just reject another character and expect that to have the same effect because it’s not as if allosexuals/alloromantics are attracted to every person they meet

Now in the cases of Saiki or Senkuu where they say repeatedly that they’re not interested in sex or romance without actually using the words, I’ll concede that that’s slightly better than Viktor from Arcane just rejecting Skye and then the creator trying to claim he’s asexual after the fact. However, I still don’t think this is necessarily good representation even if it is better. That being because there is a long history of characters who start off saying they’re “not interested in dating” and then changing their mind. Or fans interpreting them as being gay instead or their close friendships actually being romantic. The easiest way to avoid this is just to use the words “aromantic” and/or “asexual”

This doesn’t mean you have to write a whole coming out scene either. It can be as simple as a casual mention or a pride flag hung up somewhere. But it should be said

2. State it in the piece of media

One of my biggest pet peeves about aro/ace rep is that it will be confirmed but only outside of the media itself and rarely in canon. Frankly I think more characters are confirmed outside than they are inside. Let’s go over two of main ways this just doesn’t work

It’s easy to miss. I didn’t find out about Viktor apparently being asexual several months after confirmation. And I’m pretty sure a lot of fans still don’t know

It creates discourse. A lot of fans simply won’t accept it because it was confirmed post canon or outside of canon. Or there will be accusations of it being fake or people trying to make excuses as to why they should be allowed to ignore it and so on

The only exception to this rule I have is that if your setting is maybe a fantasy world or historical setting where those words don’t exist then yes, it makes sense for it to not be stated in canon and instead confirmed elsewhere. But please for the love of god don’t just confirm it after the fact or else it just looks like a JK Rowling “Dumbledore is actually gay!” thing

3. Learn what it means to be asexual or aromantic

This might be one of the biggest “the bar is on the floor” things said in this post and it’s honestly depressing how many creators I’ve seen that have made me feel the need to say this. If you’re going to have a character be asexual or aromantic, you should know what those words mean. Like I’m literally asking for the bare minimum of research here

Do you know that asexual and aromantic are different things?

Do you know what either of those words even mean?

If your answer is no, for the love of God Google that shit before writing it. I’m so tired of creators saying shit like “this character doesn’t want to date because they’re asexual”

4. Let our representation be diverse

Some aces/aro’s are POC. Some are disabled. Some are trans. Some are asexual but not aromantic. Some are aromantic but not asexual. Some are not fully aro/ace but on the spectrum somewhere like demisexual, greyasexual, librasexual, aceflux, and so on. Some are sex/romance repulsed and some are sex/romance favourable or indifferent

We’re as diverse as any other community with a wide range of experiences. And yet a lot of the rep we get is very white, usually just sex repulsed asexual or aro/ace, and able bodied. Now as a white aro/ace able bodied person myself I can’t exactly speak a lot on this but I do encourage any writers to seek out and learn about the experiences of others in my community that don’t look like me

While on this subject, remember it’s not unrealistic to have multiple aspec characters in your media. I’m only 20 years old and so far in my life I’ve met a total of 10 others who also identify as somewhere on the ace or aro spectrum. I promise we’re more common than you think and having multiple characters be somewhere on the spectrum would absolutely help in not just depicting the community as a monolith. Great example of this is Bojack Horseman who didn’t want to make Todd’s childishness seem like a byproduct of his asexuality and so added Yolanda who is also asexual but the opposite of Todd personality wise

5. Let your aromantic characters not be asexual

You wanna know how many non-ace aromantic characters I can name?

None.

Literally non. Zilch. Zero.

And I can make a pretty good guess as to why that is as well. Because sexual attraction without romantic attraction is so heavily demonised or made to be “promiscuous”. And this is something that needs to change. Aromantic people, for starters, didn’t choose to be aromantic. They aren’t “players” trying to get with as many people as possible, or lead people on, or break peoples hearts or whatever the fuck. They’re straight up just living their lives. Some might have a QPR and some might not. Some might engage in casual sex and some might not. Some might still date and some might not. And non of these things are bad

Aromantic people deserve representation just as much as asexual people, I cannot understate this enough

6. Let your aromantic characters be loveless

I’m not a loveless/aplatonic aromantic so again I can’t speak too much on this. However, I do see a lot of the time people trying to make being aromantic more palatable by saying “they can still feel love!” And “they can still have close bonds with their friends”. And look, that’s true for a lot of us. But it also alienates a lot of peoples experiences. Being an aplatonic aromantic shouldn’t be villainised. They aren’t cold or heartless. They just experience things differently and that’s ok. They deserve positive representation just as much as the rest of the community

7. Try to avoid stereotypes

This one is pretty simple. Don’t make your only ace or aro character the robot or the villain or the super childish side character. Some aces are super outgoing. Some aromantics are really emotional

Another part of this is let your aromantic characters be romantic and let your asexual characters be sexy. As I’ve stated before, these identities are on a spectrum and some ace people might still wear revealing clothing or even have sex. Some aromantics might love romantic media or even still choose to date. Non of this takes away from their identity and if you go this route just make sure you’re doing your research

Like, I’m speaking from experience here. I’m fully aro/ace but I still love shipping and romance in media. I’ve also listened to my friends about their sex lives. Like guys, sex is weird to me regardless of its missionary or hardcore BDSM. Not every ace is gonna be comfortable hearing about that but again, we’re not a monolith

—

I do have more I could say on this but I’m gonna end it here. If there’s anything I missed lemme know and also I’m willing to answer questions as long as they’re genuine, polite and respectful. Aphobia will be deleted

And of course, Happy Pride y’all🏳️‍🌈💚💜🤍🩶🖤

[macrotiis]

- 29 y/o aries ♈️

- gender-neutral testosterone beast, I'm trans 💉(2016) & post-op (2023) TME & perisex.

- xe/xem/xyrs, he/him or she/her.

- @rainbowmancer-gwen is my fox gf 💙

- Aus/NZ Pakeha (white)

- 18 +, no minors pls, this is not a NSFW heavy blog tho.

- #noid is for images without descriptions or functional alt text.

No DNI, I just block. I usually block bigots, rude ppl, pointless discourse, harry potter fans, proshippers (some "antis" too, idk this whole thing is dumb to me), & sometimes ppl who just annoy me. I'm here for a good time, I'm not here to argue & I don't appriciate ppl trying to start shit. (Letting me know of I'm rbing someone shitty is appriciated.)

Please HARD BLOCK me if you don't want me to follow you. I'll assume tumblr is fucking up & re-follow if I'm softblocked coz that happens a lot, please just properly block me.

I'm Blitz, I'm a commie anarchist furry from down-under & my tagging system is a mess. (More info under the cut)

I love animals, hairless cats & australian wildlife are my faves. Blue & purple are my fave colors. I like loud electronic & alt music; Punk, Metal, Nu-Metal, New-Wave, Ska, Drum n Bass, Industrial, Breakcore, ect.

I draw a lot, it's like my number 1 thing, art blog is @staticblitz.

I'm not a huge fandom person, but I have a Crash Bandicoot blog @n-trance, Crash Bandicoot is my number 2 thing.

I love science fiction, fantasy & horror, stuff like; Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Star Trek, Invader Zim, Doctor Who, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure, Dorohedoro, Berserk, Digimon Furries & table top role-playing games.

I'm a weird kind of aroace bisexual queer, I'm a transsexual in the sense that I'm trans, I take hormones (testosterone) & am post-op (hysterectomy); I believe being trans is different for everyone & hate truscum/transmeds. I also don't like transandrophobia/transmisandry truthers, listen to trans women & learn about transmisogyny without getting defensive. I promise you, there is space for us in the framework of discussions about transmisogyny already. PLEASE don't take posts I make about *MY* experiences as someone transmasc adjacent & get mad thinking I'm generalizing the whole trans man/transmasc community. I am one guy (system) & cannot speak for the entire community & I don't try to!

I am kink & sex positive, I sometimes do sexwork & I talk about it sometimes. That said I do have boundaries & I do think you ought to be responsible for what you post & where (ie; tag that shit & keep it away from kids). I cant prevent it, but would prefer DDLG or ABDL blogs not follow or interact with me (it's fine if you use a non-kink related blog instead. I don't judge you, I just have trauma surrounding this). Thanks 💖

Proshippers are weird, not keen on antis either but equating finding your pedo/incest fanfic a bit gross to police violence is actually nonsensical, end of discussion.

I think Marxism is pretty pog, I'm by no means an expert but I am very politically active where I live. I grew up poor with my 2 siblings & my single disabled mum, we are ex-Jehovahs Witnesses (yes thats important). This has shaped a lot of my world view, I align myself with the marginalised & working class people of the world. I am heavily critical of capitalism, liberalism, nationalism & imperialism. If you have a problem with commies or anarchists, you probably won't like me. I hate fascists & I hate cops. I love my community tho & working together with anyone who wants to work toward a better world.

I am moderately able-bodied, but have mental disabilities. I don't wanna share all but I have autism, C-PTSD & chronic fatigue among many other things. I am a system, I hate syscourse, endo systems are welcome here, ableists demanding medical history are not.

I will tag for any trigger if you ask me, I already tag a large amount of things for both categorization & moderation.

Do not send me donation posts, thanks.

This is my fursona, draw xem if you want I would love that :3

[miggydiaz]

For the salty ask 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 16, 20, 22, 23 and 26 for cobra kai pretty please

My answers are so long, so I am putting this under the cut @wonderwolfballoon! Also I just noticed your Daniel icon I SWEAR I’M NOT DRAGGING HIM TO BE MEAN!!!

1. What OTPs in your fandom(s) do you just not get?* My biggest IDGI ships for CK are probably Elimetri or Kiaz. I’m not here to yuck other people’s yums or anything, but I do think there is something to the idea that Migueli isn’t popular because it’s a ship predicated on mutual respect for one another. Kiaz has the obvious enemies to lovers vibe and I just generally don’t sail those ships. Elimetri has... its problems, IMO, most especially around the idea that Demetri has to like... save Hawk from himself? Idk. I just like romances that I feel are based on love and mutual respect and not ...tropes.

 I am also not a Lawrusso shipper although I have a lot of those on my dash and you all are great! Again, not yucking yums! Daniel just makes me want to head butt him too much to pair him romantically with anyone 😂 I don’t even want his wife with him. He needs to self reflect~ 

4. Do you have a NoTP in your fandom? Are they a popular OTP?* 

I once saw someone ship Amanda and Anoush and I noped out of that so fucking fast I almost tripped over myself. I’m not sure if they’re popular. I just think some people feel the need to get Amanda out of the way to sail their ship and stuck her with Anoush which... no. Just no. Let Amanda be a messy single queen with a martini hobby, thanks! 

5. Has fandom ever ruined a pairing for you?* 

Not in CK. I’m lucky because I pretty much stick to my little Migueli bubble and I’m okay with that? Lmao lord knows the Squad on my dash is all about the DISCOURSE™️ so idk if I just don’t feel the need to get sucked into the wider ship wars because we have good healthy debates, but so far, so good. 

6. Has fandom ever made you enjoy a pairing you previously hated?* 

I never hated it... I just didn’t have many feelings on shipping with this show in general at first. Then I was in the CK tag one day and I saw Migueli fan art. Then I discovered @afurioushawk‘s falconry series and it was all over for me after that! So fandom DID make me love a ship, just not one I hated.

9. Most disliked character(s)? Why? Oh boy. How much time do you have? In some instances, it’s a good thing season 3 happened because otherwise, this would be a multi-page essay on the problems with race and class privilege as it pertains to Sam LaRusso and just some... generally not nice comments about Demetri that I’m conflicted about because I’m not sure if the writers are intentionally trying to write him a specific way and it’s just not translating to me or what. But season 3 revamped both of their images with me a lot. I’m way more flexible in terms of Demetri, but lmao I was the number one Sam LaRusso hater for a minute there (or maybe number 2, I can think of at least 1 other person who was in that boat with me back in like... August/September, but I won’t call them out because I don’t want them to get hate...) However, I have grown a bit in my opinions of Sam, and even though I still think she’s responsible  for a lot of shit she NEVER gets held accountable for, I also think that’s a reflection of the adults around her too, and this includes my otherwise unproblematic queen, Amanda.

But honestly, my most hated character (other than the obvious villain that is Kreese) is Daniel. No matter how handsome Ralph Macchio looks in cable-knits, because Daniel has always been a sanctimonious, shit starting drama king and I say that about KK Daniel too. I’m not saying Daniel was the ~true villain~ or anything, or that Johnny was innocent -- I can only drink so much Red and Yellow Kool-Aid -- but Daniel’s always been annoying to me as a protagonist, and turning him into a smarmy wealthy car salesman who is also a class traitor did not do him any favors in my book. I will say, I also like Daniel more in season 3 than I have in previous season, but since he is the adult, I will be mad at him longer than I will be at the kids, ya feel?

10. Most disliked arc? Why?

 Johnny’s entire season 3 storyline. The sheer level of REGRESSION at every turn drives me bonkers. It’s like watching him go through all of the stumbling blocks of season 1 all over again, but without the “he’s learning! He’s going to make mistakes!” free pass that I was willing to give him the first time around. He regularly jeopardizes Miguel’s recovery and it’s played for laughs. He fucks up on every level with Robby. He spends most of his time running away when things get hard or too real. He drops the ball completely with Hawk, and like, not to put too fine a point on it, but a lot of Hawk’s issues are because Johnny put Hawk on this ‘flip the script and be a badass’ path and then offered him no guidance for how to walk that path and instead left him in the hands of Kreese. And then he has the nerve to go to Hawk and basically be like “I made you what you are!” lmao yeah Johnny, you sure did, that’s why he’s breaking peoples arms, hoss. And then all of the nonsense with Ali and Carmen, like... if you were planning on teasing KK fans with Ali and him getting back together, why write her as married in the first place? Why even tease the idea of Carmen and Johnny until after you were sure what you were going to do with Ali as a character? Instead, they do what they did in season 3 and it makes him look like a colossal jerk. So yeah. Literally every choice they made with Johnny this season, I hated.

14. Unpopular opinion about your fandom? People who hate Tory are not valid, sorry not sorry.

16. If you could change anything in the show, what would you change? I would have kept Miguel entirely out of Tory and Sam’s beef. Or at least not directly inserted him into it like he was with the kiss. I know the writers thought it was necessary to push Tory to the point of inciting a fight at school, but I am just so exhausted over girls being unable to fight about anything but boys. Also I would bring Aisha back.

20. What is the purest ship in the fandom? 

I am probably biased, but I still maintain it’s Migueli. Look, Miguel stood up to Kyler for Eli and Demetri both. Hawk joined CK because he saw what it could do for some skinny nerd who was getting his ass kicked. And he took to CK, really took to it! Even flourished before he started getting mixed messages. And he and Miguel were pretty much inseparable after that. They coordinated their wardrobes ffs. Hawk dubbed him El Serpiente and no one else calls him that — it’s Hawk’s nickname for him. Miguel confides in Hawk only secondary to Johnny, who is like a father to him. The entire Coyote Creek exchange shows they can fight and disagree but... well, to use the cliche, they don’t go to bed angry, you know? They’re square the very next day. Hawk is the first person at Miguel’s side when he gets kicked over the balcony and the LOOK he gives the second floor where Robby is? That boy is out for blood immediately to avenge Miguel. So much of his s3 behavior is fueled by that need for vengeance because MD is wholly responsible for what happened to Miguel. And Miguel is so confused and betrayed by Hawk’s shift in behavior, and yet still holds out hope that Hawk will see through Kreese’s BS and come with him to The Dojo I Refuse to Name. And when Hawk does make that deflection finally, he shows up at MD with Miguel. There’s so much more that I know I’m missing but whether someone ships them or not, that is a tried and true love and respect for one another, a willingness to fight for and defend one another that you don’t often see in TV friendships... or even in most tv relationships. And I just think that’s the best ❤️

22. Popular character you hate?

 Daniel, hands down. I mean... I don’t even necessarily hate Daniel, you know? I just think it’s really, pardon the pun, rich that a guy of immense wealth and privilege can’t get a therapist or turn to his far too patient wife for help with his existential crisis over his high school bully opening up a karate dojo to make some money and help a kid who is getting the crap kicked out of him. I get that Daniel’s narrative is necessary for the rivalry, but it does nothing to make him sympathetic as a character.

23. Unpopular character you love?

 Tory, definitely! Everyone hates her and then there’s me and the Squad over here banging away on our Coors Banquet cans yelling TORY RIGHTS! Seriously she catches so much flack for a teenage girl who is... the sole income provider for her family? At 17? While caring for a sick mom and a little brother? And fending off a creepy landlord? Tory has it so rough and then she meets a cool girl at her dojo who asks her to hang out at some fancy ass country club which is probably the nicest place Tory has ever been in, and then she gets talked down to and accused of being a thief and has another girl lay hands on her, only to find out that same girl is her new boyfriend’s ex and... ugh. I HATE that Tory gets shit all over when Tory and Sam wouldn’t even have beef if Sam had apologized to Tory as she SHOULD have. Tory isn’t innocent, but damn, I’d be pressed too.

 My other unpopular character I love? Nathaniel. Seriously that kid is THE best. He’s a literal child but is out there like I WILL FUCK YOU UP, even though he’s MD. Honestly, his Cobra Kai energy is so ferocious I won’t be surprised if he moves back to CK eventually. Anyway, I love him.


26. Most shippable character?

 Miguel, hands down. It’s because he’s so affable and sweet overall. And because his hair is so fluffy and pettable that no one can resist touching it. I like to imagine that one day he and Hawk are talking about their hair and Hawk makes a joke about how Miguel’s mane is getting so long that it’s going to be bigger than his own, and then he reaches out to ruffle it and internally has a bisexual meltdown because oh no IT’S SO SOFT AND NICE. But uh... anyway, yes. Definitely Miguel.

[returnofismasm]

Not to long form Loki meta in 2021 (sorry to my followers, but most of y’all know me personally....) but. Season 2 wishlist!

Season 1 wasn’t perfect, but I generally had a grand time watching it. It felt a lot like RTD-era Doctor Who--has some flaws, but you can tell everyone had a good time making it, and I had a good time watching it, and I’m glad there’s going to be more. 

So some things I’d love to see in season 2:

1. More exploration of Loki’s bisexuality. I’m really glad that Kate Herron made a point to get this confirmed, but more please! Whether that means a boyfriend or just references to past boyfriends is, I think, dependent on how many episodes the season gets. Without throwing a rock into the hornets nest of the selfcest discourse (seriously, don’t bring it here, make your own post) the Loki/Sylvie romance did feel a little rushed, so if they’re going to commit to that, I’d rather they stick with it then messing with a love triangle or something. If the backstabbing at the end of time has killed that dead, then yes. Boyfriend. Either way, have Loki reminisce about past lovers (was the reason Sif and the Warriors Three were all kinda done with Loki outside of him being Thor’s Kid Brother they have to hang out with because he’d dated most of them at one point? Hmm?)

2. On that note, more genderfluidity. They definitely dropped the ball on that. I’m cis so HOW that should be done is not really my lane. I liked the scene in Original Sin where Thor remarks that “These are fair maidens” and Loki responds “So am I, sometimes” so something like that would be good? But again, I do not want to talk over genderfluid folks on this topic. Just you know, do better, MCU. 

3. A follow up on the idea from episode 5 where Loki remarks that “We’re more powerful that we realize” when watching Classic Loki’s massive illusion of Asgard. The idea that magic--or at least, magic as learned on Asgard--is in part confidence could be really interesting. MCU Loki is weaker in magic than Comics Loki, and while the show did do a lot to try to close that gap, they do have to make it work with “Well if he can do this why didn’t he do it during Thor/Avengers/Infinity War/etc.” Loki’s a character with a lot of self-loathing he compensates for with a vastly overinflated opinion of himself, and neither of those things are true confidence. His most impressive magic display (moving the falling building) seemed to happen when he wasn’t really thinking too hard about it, so the seeds of having Loki’s magic get stronger as becomes more grounded are already there. Classic Loki was depressed, but he did also have a lot more actual confidence than any Loki we’d seen up to that point. 

4. Thor and Loki growing up, and also Thor and Loki reunion. Some scenes like in Good Omens, with Crowley and Aziraphale through history. It’s made blatantly clear that Loki misses Thor desperately, so it would be kinda weird if they never saw each other again. I just want them to hug, guys!

5. A longer episode run! Six is, well it’s FINE, but I think eight to ten would be ideal. I know Marvel Studios has a lot of stuff to fund, but it’s not like this show is a risk on the financial side. 

6. More Ravonna Renslayer! COVID apparently really messed with some stuff they wanted to explore with her, but we’ve got another go around on this. More Ravonna!

[nix-that-rad-lass]

I don't understand your rant. Bisexuals are unable to be gay and that's not an insult against them because bisexuality is an entirely separate orientation than homosexuality. Nobody called them tainted and if someone did, who gives a fuck, bisexuals don't suffer from heterophobia for all the bi women choosing male partners.

It makes no sense to derail goldstar discourse to defend bisexuals, it just adds to everyone's suspicion you empathize with bisexuals instead of lesbians because you don't understand what it means to be exclusively same sex attracted.

You’re really calling non gold stars bi?? Really? Anon this is not the take you think it is.

1. I didn’t call them tainted. Yet I have seen multiple puritans imply that, and imply that NGS & bi women are both lesser than or inferior to gold star lesbians.

2. “Who gives a fuck” what the fuck? So you’re happy to throw women under the bus because they are bi? Fuck you.

3. “Derail” how the fuck is talking about a ngs experience derailing GS & NGS EXPERIENCES?? Pull your head out of your ass.

4. “Adds suspicion” that I can fucking empathize?? Really?

5. “Don’t understand” ah yes. Thank you for enlightening me that you, a random fuckwad on the internet, knows me better than I know myself. Please do everyone a favor and fuck right off.

6. “Not an insult” yet gold star puritans treat other women like total fucking shit. Just because they don’t insult them to their face doesn’t mean they aren’t being shitty.

7. When the fuck did I ever say or imply that being gay and bi are the same?

Fucking hell.

[tricky-pockets]

oh god i didn't mean for this to be an essay

here is a story about bi and pan as labels:

once upon a time, people were less aware that trans and nonbinary people existed. when people started becoming more aware of these identities, we asked ourselves (1) can I be attracted to people who are not cis? and (2) does that mean I need to update my labels?

The first question is a weird one to think about now because we generally accept that it's shitty to assume you could never be attracted to a trans or nonbinary person. Nevertheless, it's a question that a lot of us had to ask sincerely.

I was comfortable with a 'yes' fairly quickly, in part because I was already bisexual and didn't have experience with lack of attraction based on gender. I imagine that it was similar for a lot of bi people.

As for the second question...

The trouble. The TROUBLE, okay. The trouble is that the word 'bisexual' has the prefix 'bi-'. And I think a VERY LARGE PORTION of the label Discourse is because some of us did this:

"oh wait now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I like more than 2 genders."

"but 'bi' sounds like two. uh oh."

"you know what sounds less like a binary? PANsexual. Or Omnisexual. that sounds more BIG."

This was a quick way to emphasize attraction to trans and nonbinary people. Others of us updated their internal definition of 'bisexual' and worked to raise awareness of trans/nb inclusion within that existing identity. To me, neither of those approaches seem transphobic or enbyphobic.

Today, those terms have subtle variations in meaning depending on the person - sometimes differentiated by the nature of the attractions and so on - but a lot of people see the terms as basically synonyms. And at this point, it's pretty well-accepted that no sexuality excludes trans/nb people by default. Generally speaking, people are not choosing labels because they think the other labels are exclusionary.

In summary, as a trans and nonbinary person: please stop calling each other trans- and enbyphobic; it's all fine. In a very practical sense, bi, pan, and omni people are equally likely to include me in their internal definitions of their own sexuality.

[itslmdee]

Fic: No Pride in Exlusionism

This month's theme is 'gatekeeping'. Today's piece looks at gatekeeping within the LGBTQ+ community.

"You're home early," Roger said. Mae sat heavily on the sofa next to him, kicking off her heels. She leaned over to kiss his cheek and then leaned back, staring at the ceiling.

Roger muted the tv. "You okay?"

"I dropped out of the planning committee."

"Why?"

Mae shook her head, took a deep shuddering breath. "This party...Gays for Halloween. I wanted a different name from the start. What does that even mean? Gay people support a holiday that many people think is an American import? Pumpkins in pride colours?"

Roger shifted to look at her. "Actually I can see paper pumpkins in pride colours."

Mae gave a wry smile. "Me too. That's not why I quit. It was Josie mostly, her and Jane and Peter. I was filling up the urn in the kitchen before we got started and I heard Josie talking by the serving hatch. Saying they were so glad John had joined us, an actual gay. She was feeling the committee was being overrun by bihets."

"She said that?" Roger took Mae's hand.

"I had three serious relationships with women before we got married," Mae said. "I'm bisexual. Marrying you doesn't change that."

"I know." He squeezed her hand. "I know."

Mae squeezed back. "Me and Tim and Desiree are all bi. Laura's lesbian but Josie is suspicious of anyone who's ever dated a man though she gives Dan a pass for a past girlfriend. Anyway Jane was giggling and agreeing because I think she fancies Josie - only reason she agreed to be vice chair when Rachel said she needed fewer responsibilities this year. And Peter...my God."

Roger waited patiently. One of the cats wandered over to inspect Mae's discarded shoes.

"I'm not that much older than most of them," Mae said. "But they don't seem to know anything about the history of the gay rights movement. Queer history, except Josie says queer is a slur despite it being reclaimed and used to push for greater awareness. And so they're trying to force out anyone who isn't a gay man or a good enough lesbian. Peter had a lot of opinions on the right kind of trans people who should be allowed to participate. The group has become increasingly exclusionary."

"So you quit?"

"Yes. I will not gatekeep," Mae said. "I will not tolerate bihet being thrown around to try and exclude bisexuals, or cishets to exclude asexuals, or get involved in the dysphoria debate to try and debate the rights of trans people. Josie doesn't want LGBT let alone Q, I, and A. Josie and Peter want L and G and screw everyone else."

Roger sighed. "Maybe there's another group you can join. A more inclusive one."

"Maybe." Mae let go of Roger's hand and got to her feet. "I'm making coffee, want one?"

"Please."

Roger knew Mae had found kinship, friendship, and purpose over the last six years she'd worked with the LGBT+ community group. She'd miss it. But he also knew she was principled and wouldn't regret quitting rather than supporting exclusionism.

"Did you talk to Maggie about this?" he asked when Mae returned with their drinks.

"I told her I quit, apologised that she'd probably have to pick up my role in organising the Halloween party."

"What about Peter? Is Maggie the right kind of trans woman according to him?"

Mae shrugged. "Maggie can take care of herself," she said. "My only regret is that if Peter talks out of turn like I heard him doing with Josie is I won't get to watch Maggie rip him a new one."

Notes and further reading

A lot of this gatekeeping takes place online; people say they've only experienced being excluded from online spaces and not groups in real life. However there are some people reporting being harassed at Pride for being seemingly straight while being bisexual, trans, or nb in a heterosexual relationship. The people who say the A in the LGBTQA is for ally not asexual to gatekeep are probably the same ones trying to gatekeep anyone who doesn't look 'gay' enough from participating in Pride.

"With the advent of queer theory and the launch of Queer as Folk, “queer” became used online as a more concise umbrella term than the full LGBT+ acronym (which, depending on who you ask, is LGBTQQIP2SAA). Today, interpretations of “queer” go a step further, and its acceptance generally splits along generational lines. Many young people — myself included — view “queer” as a term defining all nonstraight, nonbinary identities. “Queer” addresses the fluidity of gender and sexual orientation" - https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/2017/8/02/21-words-queer-community-has-reclaimed-and-some-we-havent#media-gallery-media-2

3 Differences Between the Terms ‘Gay’ and ‘Queer’ — and Why It Matters - https://everydayfeminism.com/2016/03/difference-between-gay-queer/

"The word "queer" has only recently been identified as a slur because of TERFs and exclusionists. Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERF) and radical gender/sexuality bianarists are flooding social media and blogging sites with propaganda smearing the word queer in the hopes of silencing all of us who don’t identify with their hate politics. Queer is the one word that doesn’t worship exclusion." - https://aminoapps.com/c/lgbt-1/page/blog/history-of-the-word-queer/BQ4p_GxRHwu5Xz35RWB31oKMLp8XJ8r7Ybo

Tumblr repsonse to "What does bihet mean" - https://bisexual-community.tumblr.com/post/93798259302/this-probably-sounds-stupid-but-what-does-bihet

On ace discourse and exclusionism on the internet vs in real life - https://medium.com/@meganhoins/the-rhetoric-of-digital-ace-discourse-4a690792f0bc

"According to 2013 Pew Research Center data, about 84 percent of bisexual adults who are in “committed relationships” are with “opposite-sex partners.” Within a broader LGBT community that too often guesses someone’s sexual orientation based on who they happen to be with at the moment, that statistic means many bisexual people get read as “straight”—or, at least, something less than fully queer." https://www.thedailybeast.com/why-bisexuals-feel-ignored-and-insulted-at-lgbt-pride

"Transmedicalism is a term for a wide range of beliefs in the transgender community that are critical of transgender people who haven't medically transitioned and/or don't experience major dysphoria. Many transmedicalists (or "transmeds" for short) focus on gatekeeping....Although the debate has been going since the '60s, it has gained more notoriety in the Internet age, particularly on Tumblr. Transmedicalists may be called "transmeds" or "truscum," while anti-transmedicalists may be called "tucutes" or (often erroneously) "transtrenders." " - https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Transmedicalism

[thesydneyfeminists]

Five Things This Bisexual Feminist Wants You to Know About Pride

As I’m sure a lot of you are aware, June is celebrated as Pride Month in many parts of the world. These celebrations often include parades, rainbow colored EVERYTHING and heaps of social media posts reveling in everything LGBTQIA+. For a lot of people, Pride is a party – and rightly so. In a world that blatantly aims to keep us down, rejoicing in our lives and livelihoods is a form of resistance in and of itself. It’s important for us to let loose and have fun sometimes, to recharge and remind ourselves why we fight the good fight. However, during Pride Month (and really, all year round) it is equally critical to remember the painful parts of our history. Pride exists because people fought and died for a future we have yet to fully realize. As a part of this remembrance, it is imperative to highlight the ways in which various oppressed identities overlap and interact with LGBTQIA+ identities. By this statement, I simply mean we must remember and celebrate the black, trans, bisexual women who started Pride and continue fighting every day to ensure a safer future for all LGBTQIA+ people.

My last point is also significant to our understandings of feminism. Feminism must include a space for people from different oppressed minorities. My personal feminism is so tightly entwined with my identity as a bisexual person, it is nearly impossible to extract them. And those are only two of my many identities (which range from highly privileged to marginalized). So, while this piece isn’t directed specifically towards gender equality, I believe in my heart it is still “feminist”. Feminist movements must inextricably bind themselves to LGBTQIA+ rights movements. In the same vein, they must also join with anti-racist activism, disability activism, etc. As the famous slogan goes, our feminism must be intersectional, or it is bullshit. Whether you consider yourself a member of the LGBTQIA+ community or are just trying to better ally yourself with us, this article will hopefully resonate with you. It is only a short list and would benefit from additions from our lovely readers. So, feel free to comment things you want the world to about the LGBTQIA+ community. But, without further ado, here are my top five things I want everyone to know about Pride!

Image Description: The bisexual flag, which has a fat red stripe at the top, fat blue stripe on the bottom and a thinner purple stripe in the middle.

1.     All M-Spec identities are valid and deserve a place in Pride celebrations. For those of you who don’t know, M-Spec is a term used to describe the multi-gender spectrum of attraction. It’s another, more inclusive way of talking about identities which fall under the “bi umbrella.” It includes bisexual people, pansexual people, polysexual people and anyone else who is attracted to two or more genders and wants to be included! There’s a lot of discourse about this subject, even within the LGBTQIA+ community. But Pride was started by a bisexual woman and I firmly believe she would have been inclusive of her M-Spec family (https://www.advocate.com/bisexuality/2014/06/17/remembering-brenda-ode-%E2%80%98mother-pride%E2%80%99).

2.     No cops at pride. This point is another tenuous topic of discussion and has ended more than one friendship. But I think it’s important to state and even more important to analyze. The original pride was a riot, a protest specifically AGAINST the police state. It was meant to bring light to the very real, very visceral harm cops have done (and continue to do) to LGBTQIA+ people, especially BIPOC (black, indigenous people of color). I have heard all the counter-arguments and, for the most part, understand where people are coming from. But LGBTQIA+ people have the right to be fearful and distrustful of cops. Large masses of cops at pride don’t actually help keep any of us safe. There are better ways of creating and maintaining safe spaces for the LGBTQIA+ community (http://www.aaronxrose.com/blog/alternatives-to-police).

Image Description: Photo of a crowd of people holding up protest signs and the LGBTQIA+ flag. They are standing behind red police tape. Two police officers are standing in the road on the left side of the photo. 

3.     Our Pride celebrations absolutely MUST be accessible. This means, at the very least, wheelchair accessible venues and toilets, sign language translators, accessible parking spots, among many other examples. I would also personally love to see accommodations made for autistic people at Pride events. The crossover between autistic people and LGTQIA+ people is huge, and we deserve to feel comfortable and safe at big events like Pride.

4.     Please don’t assume “straight-looking” people are just allies and/or don’t belong at pride. I personally don’t mind cishetallo (cis, hetereosexual, allosexual, aka the opposite of asexual) people attending Pride events if they are aware of their place there. I enjoy bringing my straight boyfriend to Pride festivities and sharing that part of my life with him. However, just because you see a couple comprised of what you assume to be a “boy” and “girl”, it does not mean they aren’t part of the LGBTQIA+ community. Firstly, people you perceive to be one gender could be another/ non-gendered. I’m thinking especially of my nonbinary pals here. Second, one or both parts of a couple could fall under the M-Spec umbrella. Lastly, people could be questioning their sexual and gender identities. It’s not your (or our) place to judge people or interrogate their reasonings for being at Pride. As long as they are being respectful of the space, just live and let live!

Image Description: Photo of someone holding up a large, white sheet attached to two wooden poles. The middle of the sheet is painted messily in the colors of the rainbow. White, black letters are stenciled in the paint. They read “Love is love.” 

 5.     If you are a member of the LGBTQIA+ community, whatever that means to you, you deserve love, happiness and to feel safe. I wanted this last one to just be a shout out to my fellow LGBTQIA+ folks. I see you, I hear you, I want to validate the fuck out of you. Pride isn’t always a feel good, amazing time for all LGBTQIA+ people. If it’s not for you, please don’t feel bad. Whatever you need to do to protect yourself and your emotional state, do that. If celebrating who you are means watching your favorite show on Netflix all weekend in bed, that’s perfectly alright. No two of us are the same, and we are every single one of us amazing and wonderful. Yes, you too. Sending my love your way and hoping you find it in your heart to love yourself a bit more this month.

By: Brittany L. 

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of the Sydney Feminists. Our Blogger and Tumblr serve as platforms for a diverse array of women to put forth their ideas and explore topics. To learn more about the philosophy behind TSF’s Blogger/ Tumblr, please read our statement here: https://www.sydneyfeminists.org/a

[aceys]

i think the bi vs pan thing is very cultural bc depending on where you are, ppl are mainly bi bc “pan is the same thing” (like you) or ppl are mainly pan bc “bi is exclusionary” and i got so tired of the discourse that i’m just gay bro like i fuckin hate ppl ripping eachother apart bc of bi vs pan can’t we just love eachother bro???? like ugh i literally STOPPED id ing as bi and/or pan bc of this dumb shit i hate it so much but i rly do think it depends on where ur from

i can see that. i suppose it depends on who you interact with and how you interpret it yourself. it is frustrating, i agree with you. i initially identified as pan when i was younger, but now i call myself bi because to me, it’s 1) easier to understand 2) more well-known 3) basically the same thing as pan (like you said, in my opinion). 

i mean, ideally, we wouldn’t need labels at all, which would solve this whole mess, but i just watched dan howell’s new video (and yes i’m a wreck about it, please message me i just wanna talk) and he mentioned how humans need labels so we can put everything into neat boxes and like, i understand that. people want a way to categorize themselves so they can better understand these concepts. because they’re difficult things to fully realize! something as expansive and confusing as sexuality and gender is difficult to quantify in one word. 

so, on one hand, i do understand why some people would want to label themselves as pan instead of bi. if they think it fits them better, that’s reasonable. on the other hand, though, it’s frustrating to me that we need these sorts of labels at all, especially when it’s such miniscule differences (i mean, even if you do take bi and pan as different, it’s just so similar either way and you have to admit that). especially when the entire origin of pansexuality was to be a more “inclusive” bisexuality. when you phrase it like that, it’s insulting, and even more especially to the people who quantify it as “pan means attraction to men, women, trans women, and trans men,” which is why you’ll see me calling it transphobic occasionally. including trans people as the difference between bi and pan is what pisses me off. it’s transphobic and rude to imply that they’re not real men or women. now, as for nonbinary people, that’s a different story, but at the same time, i don’t think attraction to enbys requires a separate label. 

if you look up bisexuality, the official definition is “attraction to two or more genders”. that, i think, bridges the gap between bi and pan, and successfully includes nonbinary people in an accepting way. any other differences, such as “pan people are attracted to people, not their gender!” are just making a mockery of both of the sexualities.

so, again, ideally, we wouldn’t need any of these labels. but we’re humans, and humans love labels, so if someone wants to be uber-specific and identify as pansexual, i mean, who am i to stop them? just a kid on the internet-- that is to say, no one. but, as you do, i love tossing in my two cents, those cents being that, inherently, the implied differences between bisexuality and pansexuality are so miniscule and meaningless that there is really no need for multiple labels at all.

that’s my rant. hopefully it makes sense. lemme know what you think.

[lesbian-ed]

Frequently Asked Questions

(ctrl+F helps you find stuff faster!)

Am I allowed to follow if I am X?

Everyone is allowed to follow our blog. We are not going to stop anyone from hitting the follow button. Keep in mind that this blog exclusively caters to and focuses on lesbians (this means females).

We urge bisexual women to please stop sending us questions about your heterosexual relationships. We accept questions from bisexual women about their same sex-relationships/same sex-attraction though.

Porn blogs and such will be blocked at sight though. If you are blocked by us it’s probably because you were being disrespectful in a reply/reblog or that we just don’t want you interacting with our posts for whatever reason.

Why does your bio say “x lesbians and y dykes”?

Because some of the mods prefer dyke to lesbian or vice versa. As lesbians we reserve the right to call ourselves that, but not others.

Doesn’t dyke mean lesbian mean dyke mean lesbian..?

Yes, those words mean the same. It’s just the choice between saying pants or trousers, we reserve the right to make that decision for ourselves. Again, only lesbians can use the word dyke for themselves.

Am I still a lesbian if X?

We get many, many questions from girls and women who want help figuring out if they’re a lesbian or not. We answer every question the best we can, but we cannot tell you what your sexuality is. We can only speculate with the help of the information you provide. For more information about the topic, you should check out our compulsory heterosexuality tag. PLEASE READ THE COMP HET TAG BEFORE ASKING US QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS TOPIC.

Why isn’t this blog for transwomen?

Because they are male. Males cannot be lesbians and lesbians are not attracted to males - therefore there is no point in including transwomen (or any male) in our blog. 

Why is this blog inclusive of transmen?

For this question we’d like to refer to this post where we go into depth about why. The short answer is because they are female, and we are feminists.

If you have any further question about discourse oriented issues, such as transgender ideology, please direct your asks to @lesbian-ed-discourse

Why haven’t we answered your ask?

We reserve the right to pick and choose the asks we answer. If we haven’t answered your ask in particular, there’s a few reasons as to why:

it contains content we don’t want to post on the blog (such as misogynistic slurs, violent language, mentions of explicit hetero sex)

you sent us something we don’t want our followers to see - some topics are too gruesome and triggering for us to feel comfortable posting it and letting our followers read

we don’t know how to answer it/feel unqualified to answer

you are attacking us/our followers

you are asking us something about your heterosexual relationship (this OF COURSE includes bisexual women asking for advice on their boyfriends - we don’t answer questions like that)

we have already answered something similar (please, we beg you, search the blog for the topic your question is about if you think it is a similar question - we tag everything so you should be able to find it easily) - we get many questions about compulsory heterosexuality so we urge you to look through the TAG before asking about it

the answer can be found in the FAQ and you just didn’t read it before you sent the question

the question didn’t fit the blog. Perhaps you sent an ask about something completely unrelated to lesbianism and something we didn’t want you to send in general - we get many questions and we don’t want to clog up our followers’ dashboards with irrelevant stuff. They follow us for lesbian content.

your ask would start discourse we don’t feel up for/don’t want our followers to have to sit through. Please redirect questions that would start discourse/questions that cover inflammatory topics to THE DISCOURSE BLOG and we might answer there if we feel up for it.

Are you TERFs?

We are all radical feminists/rad-leaning feminists and gender critical. We are inclusive of everyone who is female, trans or not. However, our blog is not here for males and we will never make this blog about males in any way, shape or form. Basically, we are inclusive of females and exclusive of males, no matter their trans status. In other words, women and FTT’s are welcome, but men and MTT’s are not. A better description of us would be Male Exclusionary Radical Feminists, since we don’t exclude trans females, but by all means, call us whatever you want. We genuinely don’t give a shit.

Why do you tag some asks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5?

The first 5 tags are the tags that show up on the tumblr search, so, while we still want people to be able to find the posts by the tags inside our blog, we don’t want these posts to end up in the actual tags for everyone to find. For example if we’re answering a post about sex ed, but we don’t want it to end up in the “orgasm” tag (because probably porn bots would be able to find it there), we’d tag it 1 through 5 and hope nasty porn blogs will keep off of our content.

[sapropel]

Some Thoughts on the Structure of Discourse  (and Why It's Faulty)

Hi guys! I’m sure a lot of you have noticed, but the discourse has turned to shit. I wanted to provide some thoughts on the topic, but it’s some stuff I’ve been meaning to stay for awhile. If you’re worried about the current state of the discourse, I encourage you to read this.

Also this took me three hours to write and I’m mentally ill as hell so please validate my questionable decision to write all this out lol

There are many reasons that Tumblr discourse has gotten so toxic. For one, when you put a bunch of teenagers in a high stress environment, especially mentally ill teenagers and teenagers who are survivors of abuse and trauma, it's a breeding ground both for toxicity and for pain. Because social justice/discourse Tumblr attracts users with rough backgrounds or marginalized identities, it's easy to band together against and bond over common oppressors. These things can cause several issues.

Tumblr has a terrible habit of weaponizing identities. By that I mean discoursers will use their marginalized identities to win arguments without providing other evidence or good arguments.

Take the following argument for example:

Q: Is the word “homosexual” problematic when talking about gay men?

Gay man 1: “Yes, it is.”

Gay man 2: “No, it isn't!”

Okay, so now what do you do? You're used to believing people based solely off of their identities, but what happens when they disagree?

The issue with holding marginalized people as experts in nuanced issues is that marginalized identities are NOT monolithic. People can be prejudiced, bigoted, rude, or purposefully deceitful regardless of identity. People can also be extremely kind and intelligent with different backgrounds and lived experience, with some ignorance and mistakes, with personal preferences. Obviously, if you hear overwhelmingly that something is problematic from that group of people (e.g, is it okay to misgender trans people, the answer being no), then you should take care to listen and take them at their word. Some arguments are more complicated and require deeper analysis, so let's return to the argument before.

Q: Is the word “homosexual” problematic when talking about gay men?

Gay Man 1: “Yes, it is. It recalls the medicalization of gay men and our subsequent mistreatment and dehumanization. With the split attraction model, the word also has a new meaning, so it can be confusing in conversations. Many gay men consider the word to be a slur and don't want to hear it.”

Gay Man 2: “No, it isn't! As a gay man, ‘gay’ has become an umbrella term for anyone who experiences same-gender attraction. If we don’t use that word, how will people be able to talk about us, and how will we be able to talk about ourselves? Because of some events in my life, I'm uncomfortable with other people calling me ‘gay’ but I've never been uncomfortable with ‘homosexual.’ “

Okay, so you heard an argument this time. So, what's the right answer? Isn't that what is important?

It's not that simple. One issue with discourse on Tumblr is its inability to handle nuance. Who GETS to decide what's right? Sure, we can figure out bits and pieces. For example, you should know it's inappropriate to call the first man a homosexual because he's said it makes him uncomfortable. We know we shouldn't make the second man accept the label “gay” if it hurts him.

So again, who's right?

I can't tell you that. I could only ever tell you my opinion. I can tell you that for me, personally, I like to err on the side of caution.

Tumblr is unwilling to treat issues as living, changing, perhaps unanswerable entities. The need to have a black and white answer on everything is alienating people and making discourse a fruitless endeavour. Instead of fighting to prove why we’re right, or fighting to get an answer, we should be working together towards a common goal of educating each other and ourselves and allowing ourselves to be compassionate and imperfect creatures.

How do we educate each other? I promise that treating people with innocent, if misguided, questions isn't it. We have to let people be curious and make mistakes and know that we won't demonize them for dissent or for messing up. I believe that open, honest, and genuine discourse will naturally teach well.

Again, I would like to stress that there is a difference between situational ignorance and a person consistently unwilling to better themself.

The weaponization of identity isn't the only issue with some of the language of our discourse. I also want to talk about the difference between systematic oppression and discrimination and how Tumblr handles it.

With marginalized identities, there is very often oppression. This word gets thrown around a lot, especially with respect to ace discourse. So what does it mean?

Systematic oppression is the institutional or legislative and almost always cultural manifestation of disenfranchisement coupled with a power dynamic that inhibits social mobility.

Some examples of people who are systematically oppressed (at least in America, but due to imperialism and the like, the effects are usually global) are black people, women, and people who experience same-gender attraction. I'm going to talk about the experience of systematic oppression vs discrimination for the third case, just a little bit. Obviously, these issues are extremely complex and I won't be able to explain every facet, but I can give a rough sketch.

For the sakes of simplicity and consistency, I would like to talk about two groups of people: gay men and bisexual men. Both groups of people experience same-gender attraction, and both are oppressed under homophobia.

Hold on, did OP just say that bi people are oppressed under homophobia? WHAT ABOUT BIPHOBIA???

Okay! This is a common misconception on Tumblr. Homophobia is systematic because it is legal, institutional, very cultural, and involves a power imbalance between those who experience SGA and those who do not.

Biphobia is NOT a form of systematic oppression, and I'm happy to explain why in another post, but not here. This is already too long.

Does that mean that gay men can't discriminate against bi men? No.

Does THAT mean that bi men can't discriminate against gay men? No.

Any aggression that occurs between two people who are oppressed under the same systematic force can be classified as “lateral aggression.” Lateral aggression is damaging, insidious, pointless, and divisive.

There are cultural components that privilege bi men over gay men, and there are cultural components that privilege gay men over bi men, but in society, there is no power imbalance between the two.

Bi men can be extremely homophobic to gay men, and gay men can be extremely biphobic to gay men, BOTH to the point where it could ruin someone’s life.

I said all of this to lead up to my very important point: the validation of discrimination.

I've been on Tumblr for 4 years, and in my opinion, Tumblr mainly cares about oppressed identities or notions that can be wrapped up nicely in little bows.

But I want to make very, very clear that having more marginalized identities than another person does not make you better, smarter, more correct, or mean their struggles are more valid than yours.

Some of the worst things that have happened in my life are because of things that don’t get me ~Internet points,~ like the fact I was raised in a Mormon household, the fact I'm not conventionally attractive, the fact I grew up in a conservative area.

The discrimination and heartache I have faced for things like these are arguably worse, or at least comparable, to the discrimination I've faced for being a gay man.

I feel that a lot of what's wrong with discourse is that people feel like if their heartache doesn't come from being systematically oppressed or from trauma/abuse, then it's not equal or that it's not valid. This is ABSOLUTELY false.

If we are going to be successful discoursers and make progress and better ourselves, we have to let go of our strange fetishization of identity. We have to stop the idea that there is any cohesive, monolithic experience or perspective from any group of people. We have to validate discrimination and the effect it has on people.

Failing to do this alienates people and makes it harder for all of us to become knowledgeable and kind.

We HAVE to kill the idea that someone making a mistake or holding a mildly problematic belief makes them irredeemable. We HAVE to treat arguments as individual and not necessarily as mindless parts of a larger whole. We HAVE to accept that we are imperfect, dynamic, and human. We are not arbiters of judgment or masters of morality. We are a group of people who have come together with the common goals of building community and working to better the experiences of disadvantaged people.

I recognize the need to be wary of patterns and harmful rhetoric, and I understand (and condone) retaliation against oppressors and unnecessary cruelty. This post is NOT here to excuse repugnant behavior and beliefs.

We have to treat each person we come across in the discourse not as the sum (or worse, the poster child) of their identities, experiences, and beliefs, but rather as intersectionally gestalt, multi-faceted, capable of compassion and love, imperfect, and with a boundless potential to improve themself.

It's easy to start a witch hunt on someone who made a poorly worded post or who made a mistake, and sometimes such an extreme reaction is justifiable, even necessary. But again, think about why--is it the allure of seeming more enlightened? Is it blindly following someone you admire? Is it out of spite and cruelty? Is it because you want to win? Or is it out of a genuine desire to keep people safe and to help others learn?

I understand that we are imperfect and sometimes hedonistic or primal in our intentions, and I know that perfection is impossible. I know for a fact I am guilty of many of the shortcomings I highlighted in this post.

Good discoursers have to know that being incorrect is inevitable. There is no such thing as perfect discourse, and mistakes should be expected. The discourser who sees themself as infallible is the discourser to be wary of.

We aren’t machines. We’re people.

[cauldron-of-dizzy]

So this blog is supposed to be about the things in fandom that I like, but...

But good God if I have to see any more LGBT+ discourse during Pride Month I'm going to stab a bitch. And I mean like, "Queer is a slur, aces don't belong at Pride, saying you're biromantic/homoromantic/ect is had because you're making homosexuality strictly sexual!" sort of discourse. Like. People are really That Stupid and it's annoying. Warnings for True Facts™ and heavy use of the word queer.

Now please forgive any typos, but let's see the bar "straight", shall we?

Asexuals and aromantics belong at Pride. They fall under the + in LGBT+, as do several other identities.

Cishets can go to Pride but should do so STRICTLY in support of LGBT+ people. Not for themselves, not cause it's fun, not cause it's a party. It's not for you, don't think it is.

Lesbians need more representation! Use whichever flag you think is prettiest if you can't find the least problematic one, just use it.

Trans people deserve more recognition for what they've done for the community. End of argument. Dig up your history, give them their applause.

Also! Trans men are men and trans women are women! End of discussion! Don't bring you bullshit here you will be fed to the pigs!

A really stupid argument: "There's no plus in LGBT if you don't fall under one of those 4 letters you don't belong in the community!!!" Eat a dick hon. You could not be more wrong if you tried. There is a + in LGBT+ because there's so many identities and labels that we can't feasibly fit them all. So yes there's a +, and yes anyone who isn't cisgender and heterosexual simultaneously is in the LGBT+ community.

Haven't seen this in a while but just in case, pedophiles do not belong at Pride, are not part of the LGBT+ community, and are not welcome in LGBT+ spaces. They are however welcome in psychiatric wards and coffins 6 feet in the ground.

Don't be sexual at Pride. And I don't mean don't kiss or hold hands or hug I mean at least keep your junk covered. Like common decency, y'know?

If you don't want to see gay people (of any gender or sex) being intimate at Pride, don't go. 2+2=4 bitch, not wanting to see intimacy + definitely going to be intimacy at Pride= don't go to Pride.

TERFs are not welcome at Pride. Transphobes are not welcome at Pride. Truscum are not welcome at Pride. Racists aren't welcome at Pride. Exclusionists of any kind are not welcome at Pride. I don't give a rat's ass if you're the gayest man or woman alive if you don't like trans people, POC, or anything else that isn't inherently bad due to facts, you're not welcome at Pride.

People of all genders are welcome at Pride! Trans, cis, demi, fluid, agender, non-binary, questioning, genderqueer, ect. If someone says you're not welcome, stab them in the face.

Queer isn't a slur anymore. Let's set that bar in concrete. I'm not saying that the word can't be harmful, but all words can be harmful. Yet we're not treating "nerd" like a slur. Queer, like just about every word the LGBT+ community uses for themselves, has had a complicated history and usage, and it's now being reclaimed as a broad identity. Let it happen. Besides, many, many younger people have never been harmed by the word and see it as a great term. Don't ruin it for them.

That being said, if someone isn't comfortable with you using the term queer to describe them, STOP. No questions asked. You don't know their life.

Another note on queer. If you hear someone using it, and you don't like it, but they're not specifically directing it at you or someone whom you know is uncomfortable with the term? Remove yourself from that place. Don't cause a scene, just quietly move away. You're entitled to your opinion, they're entitled to theirs.

Homoromantics aren't "closet cases" or "on the down low" or any other bullshit. You don't have a right to erase their identity like that. And it's not making homosexuality inherently sexual either. You know why? Because if someone says "I'm homosexual" but doesn't say shit about their romantic attraction, they're homoromantic AND homosexual. At the same time. And that can be summarized by saying homosexual.

I'm all for redefining terms like bisexual to make sure people don't jump down your throat about transphobia that isn't actually there, but maybe look at other terms to make sure you're not giving them the same definition? Cause I saw someone give bisexual the same definition as omnisexual today and that fucking hurt. Be conscious of different sexual orientations!

Feel free to reblog with anything I missed but if you try to start shit know that I will not hesitate to feed you your ass.

[furiouskanekicollector]

LGBT+ Representation in Voltron and Neil Kaplan's words

I don't expect literally anyone to read this, but I needed to say it. Out of all the discourse that Voltron has generated, the LGBT+ issue is the one that is nearest and dearest to my heart especially since a lot of the discourse surrounding it is focused on ship wars and age discourse. This has nothing to do with whether I want Klance to be canon or if I think Shiro should have sex with Keith.

Rather, representation is something that is very important to me and Voltron is another show that seems to be dropping the ball. Now, we don't have the entire show yet and yes, I know there are likely many seasons to go in the show. But, it bothers me that numerous people involved in the creation of Voltron have declared that we will have LGBT+ representation and avidly supported LGBT+ causes outside of the show, yet for two seasons all we have is heterosexual representation. Which, some defend and say it is not a show that focuses on sexuality or romance. Ok, fine, I agree, but we still have the following:  

1. Lance flirting with every female and I mean every female (except Pidge).

2. Depictions of hetereosexual marriages (Pidge's family)

3. Hunk and Shay as the only real, main canonical romance so far. 

Even for a show that is "totally not about sexuality and romance" we have numerous representations of heterosexual romance and sexuality.

Because that is seen as normal and acceptable for a kid’s show. LGBT+ characters are not. And, I fully believe that Voltron will eventually have representation. But, I am less confident that it will be anything particularly compelling. Like, they will have Coran be gay and show five seconds of him with a guy not even holding hands. Or, Pidge will turn out to be a lesbian, but it will be such a subtle reveal that I don't even realize it until after the show on Tumblr. Or, they will declare someone gay after the show has ended.

Which is perhaps unfair of me to assume the worst of them, but, again, for two seasons we have had heterosexual romance and sexuality front and center (Lance and Nyma was basically an entire episode of Lance trying to get in her pants. That was literally the basis for the entire episode) and pretty much nothing LGBT+ except fan hopes and dreams and possibility. Like, did Pidge hesitate at that bathroom for a reason other than confusion over the alien signs? Did Keith hold Lance's hand for a second too long while helping him up when Lance got injured?

See how subtle those are compared to Lance constantly making sexual and flirty comments toward females or Hunk and Shay being adorable together?  

What if Shay had been coded male? Or if Hunk went after Rax? Or if Lance flirted with aliens coded male and female?

Which leads me to Neil Kaplan's words. I love Neil Kaplan, full disclosure. He is brilliant as Zarkon (and Madara from Naruto). He is hilarious on twitter. Which, is why today disappointed me.

Using his own words-

https://twitter.com/NeKap/status/849667576082780160

Here, he states that this person chose to believe a character wasn't bisexual when that person could have imagined a character to be bisexual. He says not doing so is not believing in "free thought"

https://twitter.com/NeKap/status/849667576082780160

and then, I literally laughed out loud at this one

https://twitter.com/NeKap/status/849670649970778112

He asks the same person if they ever asked anyone if it is ok to not be straight and imagines a possibility where they say "yes its ok!!"

I have no idea where to start, so here goes.

Good representation is not telling LGBT+ people to imagine characters who are coded straight as possibly being bisexual. It just isn't.

As a child, I didn't even realize that bisexual people existed. Literally, no idea they existed. I say this as a bisexual person. Bisexuality was never represented anywhere. I lived in a conservative area where homosexual individuals were only spoken about in whispers, let alone bisexual people or transgendered individuals. All I knew was that I had feelings that were wrong, reinforced by everything around me, including the shows I watched where there was no representation (I am even including homosexual representation in this-I cannot think of a single LGBT+ character from my childhood).

I was sad, I was lonely, I was in denial, I hid from myself for a long time. Every relationship I saw was straight, in cartoons, movies, books, in real life, you name it. As a child, all I knew was that I was alone and wrong.

The first time I saw a healthy representation of a homosexual relationship, I cried. It was life-changing for me.

I think back on what a difference it would have made if there had been even one bisexual or homosexual character for me to look up to, telling me that what I felt wasn't wrong. That it didn't make me a disgusting pervert or pedophile or slut who wants attention (all stuff said to LGBT+ individuals).

Representation matters. Positive representation matters. This is something that is quite literally scientifically proven. For example, there are heaps of studies done about representation of black individuals in shows geared toward children-how damaging it can be when all the good people and pretty people and princesses are white while all the bad people are black (or there are no black people).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkpUyB2xgTM

One easy example. I can provide literature though (like, peer reviewed studies).

Representation matters. Actual representation-not telling children to "imagine" representation in characters that only ever express interest in the opposite sex.  

And then, the last tweet I linked. Oh boy. So, it is on children to ask people if it is ok to be gay or bisexual and then he imagines that person saying it is ok? Am I reading that right? Please tell me if I am not.

Because we still live in a world where gay kids get booted out of houses and conversion therapy where they electrocute us exists. Or, the church we go to every week tells us we will burn in hell for having perverted urges like wanting to hold someone's hand that is the same sex as us. Who exactly do you see these children approaching about this, exactly?

I like Voltron a lot and I still like Neil Kaplan. I think he is dead wrong here, but I am hoping that perhaps someone more eloquent than me can explain these things to him one day. I can't imagine what type of background he has in life and I don't know his journey, but I am imagining someone telling children and confused teenagers just to "imagine" representation where it doesn't exist and exercise free thought probably doesn't live in a world where they are taught their feelings will send them to hell or their parents might beat them or throw them out of the house for having those feelings.

Because that is what some people have lived through and are living through as we speak. And that is why representation matters so much to me now as someone who is older and can and does imagine anything I want now. This isn't about Klance. This isn't about a ship. This isn't about Shiro or how old he is. This is about the kids that I know are sitting at home watching this show, scared to death because they have realized that they probably aren't straight. Terrified of how their parents will react. Scared of going to hell. And how life-changing it could be to have one character who makes you feel normal and safe. One character that isn't straight who is accepted and loved anyway. I wish I had that as a child. I wish children now could have that.

I hope Voltron comes through for them. I really, genuinely hope it does.