#but I think I’d be a better lesbian and a better non binary person if people read me more as a man

[toasterbunnicula]

Mass Effect Character Sexualities because I want to project

(Partly headcanon, bi-ased, personal opinion)

Ashley: straight, formerly homophobic until she realized that most of her Normandy crew mates were gay

Garrus: bi energy, its simply unfair to our gay guys for such an amazing and hot character to not go both ways. Ive also seen too much Garrus/Thane/Shepard fanart to see him any other way

Liara: obviously bi, I hc that she was confused when she first encountered homophobia because it simply doesn’t exist in asari culture (closest thing is the asarixasari stigma)

Wrex: for some reason I see him as bi? I have no idea where I got this but I want to see a tough, old warrior casually mentioning being into both men and women and not caring at all about it (even though I think krogan culture probably wouldn’t approve)

Tali: for my sake as a helpless bi simp, I see her as under the umbrella, but doesn’t realize it. Like me before I came out, Tali would say “yeah she’s really pretty and I want to hang out with her and hug her and stare at her but I’m not gay or anything.” You are. You are gay. I think it would be in character for her to completely miss the fact that she’s into girls as well as men

Joker: straight. The kind of straight to make jokes about his friends’ sexualities, but not mean anything by it. He goes to pride every June with his wife EDI (who I will get to)

Jacob: I honestly can’t believe that he was originally intended to be bi, I just can’t see him into men unless I squint. It’s hilarious that they tried to make his male romance more like Brokeback Mountain so it’d be accepted

Miranda: I’ve seen a headcanon on Pinterest about Miranda having internalized homophobia because it doesn’t line up with her view of genetic perfection, something she’s established to be insecure about. I think it would make perfect sense for her character. I think it’s easy to see her as a lesbian practicing het-comp, especially with how awkward her initial flirting with Shepard is, but there are more scenes in her romance that feel authentic than there are that feel performative, so I’m inclined to say she is bi/pan/omni/etc.

Mordin: I’m pretty sure his asexuality is canon. I also think that he’s aromantic as well, but can objectively assess beauty/attractiveness well. For example, his film noir short story in the Citadel DLC involves a hookup with Aria. I personally believe that is him saying “yeah, she’s attractive, and if I were into women, I’d smash”

Zaeed: he gives off straight uncle who would punch a homophobe for you but otherwise doesn’t know how to interact with you after you’ve come out and tries a little too hard to acknowledge your sexuality but it’s definitely well-meaning (think the “anyone could be they!” scene from Brooklyn Nine-Nine)

Grunt: straight and supports his bi parents (Shepard and Garrus/Thane/Tali/Liara), wears rainbows at Pride for them, and regularly headbutts homophobes

Jack: I’m forever salty about them erasing her pansexuality. Also she and Miranda should’ve kissed

Kasumi: also gives off pan energy. She definitely feels like the type to not care about gender at all- as long as they’ve got muscles, that’s all that matters to her

Thane: pan energy

Samara: as established, Samara is bisexual

Legion: ace, non-binary (goes with people using he/him based on its masculine voice, pronouns are they/it)

Kelly: she said so herself, she doesn’t care about race/species or gender, all that matters is the person 💖💛💙

EDI: something about Sentient AI Who People Initially Don’t Trust Until She Gets A Humanoid Body That People Can Better Associate With Her reads to me as a trans allegory. Obviously, she’s not trans, but the vibes are there. Many times, people are suspicious of trans women until they transition and pass more as cis, which is similar to EDI’s story. She learns more about herself after her body changes, and others start to appreciate her more and have an easier time referring to her with she/her pronouns. As for her sexuality, she doesn’t seem to lean any particular way to me. She doesn’t seem like the type who’d use labels, even though it would make sense for her to “categorize” herself. I’d say she’s unlabelled- definitely into men, with her relationship with Joker

James: as much as I wish we could get gay gym bro representation, James is great as he is, being a masculine straight guy who’s best friends are openly gay (Cortez) and bi (Shepard)

Traynor: lesbian (canon), definitely into women who can crush her head under their heel but also has a dominant side herself

Cortez: gay (canon)

Diana: that annoying and popular bi girl you secretly had a crush on but didn’t want to because she was intimidating and popular

[autistook]

Okay so, I’m on anon because we’ve had 0 interaction previously and while I love your blog and do really want to get to know you better, I feel like you just need support rn.

Im going to share a little bit about my journey to see if it sounds a bit familiar to you (even if it doesn’t, that’s alright too!!). A bit about me: I’m a lesbian who that she was bi for ~8 years when I was young(er) and still figuring it out, because I knew I liked women but never seriously considered whether I actually liked men and just took it as a default that I did. I also sort of mentally tried to train myself into liking men via celebrity crushes etc. (something I know few of my gay guy friends also did in fear of not being bi), but obviously it didn’t work. I never actually slept with a man, but that’s more because whenever an opportunity would present itself I’d come up with a million excuses not to and less because I didn’t seriously consider it and I did feel like I wanted to. A lot of my thinking came down to me not being repulsed by the idea of having sex with a dick and instead actively fantasising about it. I thought that meant that I was *cured* as it were, and therefore couldn’t be a lesbian. When I got over that mental hurdle, I sort of realised that yeah, sex with a dick would be hot, but sex with a dick that’s a strap CONNECTED TO A WOMAN? 1000x hotter. And yeah, like you, I never really felt the same level of romantic attachment to the men in my life.

One thing I do want to say is that obviously for LGBT+ people it’s very common to view us getting to know ourselves better as a crisis, and it definitely feels like that. When I thought I was bi I didn’t really come out or anything and tried to keep my romantic life very seperate (partly because I did deep down think the label was off for me, but also yknow, that deep deep shame of internalised homophobia). BUT, it didn’t feel like a crisis in the same way realising I was a lesbian did. I think comphet really does mess with you mentally and it was pretty hard for me to come to terms with the fact that not only did I like women, but I didn’t like men. Once I did, I felt happier than I ever had in my life and I’m out and proud!! I think it might be worth thinking about why we articulate these things as a crisis to begin with and question what are the barriers in your own head preventing you from fairly considering the possibility you’re a lesbian.

On liking non-binary people, I sometimes feel guilty for finding nb people attractive when I’m a self-professed lesbian and they do not identify as a woman. But it’s not because I see them as women? It doesn’t stop me from calling myself a lesbian, however. Sexuality is complex and nuanced, but being attracted to an nb person now and then doesn’t take away from the fact that I’m a lesbian.

I hope this helps!!! Sometimes there isn’t a simple answer to these things and there doesn’t need to be. Labels are helpful, but not when they box you in or prevent you from finding yourself. I think the first step is to really think long and hard (lol) about why this is a crisis for you and what will change if you are lesbian.

Either way, remember to love yourself first and foremost and know there will always be sapphic sisters out here cheering you on 🌈❤️🏳️‍🌈

this helped a lot and made me shed a few tears. ♡

definitely a big part of me has always gone for men in relationships because it's "the norm" and makes stuff "easier".

I've always preferred women. that I do know.

I remember when me and some other girls from my class had a movie night and we talked about sex, and I said something like "I always get the ick when I think about penis and men" because I thought it was how everyone thought about it. everyone looked at me weird and turns out, I was the only one in our group who thought that lol

[possibilistfanfiction]

Genuine question, how did you figure out or realize the whole being butch thing? What does being butch mean to you?

idk if it was like… figure out? more so just putting a name to something i’ve always felt or known about myself. i came out as a lesbian, then i came out as nb, then i was like well i want gender affirming care so that must mean i am Trans™️, & it’s like… none of those words or kind of… vibes (lol sorry) quite fit? i don’t feel like a cis lesbian, & i actually kind of despise non-binary as a concept (don’t send asks abt this i won’t answer them lol, do ur own thing if u love it that’s cool); i think for me personally Transness is a little too serious & intense & limiting to how i feel. & im a white afab person in a smaller body, & honestly…….. we are often the wooooorst demographic of trans ppl lmao so i just didn’t even rly like some spaces i was in. i got the most important gender affirming care i wanted, i moved & i got married, i got to work remotely etc

& so just sitting with all of that it was like. ok well a lot of neoliberal queer spaces piss me the fuck off; i’m not cis, but i’m not TRANS in the way a lot of ppl (very validly) feel; i do Not like nb. i’d read stone butch blues before, i have a degree in critical theory where i worked a loooot w queer theory, obviously i’ve written abt queerness for ages lol. so then i was just like ah. butch. dyke. YAH! sweet. 100/10 feels amazing i love it

& i think for me i love those words most bc they’re rooted in really radical belief that i have. they carry an ethic with them that, at its best & most intersectional ofc, i want to act on, all the time. i want to show up for people & be protective & tough & strong but i also so deeply want to be nurturing & nourishing. i want to allow myself to be nourished & cared for. i think it feels rly wonderful to have a word for transgressive gender that sums it all up bc people lived it before me. they made that very specific & particular space to experience femininity in a way that doesn’t feel like a noose.

i think also butchness is so expansive! something that never sat right w me abt the way we talk abt transness in the west is that i don’t think there are ‘pre’ & ‘post’ transition selves. like… i’ve never been Not Me? like i came out of the womb a dyke. all i did my entire childhood is run around in the mountains, catalogue leaves, play w my dog, read nancy drew, & avidly watch + play any women’s soccer i could. i loved to fish & mountain bike, i grew up in the desert so gardening to me was a miracle. i never cared abt gender at all beyond like ‘well i guess i’m a girl & the women i admire just won a world cup, they’re badass’ & that was it. i liked boys clothes bc they were practical & felt better, but i just. didn’t think about it. ppl called me a tomboy which was fine, i liked scout in to kill a mockingbird so whatever. but i never felt “non-binary” & i certainly never felt like a boy.

& i am… still just like that lmao. i hated my boobs, point blank day 1 lol, but that doesn’t have to mean i’m trans, or that i’ve somehow changed in a way that requires separation from who i’ve been my whole life. i HATE the language of ‘dead/lived’ name; i hate the weird expectation that u should allow the state to have all of ur gender stuff on record (no fucking thank you, y’all can keep my legal name & i will be flying under the radar lol). so i think western transness rly just. irritates me. doesn’t fit. hasn’t ever fit.

so butchness is like. i am 8 year old jude, i’m just older now. if this makes sense ur butch lmao but. it’s this rly free space to play w masculinity in a way that doesn’t necessitate western transness, & also doesn’t necessitate a separation from maternalism, which i fundamentally believe in. i don’t even rly think of my own care as “gender affirming” & more just like… essence affirming. i didn’t want top surgery so my body could be read as male; i wanted it so i could look like me. i want my clothes to feel & fit in a Very particular way bc that’s how i like them. it’s abt practicality, efficiency, comfort.

& lastly to me butchness has a remarkable space for tenderness that masculinity on its own just cannot hold. like. it’s abt being protective & strong, sure, but it’s in service of others. always always always. so sometimes that looks like communicating calmly, sometimes that looks like infinite small acts of service for ur friends or ur partner. when i think of settling into myself it’s more about returning to who i knew i was when i was a kid, when i was the only person my dog liked & how it felt to sit on the swings when the sun was setting after the monsoon; it’s allowing myself to love like that — caring, & quiet, & full.

ultimately to me butchness is about devotion, more than anything in the world. devoted to safety, devoted to community. no one is devoted the way dykes are bc it’s how we survive. it’s how we have always survived — the steadfastness, the faith, the joy, even thru suffering, to not be boxed in. to help each other. to be funny & kind & thoughtful & not reject the absolute best parts of womanhood for the sake of a western box. to demand care. it’s so beautiful. devotion.

tldr it’s the best

[eleiyaumei]

Poll response: Gender in Hakuōki

A few months ago I made a poll asking about how you feel about how Hakuōki portrays/handles gender and this is my response to it.

First of all, I’d like to thank everyone who voted. This was intended as a poll about your feelings, i.e. personal impressions, and not meant to find out the “truth”. I’d like to encourage everyone who wants to elaborate on their impressions to do so and for those knowledgeable about topics like Historical Accuracy, to publish posts about these in order to spread knowledge and potentially clear up misconceptions.

Secondly, to the person who asked/chose the option: “Why do you care about this?”

I care about this because every person has their own relationship to gender – indifferent or not – and my relationship to it clashed so hard with Hakuōki’s in KW/EB that it gave me gender dysphoria. I wanted to know how other Hakuōki players/fans reacted to it – not to judge them, just to understand them better.

Thirdly, I want to lead the way and tell you about what I feel in regards to how Hakuouki treats gender. To be exact, I’d like to discuss the appeal of the franchise’s fem MC with the leading question:

Whom is Chizuru for?

Oh, and before I start:

Please don’t judge people for (not) being okay with Hakuōki’s treatment of gender. Everyone has their own experiences and reasons for feeling these ways. Reducing it to “internalized misogyny” is generalizing and redundant.

(BTW, internalized misogyny (or sexism) can influence both sides of the coin:

PROs can be okay with the conservative gender roles in Hakuōki because they were taught this is the way men and women are and should be and they’re comfortable in these roles.

ANTIs can be not okay with them because they were taught femininity/womanhood was inferior and weak and they don’t want to be seen that way.)

Now, I hope I can illustrate the ways that make us feel what we do in regards to gender.

1) Chizuru is for “Not Like Other Girls™ but also kinda still like other girls” girls and women

Snappy (and provocative to some) way to say:

Chizuru is for girls and women that struggle with their femininity/girlhood/womanhood but still identify with it.

Perhaps they don’t like makeup or feminine clothing, perhaps they don’t like hyperfemininity (i.e. wearing pink, skirts, dresses, accentuating their fem* body characteristics, going shopping etc.). In some areas, they might think of themselves as unfeminine but in others, they’re able to fulfill what’s expected of girls and women (e.g. having sex only in romantic relationships, marrying a man, starting a family, being a housewife or stay-at-home girlfriend).

Despite not matching with 100% of their gender’s expectations, they still want to be seen as a girl or woman and not as man or stereotypical lesbian or whatnot. And they want to be desired and respected specifically as a girl or woman.

Most Hakuōki guys, especially Harada and Hijikata, acknowledge that and that’s appealing for girls and women as described above.

And then there’s...

2) Chizuru is for people that don’t care about gender roles and expectations

Androgynous-looking, cross-dressing, sword-wearing, living-in-a-men-dominated-world Chizuru is appealing for Gender-Non-Conforming, trans*, non-binary, genderfluid, genderqueer people and others.

I was raised by a gender-non-conforming woman who builds sheds and does housework, whose income feeds the family, who wears colorful but gender-neutral outfits, whose arms are muscular, chest rather flat but body still feminine, who did karate and handball, who likes women like Whitney Houston, Sigourney Weaver/Alien’s Ripley and Downton Abbey’s Dowager Countess of Grantham, who loves the military not for the “hot masculine men” but for the discipline, weaponry and combative prowess... (I don’t like the military but I see where she’s coming from.)

What I meant to say was: The way I grew up influenced my view on gender. My education lacked a focus on gender roles and expectations, with my mom constantly defying them and my dad not being fond of (hyper)femininity. I wasn’t told that fighting was only for boys and men so I never felt bad for being interested in it. I never questioned my gender identity because no one seemed to care about how feminine or not I was.

The game developers did not include the wishes of players who wanted to fight in a samurai visual novel. They added a singular training scene with Kondo, not to teach Chizuru swordfighting but for the player to develop sympathy for Kondo so that they’ll feel bad once he’s executed.

They could have fixed this easily by including the options to fight so every player that wanted to could do so and those who didn’t could have not done it – and accompanying both options should have been no or neutral consequences so as to not tell players that they are wrong to choose one option over another. Or if they are positive/negative consequences, make them adhere to the respective love interest. (Like how saving Harada at the end of KW does not give you affection because it hurts his masculinity/does not fit with his preferences for his future wife.) Easy fix to make everyone happy, no? Instead of hating the game (experience), we can instead come to the conclusion that we like one love interest less or more.

Also, I want to address this statement I saw:

“The way Chizuru is portrayed is nice to see because women should not have manly qualities in order to be seen as strong.” (*This is no direct quote.)

Yes, you’re right. Feminism is about not forcing roles and behaviors onto people depending on their gender, physical attributes etc., and it’s also about not privileging one gender (expression) over another.

But, do you know that a lot of people in the manosphere and other patriarchal spaces use this sentiment to enforce traditional gender roles and exaggerate the masculine attributes they see in popular media (like Shadiversity sees in Princess Peach in the new Mario movie) and claim that popular media only portrays “strong women” as having masculine attributes, often without convincing arguments? I just say this here to spread awareness so that you don’t fall for manosphere conspiracy theories and such.

Especially when we look at otome games, most fem MCs adhere to traditional fem gender expectations and this is okay (while also often criticized in reviews) but this makes any strong feeling you have towards not wanting Chizuru portrayed in ways you associate with masculinity seem over-the-top. Like, don’t you think that there are otome game players out there who want their MCs to be different from the majority – for whatever reason? It’s great you can see yourself in these fem MCs or you just like seeing such fem MCs but please acknowledge that you are not the only otome game players out there and others might feel differently from you.

(I hope you’re not coming from a place of seeing otome games as ‘one of the last bastions of traditional femininity/gender roles’ because gatekeeping this whole genre of games and forcing each game to adhere to certain standards relating to gender is not fair to anyone [and arguably sexist].)

Another reason why some people are frustrated with Chizuru or with the treatment of her by characters and the franchise as a whole has to do with what X talked about in their critique of the Hakuouki anime series:

Set-up and pay-off.

KW sets up Chizuru as a cross-dressing young woman with a sword, who has basic knowledge in sword fighting, proves herself to be able to protect herself sufficiently (in the test by Saito and Okita), wants herself to be useful and not a burden on others.

So it feels forced, illogical, maybe even ill-willed whenever KW/EB puts Chizuru in compromising situations where she does nothing but scream and cry and has to be saved by others which fuels her self-loathing and feelings of being a burden but she never asks or is being offered to be trained nor does she become able to defend herself in the long run. There are singular scenes of her training but it never pays off. (If she was never set-up to be swordfight-savvy enough to protect herself, her always not being able to protect herself would be justified and not (as) frustrating.) And even in Okita’s EB route, Chizuru wants to fight, Okita allows her to, she kills a man, then has to be saved from another and what does Okita say to Chizuru, who clearly wants to fight by his side? That she has to leave everything to him – without offering her to teach her even though he is a kenjutsu prodigy and instructor. Set-up: Chizuru wants to fight. Pay-off: She fights and kills a man ONE SINGULAR TIME. Like, at least adhere to the Rule of Three... (Or do you think this adheres to this rule: 1) Chizuru proves herself to Saito and Okita, 2) she saves Okita from Kazama, 3) she kills a soldier? Well, it’s at least not enough pay-off for me.)

EB especially spends a lot of time describing in excruciating detail how much Chizuru suffers from guilt and self-loathing, thinking herself a burden on anyone, and how is this resolved? By the love interests saying some phrases about caring about and loving her, needing her (as emotional support...pet, tbh), kissing, sometimes sleeping with her and/or marrying her. She is never given a character arc for growth/change because the love interests are always prioritized over her.

(And she is so goddamn passive in 'her own story'... I would argue that Hakuōki is not about Chizuru, it's about the love interests. She is the Watson to the Sherlock Holmes.)

[ayeeyo1]

I’ll write some advice i would’ve given my younger self. 98% of this is from my own personal experiences. I never had real ass advice and only got cookie cutter picnic date advice. So here are few lessons I picked up.

Normie advice “TIFs are still women! Biologically you guys are still lesbians. In order to have more female solitary don’t isolate your TIF sisters”

Never stop a coper from coping. If you think that confronting thier cope will make you lose her, fuck it bro. It’s already over. She’s not your religious grandma holding on to faith dearly due to her old age. She isn’t some elder at deaths door. She isn’t some fucking turbo doofus who doesn’t understand things. She knows bro.

Let’s say for example the coper is non-binary but refers to herself as “gay” instead of ditching her cope and accepting being female, she will drag you in saying your not a lesbian for dating “them”. Her delusion is more important than material reality. Her delusions are more important than your LIVED reality. She can’t be saved bc she doesn’t give a shit. I wasted so much time talking to TIF adjacent women. They look like you but they are nothing like you. Lesbian TIFs are 99% of the time sell outs who hate other women.

“Lesbisn are women identified, they don’t care as much about beauty as men do. Dating women is such a blessing, I no longer appeal to these standards”

when making aesthetic choices consider the female gaze. Your average lesbins won’t drag you for having armpit hair. But women are 100% aware of aesthetics. I’d argue more than men. Long story short don’t get a buzzcut bro. Consider your face shape, your body proportions allat. It sucks to consider beauty culture but charges to the game. I’ll never betray my masc hood but since I’m already small and baby faced consider a more soft boy or pretty boy aesthetic. Going full unc butch was a mistake.

The other is how normies like to attribute bad behavior of lesbians as internalized misogyny or homophobia . Manipulative women use therapy speak and woke talking to absolve herself of her guilt.

If she loved you she would respect you. Don’t be a fucking doormat. When those negative thoughts creep in listen to them. It’s not always “internalized misogyny”. Don’t listen to these “don’t call her bitch bro” cornballs. Did she bitch you? Fuck her. She can go to hell.

You are better accepting a bitter truth about your Girl than living in a delusion.the truth will be there no matter what. Make the reality your friend otherwise it will become your grim reaper.

[obsidianflow]

The Major Issues about anti Mspec Lesbian debacle

SO I’m a little insane and i decided I’d make an entire essay about this because otherwise I wouldn’t be able to sleep!

I’ll preface this by saying that this isn’t room for Anti Mspec Lesbians to get in my notifs and send me shit like ‘ummm actually you’re wrong’ because this is literally just for me anyways, just putting it here so people can see and possibly share thoughts, idk. If you send me anything about how wrong I am that’s really short I’m just going to block you, as a fair warning lmao

1: The whole ‘Lesbian means Non-men loving Non-men’ argument

Now I dont think its hard to see that this is transphobic, but I’ll explain anyways because I like explaining! Now first off, the major thing that’s face value. Non-men is just. A new way to shove nonbinary people back into the binary (Which we all know is the opposite of the entire fucking point) This ‘non-men’ and its counterpart just completely ignores multigendered and fluid gendered people! As well as just.. People with more complex relationships with their masculinity/femininity than just ‘not a man’ and ‘a man’.

And another thing not relating to transphobia now, definitions of these labels _will _vary from person to person. That’s the beauty of queerness, we all define it differently for ourselves! And that’s _okay. _Queerness isn’t, and never has been, about being understandable. Its about comfort, the labels are just there to find other people that are similar to you, and have a community! We’re here for a good time, not laying down and being as understandable to the cishets as we can. Whether or not they can understand us isn’t going to change their feelings about us, a majority of the time. They just say ‘its too weird’ as a way to make fun of us, not an attempt to understand or learn or listen. They don’t care either way.

2: Men can’t be lesbians

I get it if this one feels a little weird, we’ll get through it.

Now, the issue with this is that this is just going to keep queer people out of their own spaces! This doesn’t acknowledge multigendered, genderfluid, people who identify as a man for their own safety, as well as trans men who just don’t feel comfortable identifying as straight (Which I don’t blame them, because a large part of our community demonizes straight people, who would want to be the butt of their peers’ jokes?)

And that’s only a few examples, there’s plenty of experiences I’m sure that aren’t encompassed here. But that’s the thing! There are 8 billion of us on this planet, we’re never going to document every single sexuality experience out there. In general, this is meant to exclude the ‘enemy’, which a lot of people have conveniently made the Male Gender their scapegoat, but it more often than not just excludes other queer people. Which, we understand excluding other queer people isn’t the best idea, right?

3: Men are going to infiltrate our spaces and harm us

Men who feel like they can ‘fix’ lesbians are going to infiltrate your spaces whether you like it or not, but they’re not going to identify as a lesbian to go about doing that. Have you ever heard a story of a man actually doing this to groom lesbians? Because I sure as hell haven’t, and I’m always open to hearing stories about stuff like that.

But unlike that what if, I have heard stories of ‘Cisgender’ men identifying as lesbians and subsequently finding out they’re trans at some point afterwards (or even stories of ‘cisgender’ men identifying as lesbians despite being openly trans!) I’ve Met people from these stories, I’ve talked to them about those stories! There’s an entire phenomena about it at this point, it happens a lot more than you’d think. 

When you base your identity off of being hurt, and only ever stay in that hurt, never look out to better things, you’re just going to harm others. It’s happened time and time again, I’ve seen so many communities that have this same issue. The term Lesbian and generally any other sexuality labels should be based in Loving, not hate of some identity group you’ve been hurt by.

If your sexuality is impacted by your trauma, and other factors of being hurt, that’s okay! What I’m saying is we shouldn’t be morphing entire identity labels to be based only in hate of their abusers, when the original definitions were always based in love and only love. It seems like a waste of a good thing, honestly

4: Just make a new label

I hate to tell you this bud, but making a new label isn’t really going to work for everyone when there’s already a label that’s perfectly applicable. Why would you make a new term if one already works? The only reason I think would be to avoid hate from people who dislike the label you’re using, but that’s more of ‘avoiding getting rocks thrown at you’ than being happy with yourself and defining yourself comfortably. And it’s not even really something you share with absolutely everyone, either. It’s for you primarily. Why should you be conforming to someone else’s ideals just so they’re comfortable, when opposed to you being even more ‘weirdly’ queer than them.

5: I’m not comfortable with someone identifying this way

That’s fine! You don’t need to be comfortable with their identity. But that doesn’t mean its inherently harmful to your identities, that doesn’t make their identity inherently lesbophobic. In general this is an issue that a lot of white queers have, automatically assuming anything that makes them uncomfortable is an attack on them. Not everything is against you just because you’re discomforted by it!!!

6: This is a new label coined by someone on tumblr in 2016

Well my first question, if you’re seriously saying this, is ‘Have you ever actually gone looking for the history about this label? Have you ever researched this label?” Because if you did do any research, you’d probably find that bi dykes have existed since the 80s

I use these posts as a general just place to look at some history stuff, just some stuff I’ve found myself! They include sources, and more information.

<Post 1> <Post 2>

I’d also like to add that if you’re going to argue history, the original definition of lesbian is much closer to the modern definition of sapphic than the modern definition of lesbian. Lesbian meant the queer attraction to women, or generally Not Adhering to Female Gender Roles. It’s very different!

7: Lesbians need to separate from Bisexuals

Yikes. Never got over the lesbian separatism movement, did we?

8: I don’t understand it

That’s fine. You don’t need to understand it! It’s complex, it’s different, it’s strange. Of course you’re not going to fully understand it. That’s okay. All we’re asking here is you open your eyes a bit, and try to be more open towards different experiences. Don’t give into the stupid echo chamber of ‘X is phobic’ without any complex explanation into it. Topics like these that have so much nuance can’t be explained so easily, that in itself feels like more erasure than the mlm flag being similar to the sunset lesbian flag.

Non rebuttals

I haven’t even finished with everything either, because it still goes deeper than just that.

A majority of the people I’ve seen who are anti mspec lesbians are white, which plays a very major role in the whole thing. It just goes on where white cis women are taken more seriously than black trans women, and it all cycles out of control. And the majority of mspec lesbians I’ve met have been POC, my own partner is a POC mspec lesbian! I think at the very least if your side is majority white and the other side is majority POC, there’s something wrong there, and you should be thinking harder about the whole issue. At least start by trying to hear the other side’s argument!

This is just history repeating it’s self, honestly. Queer history has been demolished because of homophobia time and time again, so we don’t know the history and are doomed to repeat it. It happened with trans people, it’s happened with nonbinary people, it’s happened with pretty much every queer identity under the sun. We find a new scapegoat and run off with hating on them, despite us all being queer together. The cycle of hatred is more than a little annoying at this point. Everyone preaches about being so inclusive, and in the same breath rants about mspec lesbians being an issue. That isn’t inclusive, if you’re wondering.

A very major thing I think the Anti Mspec Lesbian side needs to realize is that you can’t make such bold claims as another queer person being against your identity without at least hearing their argument first and genuinely listening. You have to make an effort to listen to them, and deconstruct your own thinking to see if it truly is such. We recognize that people shouldn’t be put in jail without a fair trial, we should probably extend that to each other outside of the courthouse! I personally don’t think someone putting an identity label on themself is phobic of another identity, I think it’s a little absurd that even came around as a concept. It feels like reaching for straws, really.

In general, this doesn’t even go over everything either. Throughout this entire thing, all the arguments I went through, white supremacy is riddled throughout them. The need to have things be understandable, the need to separate, etc. It all very easily comes down being white supremacy.

Anywhoo! That was long. If you have any thoughts, feel free to add on, but here’s my essay

[redheadbigshoes]

Just a question because it’s something that I’ve seen being brought up but since lesbian means a person who is not a man attracted to non men (being inclusive of non binary lesbians in this definition) what about non binary people who are partially men (like bigender people for example) identifying as lesbians?? With some peoples definitions it would exclude them so I just wanted your thoughts (not defending the bi lesbian label at all btw this is a genuine question coming from another lesbian)

I understand your intentions with this and I know you’re just genuine asking so no worries.

When it comes to non-binary people it is a more complex discussion. Personally, my sexuality includes only fem-aligned non-binary people.

When we say non-binary is included in all sexualities we don’t usually mean all non-binary people (for example) are included in lesbianism. But I don’t think I’m the right person to have an opinion on someone who’s bigender (and partially identifies as a man) using the lesbian label. I’d appreciate if someone who follows me and is non-binary can better answer this.

[transboysokka]

i suppose this is sort of relevant to your post but recently i’ve been considering if i’m actually transmasc and if it’s not a touchy subject how did you figure out you were trans? i’m just trying to figure things out for myself at the moment

Sure!

I actually figured it out twice weirdly enough lol. I’ll try to explain both.

Of course not all experiences are the same! But hopefully it’ll help you figure it out :)

So growing up I was always uncomfortable with my body. I had interests across the board- pink, barbies, action figures, dinosaurs- but always didn’t like being seen as a girl. I didn’t want long hair, as soon as I started dressing myself I ended up wearing as masculine type clothes I could find. I hated being split up to go “with the girls” for school activities. EVERYTHING about puberty was HUMILIATING and I asked my mom for years if I could get top surgery before I even knew it was a thing.

So one day when I was 14 I saw the word “transgender” on the Internet, looked up the definition, and was like “oh no that’s definitely me” like it was an instant recognition

(Of course I was raised Very Conservative and Very Religious so I thought that was terrible and wrong so I repressed those thoughts and memories for 7 years. Very healthy. Actually in that time I thought I seemed like the most normal cishet girl ever but friends will tell you I came across as either a huge lesbian or a boy in a wig lol)

Anyway when I’m about to graduate from college I have long hair, “girly” ass clothes, always wearing makeup, and MASSIVE depression. I think I just slowly started to realize I didn’t LIKE any of that stuff and was only doing it because I thought it was expected of me. I wasn’t happy with my life at all and started really reflecting on why that was. I started to really get bothered when I was called a girl or she/her pronouns or even associated with women. I started dating another AFAB person who I WAS I love with but I HATED that we were so often mistaken as a lesbian couple

I tried out identifying as non-binary for a year or two to see if that alleviated the dysphoria and it REALLY didn’t. I started dressing the way I wanted, cut my hair, started wearing a binder, that all felt better, but something was still missing.

I still had a huge moral/religious block on being binary trans but I realized it suddenly laying in bed one night. It was a real “oh shit” moment and I was terrified, but I just realized I’d be so much happier being called he and him and sir…. Even though I thought at the time I was going to go to hell for it I just had to do it. I felt like if I did then my life could truly like… start.

And I gotta tell you, anon. When I started living as a man, that’s exactly what it felt like.

Sorry for the looooong explanation, but I hope that helps you! Best of luck!

[cowboyfiles]

Heya, Lou was a common nickname while also a family nickname for Louisa, and, while probably not meaning to, this comes from a very lesbphobic standpoint. That a woman can’t express herself besides being feminine, you’re putting her in a box just like people in her time did. Please understand that you’re not helping her by shoving Louisa back into stereotypes of what makes a woman or a man. She grew up in a very homophobic time, that shunned others for loving the same sex. Being dissatisfied with being a woman does not mean she wished to be a man, and if she did say that, “being a man” came with freedom that woman did not have, and that lesbians didn’t have by being able to simply love each other. She didn’t want to be a man because she felt like a man, she wanted to escape what being a woman meant during her time.

Hi, anon!! Sorry I didn’t see this sooner!

Thank you so much for bringing this up. I think it makes for an interesting discussion of period-typical homophobia and the progress we’ve made in accepting and understanding people’s identities as a society, so it’s really awesome that you pointed it out.

I’ll be referring to Lou with they/them pronouns here, to take into consideration your argument and also what I found while researching my answer.

First, I’d like to state that everything I’d seen about Lou’s personal life and their relationship with gender, up until the point I made the post, mentioned that they preferred to be referred to as a man would (how they felt “more than half-persuaded” they were “a man’s soul put by some freak of nature into a woman’s body”). But it was, in fact, wrong of me (and thank you for making me notice this) to not take into consideration that, at the time in which they lived, the notions of gender and gender non-conformity were not at all the same as what we have today, so it would be unfair to just assume their repeated mentions of feeling unfit as a woman just meant they identified as a man.

I did some further research, and I think it’s fair to say we never will know what Lou really identified as, although I think we can all firmly agree, in today’s standards, they probably would have liked the broadened horizons of gender, and I think being non binary might have been what they would have identified the most with, but, again, we really cannot say.

I would also like to say that, as a lesbian myself, it’s really unfair that you put Lou in a position where they have to be a woman who feels disconnect from womanhood and femininity because of their feelings for other women, rather than a trans man. I don’t think it was lesbiphobic (at least not as much as it was really just wrong), from my standing point, to take the information I had been given and assume they would identify with being what today we know as a trans man, although a) you could not have known it, so, really, it was reasonable of you to conclude that, and b) it was good that you brought it up because it deepens the discussion even further, to gender non-conformity and the lesbian community. Society today, and at any point in time, for that matter, has a hard time understanding labels and identities like the LGBTQ+ community does; we understand it because we have to, because we need to understand ourselves and the people who, like us, don’t feel seen, or “proper” (which is such a pretentious word, but I could not think of any better alternative), but the world outside does not, and they don’t care. Perhaps, were they alive today, Lou would have identified as a gender non-conforming lesbian. I think it’s really fair to assume they did, but in the end, that’s really all we’ll do — assume.

Now, you mentioned their (for a lack of a better word) discontent with being a woman as being, at its core, a discontent with society’s views of them, and the issues that came with being a woman at the time; I don’t think that’s true. Really, as I’ve mentioned several times already, we could not know for sure, and all we’re able to do is take what Lou’s left in their words and quotes and assume; and, exactly because we can’t confirm anything, every assumption has a point of truth and is valid to their extent. Obviously, as every single argument ever made is, yours is sustainable and defendable, but I still think it’s unfair to take things like “I was born with a boy’s nature and always had more sympathy for and interest in them than in girls”, and assume that’s just discontent with societal norms. Again, we cannot know, and if that’s what you choose to believe in, of course that will be correct for you, and I don’t expect, in any way, to change your opinion.

To conclude, this discussion could go on for so much longer, and I find it incredible that you brought it up, because I would not have gone this far into it if you’d not made me realize my mistake, so thank you!! It’s only fair that I finish by saying that gender is, of course, a confusing concept that we as humans have come up with, and if, even with today’s knowledge and access, we still have a hard time grasping all its sharp and smooth edges, we can only imagine how hard it must have been for those before us; it’s also fair to state that for women, and those assigned female at birth, it is especially hard to have a good relationship with it, and we can only hope newer generations can grow into a world in which they have the most freedom to explore and experiment, and understand their boundaries with each form of gender expression.

Again, thank you so much for bringing this up! And I’m sorry, again, that I didn’t see this sooner!!

[nullsexducks]

Okay so since I’m lazy and don’t feel like typing this all out again to explain it with context, here’s the Reddit convo I interrupted and I’m gonna copy and paste my response here. It’s a really interesting issue to me and I’d like to hear other people’s opinions. (UNLESS your opinion is just always “let people identify however they want all the time and in all contexts, let people live!” I don’t need to hear from you this time. You’re allowed to have that opinion, I just don’t need that added here.)

“Sorry to throw myself into a conversation that doesn’t include me, but I just wanted to add my thoughts here. This is seriously like the one issue I’m unsure about. I’m firm and proud as a truscum, as a BaB (think bi is enough and pan/omni/poly/abro/etc. are biphobic and unnecessary), as an ace/aro exclusionist… but this one stumps me. I do consider myself non-binary. I use only they/them. I’m extremely dysphoric regarding both genders. (I’m also bisexual if that matters at all? idk i love people regardless of gender.) I feel dysphoric when a straight man or a lesbian is attracted to me, as I feel like they see me as a woman. Same thing with the flip side with gay men and straight women. On the other hand, I feel like if a man were to be attracted to me and call themselves bisexual, while also only liking women, I’d be uncomfortable because they’d basically be saying that non-binary is it’s own gender, which has a lot of offensive implications. To me i guess, the second option here feels like the lesser of two evils, but still bad? but also like. that’s an unfounded, subjective, personal opinion, which will vary between enben. At this point, I’ve kind of precariously settled on: 1) I’d better hope I find someone I love that’s bisexual in the way that’s attraction regardless of gender 😂 of course there’s people who are bi and not attracted to non-binary people, and that’s totally fine. 2) the percentage of trans people in the world is super small, and the percentage of actually dysphoric non-binary people is tiny even compared to that, so I’m not sure how much I need to worry about the semantics? It seems to become a much larger issue in cases such as my cishet male friend who is currently dating a ‘genderfluid they/he/she asexual bi’ who is, shocking I know, AFAB and entirely female presenting. This scenario is SIGNIFICANTLY more common than true dysphoric enben dating binary people (like 99.9% of people). I think because of that, the whole issue seems more prevalent than it actually is.”

[kalinara]

On Aspec Identities

I’ve “joked” before that I know that it’s Pride Month, because as soon as June 1 comes around, I suddenly get to see a wonderful flood of aphobic bullshit on my dash.  

Sometimes the people who reblog this shit aren’t themselves exclusionists.  At least I’d like to think they aren’t, given that they’re mutuals who follow me, but out of ignorance, they join in on mocking what they don’t understand.

My block button gets a nice workout during Pride.

Anyway, since I do think (hope) that some of the people reblogging this nonsense do so because they are genuinely clueless, I’m inspired to write this post.

--

It’s very common, during Pride and otherwise, to see people mock the idea of aspec identities.  For example, “fraysexual”, in which people only experience sexual attraction to people they don’t know very well, for example, celebrities.

It’s very common to see otherwise well-meaning people mock this idea.  “I’m attracted to Chris Hemsworth!  Does this mean I’m suddenly LGBTQ?!”

I don’t want to attack their reading comprehension, of course, but they’re missing something obvious in that definition: the word “only”.

If you are a woman and you are attracted to Chris Hemsworth, then you’re probably straight.  Or bi.  But if you’re ONLY attracted to Chris Hemsworth and NO OTHER MEN in the world...then maybe something else is going on.

Lesbians will often talk about compulsory heterosexuality and that’s a thing that asexual people experience too.  Society has an expectation of allo-straightness and it’s very hard to define a negative, so it’s very common for a young person to express attraction to a fantasy, someone safely out of reach.  Most of us will never meet Chris Hemsworth in real life, certainly we’ll never get invited to have sex with him, so we don’t really have to parse through whether this is something we really want to do.  And well, if we’re not interested in the real life men that we know, it’s probably because they just don’t measure up.

Now, I think lesbians have one advantage in this case that asexual people don’t have.  And that’s that they do feel attraction to women.  It’s suppressed, and it may take a lot of time to realize it, but it’s there.  And once you feel the real thing, I think that it makes it easier to see the “attraction” to Chris Hemsworth for what it is.

Most asexual people don’t have a “real thing” to put the fantasy and cultural programming into perspective.  It’s very hard to define a negative, and often you end up doing that by defining everything else around out.  That blank space is what’s left.

And that’s why aspec identities exist: because society has a really complicated relationship with sexuality in general.  A physical sex drive can complicate matters too.  Because that’s a thing that most people have.  Hormones and gonads and all that.  And if you think growing up with all those impulses is confusing already, try it when you don’t have a sexual orientation to direct it.

So that’s, I think, where a lot of these identities come from.  Identities like fraysexual and lithsexual (sexual attraction ONLY if it’s not reciprocated) sound weird to an outside observer, until you understand that the end goal is not to have sex!  The end goal is to process what we’re feeling and not feeling and define it for ourselves.  

As a young person, I didn’t know I was asexual.  I thought there was something wrong with me.  I’d grasp at straws and think to myself that I must be straight, because I liked slash fanfiction.  Because I liked erotica.  Clearly I just never really had the opportunity to have sex.  I have very specific trait preferences.

And then the invitation came!  From someone who was objectively very attractive.  He* was beautiful, a live action and real life version of the characters I’d read about, amazingly smart, great sense of humor.  I’d fantasized about them for a long time before this moment.  (More accurately, I should say “They” as later, they came out as non-binary.  At the time though, I’d believed them to be male, just as I’d believed myself to be female.  People are complicated.)

The fantasy was real!  There was no better time!  And....all I could feel was a resounding “NO.”  I liked them a lot.  But...no.  No.  (They took the refusal with good grace, they were really great!)  The aftermath was rough on me though, because I no longer could fool myself.

I don’t consider myself lithsexual or fraysexual because in my case, the attraction wasn’t so much to the person as to the fantasy of being straight.  But people come in all variations, and we can only really define ourselves.

Ultimately, aspec identities aren’t about you unless they apply to you.  But for us, they can be a literal lifesaver.  I spent a long time thinking I was broken.  Why could I feel a sexual response when reading erotica but not want to have sex?!  Obviously I can’t be asexual if I feel SOMETHING, right?

And then, and then, at the age of thirty or so, I stumbled across the concept of autochorissexuality.  The idea of a disconnect between self and sexual desire.  And I realized, wait.  There I am.  You can’t imagine the sense of relief.

THAT’s why these identities exist.  It doesn’t MATTER if you understand them.  It doesn’t MATTER if you think they’re valid.  They’re for US, not you.  And it costs exactly 0 dollars to shut the fuck up about something that has nothing to do with you.

[gay-kurapika]

This isn’t even close to to the most toxic thing my ex roommate did to me but I’ve been thinking a lot about it and want to talk about how it really went down. So I reiterated over and over and over again when I met her that I was a lesbian, that I was only attracted to women. This was far before I tried to explain non-binary and transgender identities, and even before I’d done my best to explain current terminology, situations it’s acceptable to use certain terminology, the complexity of any transgender experience let alone my own or the way I can’t speak for any particular person and that it’s best to just listen to what someone tells you and be as respectful as possible. Currently I’m identifying as a non-binary lesbian again, I think non-binary suits me better when I really don’t feel connected to a gender but I also feel occasionally happy as a man or as woman. But. I did tell her eventually that the name I go by with people I trust is Andi or sometimes Andrew. I sometimes feel more like a man or a woman or like neither. That often I’m closer to a man. And I made it clear I’m not attracted to men, I have a girlfriend who I adore, I’m not attracted to men even if I can understand when a man is attractive. But she she called me bisexual all the time and I legitimately don’t think that’s an insult in any way shape or form but I do when I know for a fact you're saying that because number one and most important she never respected my girlfriend, who is trans, she didn't believe i was anything except Girl Lite, and she believed me saying a guy on a show was objectively attractive meant i secretly like guys. I wan't to make it clear that after two years of knowing each other, she still was "making this mistake" because she didn't actually listen to me when i tried to be the most patient person ever when I really should have seen that she doesn't have respect for people who set firm boundaries.

[lacependragon]

Hot Wheels: Battle Force 5 Updated Headcanons

A long time ago, like at least a year but probably several, I made a list of gender and sexuality headcanons for the Battle Force 5 characters. I thought I’d update it.

For reference, my ships these days are:

Vert Wheeler/Zoomer Takazumi

Sherman Cortez/Agura Ibaden/Stanford Isaac Rhodes IV

AJ Dalton/Tezz Volitov

Spinner Cortez/Zemerik (short term, sex) then Spinner with a non-binary OC

Let’s get to it:

Vert is a bisexual cis man. He tends to prefer men, slightly, but has slept with a lot more women. He’s a bit of a slut and has been very fearful of relationships since a bad one in high school. He can and will sleep with anyone he can convince into his bed.

Zoom is a gay cis dude. He doesn’t give a shit about gender roles, he isn’t super concerned about keeping quiet, and he’s pretty cheerful about his experiences.

Stanford is a non-binary (he/they) queer person. He’s got a slight preference for women but he’s never been picky. He’s polyamorous and enjoys commitment. Likes queer as a blanket term and because its non-specific.

Sherman is a bisexual cis man. He’s not super into genders other than women, but he’s open, and he ends up falling for Stanford and Agura. He’s very quiet about it and speed runs a sexuality crisis over Stanford. He ends up rolling into polyamory because it works out.

Spinner is a queer trans dude. He doesn’t know his sexuality. He doesn’t really care. He’s given up. He’s queer. That’s all that matters. He bangs a robot (Zemerik) at one point. Not loud about his sexuality or his gender.

Agura is a cis woman who, as she puts it “is about as straight as you want her to be”. She typically prefers to call herself pan, but she’s also ID’d as bi, polysexual, and queer. She’s demiromantic. She’s never tried being polyamorous before but she likes it.

AJ is a mostly cis pansexual guy. He doesn’t really give a fuck about gender, though he’d probably call himself a demi-guy if he knew the term. He loves everyone. Has no real preference. Just loves love.

Tezz is a cis dude and he is both demi-romantic and demi-sexual. He doesn’t think he really likes anyone, but then he falls for AJ over the course of the war. He ends up really enjoying sexual intimacy.

Grace is bisexual and cis. Loves dates. Not big into slutting it up. Bit of a size queen.

Sage is the Sentient equivalent of a lesbian and has a wife (OC).

Zeke is a little old gay cis man. He’s got a husband (OC) and used to do drag in his younger years.

Zemerik liked Spinner for the boning.

Kalus also has a husband.

Alien Race Shit:

Sentients don’t really care about sexuality or gender.

Vandals are fine with sexuality but being a warLORD with a husband is considered better than being one with a wife. It’s like Old Ass Greece that way.

OCs

Corona is Sage’s wife.

Xunsu is Kalu’s black panther husband.

Sun Wuu is Grace’s future girlfriend who is trans and pan.

Noah is Zeke’s gay husband.

Kero is my red sentient OC who is nb and aro/ace.

Kyru is another OC you haven’t met yet who is also NB.

[jeannereames]

Hi, Dr. Reames! I just read your take on Song of Achilles and it got me thinking. Do you think there might be a general issue with the way women are written in mlm stories in general? Because I don't think it's the first time I've seen something like this happen.

And my next question is, could you delve further into this thing you mention about modern female authors writing women? How could we, beginner female writers, avoid falling into this awful representations of women in our writing?

Thank you for your time!

[It took a while to finish this because I wrote, re-wrote, and re-wrote it. Still not sure I like it, but I need to let it go. It could be 3xs as long.]

I’ll begin with the second half of the question, because it’s simpler. How do we, as women authors, avoid writing women in misogynistic ways?

Let me reframe that as how can we, as female authors, write negative (even quite nasty) female characters without falling into misogynistic tropes? Also, how can we write unsympathetic, but not necessarily “bad” female characters, without it turning misogynistic?

Because people are people, not genders, not all women are good, nor all men bad. Most of us are a mix. If we should avoid assuming powerful women are all bitches, by the same token, some women are bitches (powerful or not).

ALL good characterization comes down to MOTIVE. And careful characterization of minority characters involves fair REPRESENTATION. (Yes, women are a minority even if we’re 51% of the population.)

The question ANY author must ask: why am I making this female character a bitch? How does this characterization serve the larger plot and/or characterization? WHY is she acting this way?

Keep characters complex, even the “bad guys.” Should we choose to make a minority character a “bad guy,” we need to have a counter example—a real counter, not just a token who pops in briefly, then disappears. Yeah, maybe in an ideal world we could just let our characters “be,” but this isn’t an ideal world. Authors do have an audience. I’m a lot less inclined to assume stereotyping when we have various minority characters with different characterizations.

By the same token, however, don’t throw a novel against the wall if the first minority character is negative. Read further to decide if it’s a pattern. I’ve encountered reviews that slammed an author for stereotyping without the reader having finished the book. I’m thinking, “Uh…if you’d read fifty more pages….” Novels have a developmental arc. And if you’ve got a series, that, too, has a developmental arc. One can’t reach a conclusion about an author’s ultimate presentation/themes until having finished the book, or series.*

Returning to the first question, the appearance of misogyny depends not only on the author, but also on when she wrote, even why she’s writing. Authors who are concerned with matters such as theme and message are far more likely to think about such things than those who write for their own entertainment and that of others, which is more typical of Romance.

On average, Romance writers are a professionalized bunch. They have national and regional chapters of the Romance Writers of America (RWA), newsletters and workshops that discuss such matters as building plot tension, character dilemmas, show don’t tell, research tactics, etc. Yet until somewhat recently (early/mid 2010s), and a series of crises across several genres (not just Romance), treatment of minority groups hadn’t been in their cross-hairs. Now it is, with Romance publishers (and publishing houses more generally) picking up “sensitivity readers” in addition to the other editors who look at a book before its publication.

Yet sensitivity readers are hired to be sure lines like “chocolate love monkey” do not show up in a published novel. Yes, that really was used as an endearment for a black man in an M/M Romance, which (deservedly) got not just the author but the publishing house in all sorts of hot water. Yet misogyny, especially more subtle misogyny in the way of tropes, is rarely on the radar.

I should add that I wouldn’t categorize The Song of Achilles as an M/M historical Romance. In fact, I’m not sure what to call novels about myths, as myths don’t exist in actual historical periods. When should we set a novel about the Iliad? The Bronze Age, when Homer said it happened, or the Greek Dark Age, which is the culture Homer actually described? They’re pretty damn different. I’d probably call The Song of Achilles an historical fantasy, especially as mythical creatures are presented as real, like centaurs and god/desses.

Back to M/M Romance: I don’t have specific publishing stats, but it should surprise no one that (like most of the Romance genre), the vast bulk of authors of M/M Romance are women, often straight and/or bi- women. The running joke seems to be, If one hot man is good, two hot men together are better. 😉 Yes, there are also trans, non-binary and lesbian authors of M/M Romance, and of course, bi- and gay men who may write under their own name or a female pseudonym, but my understanding is that straight and bi- cis-women authors outnumber all of them.

Just being a woman, or even a person in a female body, does not protect that author from misogyny. And if she’s writing for fun, she may not be thinking a lot about what her story has to “say” in its subtext and motifs, even if she may be thinking quite hard about other aspects of story construction. This can be true of other genres as well (like historical fantasy).

What I have observed for at least some women authors is the unconscious adoption of popular tropes about women. Just as racism is systemic, so is sexism. We swim in it daily, and if one isn’t consciously considering how it affects us, we can buy into it by repeating negative ideas and acting in prescribed ways because that’s what we learned growing up. If writing in a symbol-heavy genre such as mythic-driven fantasy, it can be easy to let things slip by—even if they didn’t appear in the original myth, such as making Thetis hostile to Patroklos, the classic Bitchy Mother-in-Law archetype.

I see this sort of thing as “accidental” misogyny. Women authors repeat unkind tropes without really thinking them through because it fits their romantic vision. They may resent it and get defensive if the trope is pointed out. “Don’t harsh my squee!” We can dissect why these tropes persist, and to what degree they change across generations—but that would end up as a (probably controversial) book, not a blog entry. 😊

Yet there’s also subconscious defensive misogyny, and even conscious/semi-conscious misogyny.

Much debate/discussion has ensued regarding “Queen Bee Syndrome” in the workplace and whether it’s even a thing. I think it is, but not just for bosses. I also would argue that it’s more prevalent among certain age-groups, social demographics, and professions, which complicates recognizing it.

What is Queen Bee Syndrome? Broadly, when women get ahead at the expense of their female colleagues who they perceive as rivals, particularly in male-dominated fields, hinging on the notion that There Can Be Only One (woman). It arises from systemic sexism.

Yes, someone can be a Queen Bee even with one (or two) women buddies, or while claiming to be a feminist, supporting feminist causes, or writing feminist literature. I’ve met a few. What comes out of our mouths doesn’t necessarily jive with how we behave. And ticking all the boxes isn’t necessary if you’re ticking most of them. That said, being ambitious, or just an unpleasant boss/colleague—if its equal opportunity—does not a Queen Bee make. There must be gender unequal behavior involved.

What does any of that have to do with M/M fiction?

The author sees the women characters in her novel as rivals for the male protagonists. It gets worse if the women characters have some “ownership” of the men: mothers, sisters, former girlfriends/wives/lovers. I know that may sound a bit batty. You’re thinking, Um, aren’t these characters gay or at least bi- and involved with another man, plus—they’re fictional? Doesn’t matter. Call it fantasizing, authorial displacement, or gender-flipped authorial insert. We authors (and I include myself in this) can get rather territorial about our characters. We live in their heads and they live in ours for months on end, or in many cases, years. They’re real to us. Those who aren't authors often don’t quite get that aspect of being an author. So yes, sometimes a woman author acts like a Queen Bee to her women characters. This is hardly all, or even most, but it is one cause of creeping misogyny in M/M Romance.

Let’s turn to a related problem: women who want to be honorary men. While I view this as much more pronounced in prior generations, it’s by no means disappeared. Again, it’s a function of systemic sexism, but further along the misogyny line than Queen Bees. Most Queen Bees I’ve known act/react defensively, and many are (imo) emotionally insecure. It’s largely subconscious. More, they want to be THE woman, not an honorary man.

By contrast, women who want to be honorary men seem to be at least semi-conscious of their misogyny, even if they resist calling it that. These are women who, for the most part, dislike other women, regard most of “womankind” as either a problem or worthless, and think of themselves as having risen above their gender.

And NO, this is not necessarily religious—sometimes its specifically a-religious.

“I want to be an honorary man” women absolutely should NOT be conflated with butch lesbians, gender non-conformists, or frustrated FTMs. That plays right into myths the queer community has combated for decades. There’s a big difference between expressing one’s yang or being a trans man, and a desire to escape one’s womanhood or the company of other women. “Honorary men” women aren’t necessarily queer. I want to underscore that because the concrete example I’m about to give does happen to be queer.

I’ve talked before about Mary Renault’s problematic portrayal of women in her Greek novels (albeit her earlier hospital romances don’t show it as much). Her own recorded comments make it clear that she and her partner Julie Mullard didn’t want to be associated with other lesbians, or with women much at all. She was also born in 1905, living at a time when non-conforming women struggled. If extremely active in anti-apartheid movements in South Africa, Renault and Mullard were far less enthused by the Gay Rights Movement. Renault even criticized it, although she wrote back kindly to her gay fans.

The women in Renault’s Greek novels tend to be either bitches or helpless, reflecting popular male perceptions of women: both in ancient Greece and Renault’s own day. If we might argue she’s just being realistic, that ignores the fact one can write powerful women in historical novels and still keep it attitudinally accurate. June Rachuy Brindel, born in 1919, author of Ariadne and Phaedra, didn’t have the same problem, nor did Martha Rofheart, born in 1917, with My Name is Sappho. Brindel’s Ariadne is much more sympathetic than Renault’s (in The King Must Die).

Renault typically elevates (and identifies with) the “rational” male versus the “irrational” female. This isn’t just presenting how the Greeks viewed women; it reflects who she makes the heroes and villains in her books. Overall, “good” women are the compliant ones, and the compliant women are tertiary characters.

Women in earlier eras who were exceptional had to fight multiple layers of systemic misogyny. Some did feel they had to become honorary men in order to be taken seriously. I’d submit Renault bought into that, and it (unfortunately) shows in her fiction, as much as I admire other aspects of her novels.

So I think those are the three chief reasons we see women negatively portrayed in M/M Romance (or fiction more generally), despite being written by women authors.

------------------------------------

*Yeah, yeah, sometimes it’s such 2D, shallow, stereotypical presentation that I, as a reader, can conclude this author isn’t going to get any better. Also, the publication date might give me a clue. If I’m reading something published 50 years ago, casual misogyny or racism is probably not a surprise. If I don’t feel like dealing with that, I close the book and put it away.

But I do try to give the author a chance. I may skim ahead to see if things change, or at least suggest some sort of character development. This is even more the case with a series. Some series take a loooong view, and characters alter across several novels. Our instant-gratification world has made us impatient. Although by the same token, if one has to deal with racism or sexism constantly in the real world, one may not want to have to watch it unfold in a novel—even if it’s “fixed” later. If that’s you, put the book down and walk away. But I’d just suggest not writing a scathing review of a novel (or series) you haven’t finished. 😉

[nancylou444]

I tried to be nice

Replies to this post:

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

------------------------

Became this:

THEM:  hi! thanks for the answers I really appreciate the discussion. normally if someone ships something I don’t like or something like that, I’ll just leave them alone but.. just to be clear I completely respect all of your opinions, even agree with some of them, even if we might disagree on the incest and Castiel haha. So I don’t mean any disrespect with this at all, please let me know if I’m out of line though!  

 But... I saw some things you said, and they come across to me in a way that I don’t think you intended? I feel really awkward sending this haha, you’re very nice and I don’t think you said anything on purpose, but I just.. wanted to let you know that some of the things regarding your opinion on certain characters come across not very well? I don’t think it’s intentional or anything, and I don’t mean to call you out at all which is why I didn’t want to point it out in the replies y’know?  

 Don’t get me wrong though, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with not liking castiel or destiel. I’ve been watching the show for a while with my dad, and he isn’t a huge fan either, I don’t think that’s a problem :) 

I’d continue without waiting for a response but I don’t want to say something you’ve already been told, or continue without knowing if I’ve said something out of line already 😅

ME:  I'm kind of distracted dealing with my Mom's rehab center. But you can keep going.

THEM: Alright! I’ve tried rephrasing this a million times but I don’t know how to make it seem not antagonistic. I promise I don’t mean that you’re doing it intentionally, it’s just, uh a lot of your criticism of spn feels like it could be read as homophobic? Again I don’t think YOU are I just wanted you to know it kind of reads that way!

That sounded so confrontational. I really don’t mean it that way 😭

ME: HOMOPHOBIC? Really? A lot of the 'proof' your fellow shippers use border on stereotypes but you think I'M homophobic? Considering my top two ships are Wincest and Malec. Yeah, sounds confrontational.

THEM:  I’m sorry, I didn’t mean it like that. I guess there’s no other way to say it, but I understand why you feel accused. What do you mean by proof..?

Also I don’t really think having gay ships means you can’t be homophobic. *I* used to be homophobic years ago, and I’m a gay person!

ME:  How old are you? https://nancylou444.tumblr.com/post/154098904136/a-guide-to-dean-winchesters-imaginary-bisexuality

THEM:  yeah this is starting to get frustrating. I’m gonna be real with you, why does it matter if people think dean is bisexual? like, bottom line, that is my question for you

and your answer will determine if your veracity is homophobic. why does it matter that some people think dean is bisexual. not the fans or actors or writers or anything. why does it matter that some viewers will watch, and they will think dean is bisexual?

ME:  My problem isn't that some people think he is bi IN FANON, my problem is that they want CONFIRMATION OF A FANON SHIP. And that some people DENY how the show ended. These same people think that fake weddings are more canon than the FINAL EPISODE.

THEM:  I get what you mean, but how is it a fanon ship when it’s confirmed romantic from one side, and interpretable as mutually reciprocated in Latin America? (I’m going to disregard the bit about the wedding, because I’m a firm believer in Neil Gaiman variety death of the author. Also that’s just people having fun with fanon, who cares?)

ME:  Confirmed romantic?By whom MISHA, who wanted to sell necklaces? Have you never said 'i love you' to a FRIEND or FAMILY member? The dub is not canon, so don't even try using that as proof. Death of the author is just another way of saying MY VIEW OF THE SHOW IS SUPERIOR TO HOW THE CREATOR WANTS TO SEE IT. Jensen has said many times that the ship isn't canon and that Dean is straight. But it's better to believe what Misha says because he agrees with you. You think somebody is bi because of how they sit or the color clothes they wear? That would make YOU homophobe.

THEM:  LOL You know what? I change my answer. I looked through your blog and you ACTIVELY and viscously hate Cas, Charlie, Claire, Kaia and the implication that Jack may not be straight. You’ve said Cas coming out as gay and in love with dean makes the rest of his actions predatory, compared him to a teenage girl, called him creepy, and openly rejoiced in your idea that dean looked ‘disgusted with him’. You said that Claire is awful, that Kaia is a wooden plank, that they ‘shoved them together’ for ‘woke points’ and said that Jody saying Claire was IN LOVE WITH Kaia ‘doesnt count’ and called it ‘lip service’. And it doesn’t end there! After all this, you said that you preferred the old better s4 Claire. Is it because she was ostensibly straight? Are you uncomfortable with queer women? And then you have the audacity to use these characters (Claire and Kaia and Charlie) as reasons to epicly own the Hellers and claim they already have represention. You are a completely disingenuous bitch and I don’t care to be nice to you anymore! I don’t feel AT ALL charitable toward you anymore, and I don’t care if you have gay ships. Gay people aren’t here for you to fetishize! You CONSTANTLY mock and ridicule jokes made by queer people regarding deans bisexuality or Cas being gay or any number of things. You constantly reaffirm that Dean is straight and call people who think otherwise delusional and disgusting, while you think dean is in romantic sexual love with his male sibling. You are openly hostile to the idea of non-binary jack and were pissed that Alcal endorsed that. You devalue Jack’s value and relationship to Cas who is, textually, his father figure. I have NO reason not to think that you are homophobic. I don’t care anymore! You’re a huge bitch and, judging by your prior responses and posts, a genuine dialogue regarding queerness in spn is impossible. You regard any instance of canonically queer moments ‘lip service’ and so regard it. You actively hate every canonically gay character and degrade them using traditionally homophobic tropes and stereotypes.

Feel free to explain how you aren’t homophobic. I’m so sorry if I got the wrong impression.

ME: Wow I see your true colors have come out HELLER.

THEM:  Idc if you think I’m mean. Go ahead and make a post about me lol, have fun with it. Give me a moment to respond to your paragraph it’s... a lot to dissect.

I’ll touch on your comments about the dub and the Spanish language in a moment. First though

I ’m gonna be real with you, I don’t think you know what death of the author is. Neil Gaiman’s variety of the dead author principal is that once canon ends, the story belongs to those that consume and engage with it. That’s... also literally the theme of supernaturals final season. Anyway I really recommend you read up on death of the author and Neil Gaiman’s takes on fanon. It’s a fun way to consume your media, and in the end that’s what I’m here for.

I don’t care what Misha says, and I don’t care what Jensen says! I think they are both queer because I have eyes and watched the show. I think it’s a lovely narrative that is supported by canon, and it’s fine if you disagree with that

On your last sentence there... lol. It’s a common joke in queer circles that gays can’t sit properly, specifically bisexuals. Same thing with the clothing, it’s a SUPER common joke for example that lesbians wear flannel. Maybe you need to go outside and talk to some normal, non-incest shipping queer people. But what do I know!

And finally... ‘the Spanish dub isnt canon’

I am literally cuban. My first language is SPANISH. my entire household speaks Spanish, and my family past 1st cousins don’t speak any English. My Boricua cousins have watched supernatural in full for years, and they watch it in Spanish. Do you think America is the center of the universe? Do you think our media is somehow less than yours, that our interpretations of English language media isn’t valid? What, do you think we are idiots who don’t know how to analyze literature and media? Do you think the people who work at Telemundo, people employed as dubbers and translators, you think they do a worse job than the American crew?

Why, because they aren’t American or don’t speak English? ‘Te amo’ said to a non family member is, in 99% of any instance, ROMANTIC. it’s something you say to your spouse in serious situations like weddings!! Even MARRIED people don’t normally say te amo, everyone uses te quiero unless it is very serious or romantic in context.

All of my family who are Spanish language, they heard dean say ‘y a yo ti, cas’ and think that they were in romantic love. Sorry dude! The United States might be the center of your universe, but Latin America is HUGE. Spanish is one of the most spoken languages in the WORLD. In fact, more people speak Spanish than English. Sorry that you seem to hate gay characters SO MUCH you have to say an entire language somehow isn’t valid to consume media in!

ME: 

Obviously this heller is batshit crazy. 

Some of those things she thinks I said just show she has no idea how to follow a tumblr thread. 

You are a completely disingenuous bitch and I don’t care to be nice to you anymore! I don’t feel AT ALL charitable toward you anymore, and I don’t care if you have gay ships. Gay people aren’t here for you to fetishize! You CONSTANTLY mock and ridicule jokes made by queer people regarding deans bisexuality or Cas being gay or any number of things. You constantly reaffirm that Dean is straight and call people who think otherwise delusional and disgusting, while you think dean is in romantic sexual love with his male sibling.

Wow. 

I have NO reason not to think that you are homophobic. I don’t care anymore! You’re a huge bitch and, judging by your prior responses and posts, a genuine dialogue regarding queerness in spn is impossible. You regard any instance of canonically queer moments ‘lip service’ and so regard it. You actively hate every canonically gay character and degrade them using traditionally homophobic tropes and stereotypes.

Where have I hated canon gay characters and degraded them using tropes and stereotypes? The bitch has me confused with HER FELLOW SHIPPERS. 

Gotta love how she is defending the Spanish dub. Hit a nerve did I? 

It’s a common joke in queer circles that gays can’t sit properly, specifically bisexuals. Same thing with the clothing, it’s a SUPER common joke for example that lesbians wear flannel. Maybe you need to go outside and talk to some normal, non-incest shipping queer people.

Now who is using stereotypes? 

[vampish-glamour]

I really gotta say, the MOGAI pride flags aren't just wrong because they either lack meaning or is already covered by something, but they're flat out ugly. I know pride flags aren't an aesthetic thing as much as being LGBT isn't either. But the people using them as an aesthetic seem to lack any form of aesthetic. The ones I can't stand the most are the non-binary and genderqueer flags, among others. I just... who puts those colors together?! Joking aside, I think a lot of the MOGAI people only come up with new "pride" flags because they think that every trait is a gender or sexuality. That, and they're afraid to use LGBT. "Lesbian and bisexual are dirty words, transgender is transphobic, gay is a slur, etc. etc." I can't imagine being homo/transphobic to the point that thinking LGBT are dirty, slurs, or exclusionary words. At the end of the day, using another word just to avoid saying (let's say) bisexual - bisexuality is still bisexuality no matter how you put it, reword/redefine it, or what new flag someone comes up with. I think the lipstick lesbian and gay man pride flags are aesthetically pleasing, but I don't use them because I'm neither a lesbian or a gay man. I think pink, blue, and purple are beautiful colors, more so together, but I don't fetishize (for the lack of a better word) the bisexual flag because it's an identity, and I can find the pink-purple-blue aesthetic in many, many other things without demeaning an identity and flag with meaningful history.

I’ve noticed that MOGAI flags tend to fall into certain categories.

Neon eyestrain

Clashing colours

Too saturated

Too desaturated

Meaningless gradient

Often times crossing over and fitting more than one category lmao.

I agree though, the flags are often just flags for personality traits or even just individual preferences. There are so many flags out there that get more specific as you go along… it’s really just people desperately trying to find a way to feel special. Apparently LGBT isn’t enough anymore.

Personally, I don’t have much use for flags. If I were to use a flag, I’d probably just go with the rainbow one simply because I love the meanings of each stripe. It’s much better than “pink is for girls” that you find in nearly every lesbian flag variant.