#heterosexual behaviour 101

[drulalovescas]

Heterosexuality according to Dean Winchester:

1. Checking a handsome guy's dick.

2. Checking a handsome guy out.

3. Staring at a handsome guy's lips.

4. Slapping a handsome guy's ass.

5. Gently caressing a handsome guy's face

6. Getting a boner when looking at a handsome guy.

[dansenfans]

From Dansen fans admin.

This is a collaborative reaction to some (not all as we would be here forever and a day trying to write it down) of our problems with the current storylines on Supergirl. Before we get into that, a word on who helps run the account. We are a varied set of users, but all recognize the importance of Dansen, but also Brainia as representation that not only helps other LGBTQ people - it undoubtedly has saved a life somewhere simply because someone sees themselves represented onscreen. Do not think for a second this is an exaggeration or untrue. The representation is that important and needed. LGBTQ representation is far more than just having a character on TV. It gives those who are marginalized a voice. It gives that child growing up in a hostile environment simply for being LGBTQ hope that their life can be okay. That they aren't a freak. Or they have sinned.

We are from within the LGBTQ community, white, POC and from the heterosexual community (as an ally). So these comments are from a diverse set of people. We all love different characters and even multi-ship in some cases. What we all have in common is a love of Dansen.

What we all also have in common is our absolute horror in not only how the current LGBTQ characters are being used, but how relationships are suffering for it. 

Even away from Dansen we are finding the current overall arc of the story extremely difficult, because there is now such a disconnect from characters and friendships.

Let's tackle the LGBTQ and Dansen problem first. 

William has as much presence as a tree stump. There is something called the potted plant test, and that basically means, if a character can be replaced by a potted plant in scenes and not be missed, they don't need to be there. William is that plotted plant. So many of his scenes could easily have been done by Nia (who is a journalist after all) or Kelly (who we still don't know if she knows Kara is Supergirl, which under the circumstances is utterly laughable).

There is also something in the screenwriting industry that is writing 101, and by all accounts (according to a screenwriter a couple of us know, and no they aren't in the Supergirl fandom, SM or watch Supergirl), “Show us, don’t tell us why this relationship or friendship should work," is what you should have at the forefront of anything you write.

In other words, if fans are being told, or characters get continually told by those around them why they should be in a relationship, it isn't working.

The premise is pretty simple. You outline you want your character to have a love interest. You indicate who that LI might be. You get casting sorted, have chemistry reads. Consider the way in how they get together to fit the bigger narrative. What you don't do is tie it down that this is the way you have to go, regardless of what the story calls for. If after a few episodes, the chemistry onscreen between a character and someone completely different to the LI you had in mind is so obvious, so powerful, you adjust. You don't try to force the original LI into that scenario. If you then have to justify that LI (in Supergirl's case by having those around continually tell her she should go for a date with William, when she looks nothing but awkward and the chemistry is flat), then you fail on this basic writing point. If you ignore what a lot of fans, media and casual observers see elsewhere, you fail at the job of being a good storyteller. 

Supergirl has done both.

Ah but now we head into that territory of Supercorp. Look, we don't ask that people like Supercorp. This truly isn't about that. We aren't a Supercorp account. What it is about is the groundswell of fans who have increasingly seen a crackling connection between Kara and Lena, who had either of these characters been male, would've had them together by now. There are so many direct parallels to other couples, not just on Supergirl but elsewhere (particularly Clois, which fans have plenty of examples about if you look).

But this season, Supergirl took it a step further. The romantic coding that went on in 5a, that had direct parallels to the canon couple (Dansen) on the show to bait fans into watching (and yes it was queerbaiting if they didn't intend to make it romantic because that is exactly what queerbaiting is, and Supergirl has queerbaited now in the worst ways possible) is inexcusable. When you have media outlets, blogs, even non Supergirl fans see this and talk about it (each of us here has someone who isn't a Supergirl fan, but knowing there is a lesbian couple on the show assume Kara and Lena are that couple if they've caught sight of clips) then you have a problem, even if you don't acknowledge it. 

The latest hypocrisy of all this is how some fans have tripped over themselves to say how lovely, how romantic it was of William to remember Kara's coffee order, yet scream down other fans who said the same thing as Kara not only got Lena her favourite coffee and food - she flew across the world to achieve that, at a time Kara fully believed the friendship was fixed. To have fans called delusional for it is preposterous. You cannot do that. You simply can't, and this is a prime reason so many fans get angry and upset. 

Aside from that, the overtones of why William did the coffee run, it was actually more on the creepy side than friendship side. He even acknowledged his behaviour, with the coffee, the texts and the compliments was overstepping and not respecting Kara by his actions. Some say that's self awareness and bravo. We all argue it is borderline abusive.  If your self awareness is such you know your behavior is wrong, and you do nothing to stop or correct that behavior and carry on, then those are nothing more than platitudes. There are examples of people who have been triggered by 5.14 and Williams' actions, and citing why that has occurred as IPV survivors. Melissa is a IPV survivor and if others have been affected by this, we truly worry Melissa has been too, although we sincerely hope that isn't the case. Is that what you want as a fan, even if it is only a possibility with Melissa? Because we definitely don't. No fan should have been triggered from a character like that.

The 100th episode basically turned around and told Kara that she and Lena's destiny was so entwined, that they couldn't live without each other, or they would die for the other. Platonic or not, that is soulmate status. As for best friends? Those of us who are married are all married to our best friend. So many people, whether gay, straight, everywhere in between, say a spouse is their best friend. For anyone saying a best friend doesn't mean they're in love with that person is the worst take, as most of the time the best friend is the partner or spouse. William has barely been in the friend zone, let alone best friend zone. 

As for how William is impacting on the LGBTQ and current cast, there is no doubt he is in an extremely negative way. To the degree that Dansen has suffered significantly. Sure we had an emotional scene in 5.07, but we are now at 5.14, so a further 7 episodes in, and we barely have minutes worth of Dansen onscreen time. Last episode was less than a full minute total Dansen time and that's the best it's been in weeks.

Less than a minute! It was approximately 45 seconds for the first scene. 7 seconds (yes you read that correctly 7 seconds) on the second scene.

So this means that while we got nice character development beginning in S4, and to some degree early in 5a, we have had nothing on any note in regards Dansen all season, or Kelly throughout the entire season so far.

This means that we got invested in these characters, we were promised it would develop as S5 went on, to have this thrown at us as the best they can do? Any intimacy has been pretty much nonexistent, (we had more from Sanvers), and we get told that what they have given us we should be grateful for. No-one deserves that sort of disdain as fans. Yet we get told by others that Kara deserves a relationship with William? Save us the hypocrisy. 

No-one here is saying Kara doesn't deserve a relationship, but at the expense of others? Lead of the show or not, that is an awful take. Particularly when we have a fundamental relationship with her and Lena, even if it isn't romantic. 

If you cannot find balance as a writer to incorporate all of these things, then you aren't doing a good job of it at all. Azie in particular has been given the shittest end of the stick possible. Chyler hasn't faired much better. It is making Dansen now appear forced and lacking depth, and that's even allowing for the build up they gave us in S4. Kelly is a Black Lesbian, is highly educated, has (by all accounts) a loving solid relationship with another woman. All aspects we should be highlighting and applauding. Instead, here we are having to write at length some of what is so wrong for us.

Moving on to another area that was problematic. To have Alex discuss technical details as Kelly arrived in regard her work at Obsidian North, but to hear Kara say to Kelly, "She has never said words like that." 

Now this line could have been in jest, but it didn't feel like that, and considering Alex has a PhD in bioengineering, Alex is also an expert in alien physiology, and has used this knowledge in multiple D.E.O. operations. Alex was able to successfully create Blue Kryptonite to incapacitate Bizarro and working with Maxwell Lord, synthesized a cure for Red Kryptonite. She is also an accomplished neuroscientist and xenobiologist. Alex herself stated she could've had a promising medical career as a researcher had she not decided to work at the D.E.O. instead - and now you are saying Alex would never use that kind of language? Come on! That's so unrealistic it would be laughable if it wasn't so awful.

If you are a show who claims to be at the forefront of LGBTQ representation, who claim to be about female empowerment, you are giving us neither of those things. Someone else wrote this (taken with permission from Buddha in disguise on Tumblr).

"It seems we shouldn't ask for justification as to why William is on the show, but when we say the LGBTQ characters are being sidelined, that it doesn't matter one jot how diverse a cast can be; if said cast are not being given credible storylines or screentime, and if we say as much, we have to continually justify why that is the case. We get told to take what we are given. To insist on better, is oppressing the straight characters on the show, often said by CIS men (in some cases CIS women have argued the same). This isn't oppressing anyone, but asking that if we get given relationships, given characters we want to invest in, they get the storylines to accomplish that. Supergirl is failing the LGBTQ audience so badly at the moment. So many have the same complaints it is ludicrous to suggest this is just one section of a fandom or trolls."

The show is floundering. Winn got a more complete arc and closure in two episodes than anyone else so far on the show this season. We might have had 3 or 4 great episodes out of 14 of the 20 so far this season. The rest have been mediocre at best, with no obvious cohesive plot or storytelling. 

It is crazy that a Superhero show, that effectively has the freedom to pull in ideas from multiple sources with unique interesting takes that allows, has made it so boring, so full of drudgery that people are starting to turn off in droves. A fandom boycott isn't enough for such poor ratings on some episodes. Having moments in an episode that are good, possibly great, when the rest around it is so poor is destined to fail. 5.14 was another example of that. The moments that were good were enjoyable but the rest was so bad, it is harder to enjoy those good points. To even remember them.

Batwoman and Legends of Tomorrow have both done this far better of late (even if Legends have been a bit problematic with Zari), and the POC and the LGBTQ side of the stories have primarily been handled well. Batwoman in particular has just done an amazing storyline with Sophie Moore. The interesting thing is, a lot of people found Sophie hard to like to begin with. Many thought Kate Kane was better off without her. What changed all that was they gave Sophie an in depth, credible backstory and the chemistry between them grew organically. Fans could see the connection and increasingly yearned for it. They have also just tackled homophobia in families, particularly for POC. All without taking away from other essential elements of the storytelling. Supergirl take note; this is how you write a show that is integrated without hurting either the POC & LGBTQ characters or CIS straight characters. 

Now let's just broach the disconnect with characters and friendships. 

Because of the fracturing of friendships and relationships has been so extreme (virtually every one has lost all or most of what we had in previous seasons), we have lost core elements of the show. Of course the most obvious is Kara and Lena, but it extends far beyond that.

Alex and Brainy. Brainy and Lena. Brainy and Nia (Brainia is groundbreaking representation for transgender people to show they too can have relationships, but no, we can't even have that). Kelly and Kara (early S5 suggested Kara and Kelly were close enough friends now to talk about presents for Alex). Alex and Lena. 

Alex, Lena and Kara, which in the last two seasons have been the powerhouse behind them defeating whatever was going on around them as a team, but still allowing Kara to shine as the Superhero.

All these intricate relationships have gone. Instead we are faced with pairings that feel uncomfortable and awkward as a viewer, so the crux of what made Supergirl work has been lost. We are suddenly expected to be able to feel emphatic and understand completely unheard of pairings when we know nothing about them under those circumstances. Strangely enough, the one new pairing they have achieved this with is Andrea and Lena, because we got a fully fleshed out background, that also helped explain some of Lena's behavior today. The rest feels chaotic, and so far into the season that feeling of chaos should be going the other way. Instead it's increasing.

As we wrote this, the latest media outlet to highlight some of the problems the last episode faced came out.

It might not be a big article or have any real depth, but when The Radio Times wades in, you are beginning to lose serious credibility in media circles. The Radio Times is not some 2 bit media blog that you can laugh off or blame a fandom for.

5.15 promises to have better LGBTQ content, and is tackling a subject that Nicole herself became involved in with the writers. This gives us higher hope it is a better episode overall. We also know Kelly and Alex work together with J'onn, and while it would be great to see them partner up onscreen, we would actually really like just softer Dansen at home moments. We hope it incorporates both, but honestly the way this season has gone we aren't holding out much hope on that.

Last of all. We have seen several people tout that the plot twist is William in fact becomes a villain. None of us like the idea that another POC becomes a villain, but if by seasons end it occurred and so explained his presence (as a tool or high up member for Leviathan for example,) then at least that would give us something solid. But again, to do all this at the expense of all other characters is not what you want to see. Nor do any of us wish to see another POC get killed off if this happens as is being suggested. We would all rather William just disappears back to London to The Times. 

The last thing any of us wanted was to be writing this, but collectively our patience has run out. Our disappointment is acute. 

While we try to avoid mistakes and edit this, none of us are writers so please forgive any glaring errors you find.

[rose---child]

a joke about sailormoon bringing openness to queers lead me to this thanks wikipedia

1903 – In New York City on 21 February 1903, New York police conducted the first United States recorded raid on a gay bathhouse, the Ariston Hotel Baths. 34 men were arrested and 12 brought to trial on sodomy charges; 7 men received sentences ranging from 4 to 20 years in prison.

1906 – Potentially the first openly gay American novel with a happy ending, Imre, is published

1910 – Emma Goldman first begins speaking publicly in favor of homosexual rights. Magnus Hirschfeld later wrote "she was the first and only woman, indeed the first and only American, to take up the defense of homosexual love before the general public.

1912 – The first explicit reference to lesbianism in a Mormon magazine occurred when the "Young Woman's Journal" paid tribute to "Sappho of Lesbos[7] "; the Scientific Humanitarian Committee of the Netherlands (NWHK), the first Dutch organization to campaign against anti-homosexual discrimination, is established by Dr. Jacob Schorer.

1913 – The word faggot is first used in print in reference to gays in a vocabulary of criminal slang published in Portland, Oregon: "All the faggots [sic] (sissies) will be dressed in drag at the ball tonight".

1917 – The October Revolution in Russia repeals the previous criminal code in its entirety—including Article 995.[8][9] Bolshevik leaders reportedly say that "homosexual relationships and heterosexual relationships are treated exactly the same by the law."

1919 – In Berlin, Germany, Doctor Magnus Hirschfeld co-founds the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (Institute for Sex Research), a pioneering private research institute and counseling office. Its library of thousands of books was destroyed by Nazis in May 1933

1921 – In England an attempt to make lesbianism illegal for the first time in Britain's history fails

1922 – A new criminal code comes into force in the USSR officially decriminalizing homosexual acts. 

1923 – The word fag is first used in print in reference to gays in Nels Anderson's The Hobo: "Fairies or Fags are men or boys who exploit sex for profit."

1923 – Lesbian Elsa Gidlow, born in England, published the first volume of openly lesbian love poetry in the United States, titled "On A Grey Thread."

1923 – The word fag is first used in print in reference to gays in Nels Anderson's The Hobo: "Fairies or Fags are men or boys who exploit sex for profit." 1923 – Lesbian Elsa Gidlow, born in England, published the first volume of openly lesbian love poetry in the United States, titled "On A Grey Thread." 1923 – The word fag is first used in print in reference to gays in Nels Anderson's The Hobo: "Fairies or Fags are men or boys who exploit sex for profit."1923 – Lesbian Elsa Gidlow, born in England, published the first volume of openly lesbian love poetry in the United States, titled "On A Grey Thread."

1937 – The first use of the pink triangle for gay men in Nazi concentration camps.

1938 – The word Gay is used for the first time on film in reference to homosexuality

1941 – Transsexuality was first used in reference to homosexuality and bisexuality.

1945 – The Holocaust ends and it is estimated that between about 3,000 to about 9,000 homosexuals died in Nazi concentration and death camps, while it is estimated that between about 2,000 to about 6,000 homosexual survivors in Nazi concentration and death camps were required to serve out the full term of their sentences under Paragraph 175 in prison. The first gay bar in post-World War II Berlin opened in the summer of 1945, and the first drag ball took place in American sector of West Berlin in the fall of 1945.[26] Four honourably discharged gay veterans form the Veterans Benevolent Association, the first LGBT veterans' group.[27] Gay bar Yanagi opened in Japan

1946 – Plastic surgeon Harold Gillies carries out sex reassignment surgery on Michael Dillon in Britain.

1951 – Greece decriminalizes homosexuality.

1956 – Thailand decriminalizes homosexual acts.

1957 – The word "Transsexual" is coined by U.S. physician Harry Benjamin; The Wolfenden Committee's report recommends decriminalizing consensual homosexual behaviour between adults in the United Kingdom; Psychologist Evelyn Hooker publishes a study showing that homosexual men are as well adjusted as non-homosexual men, which becomes a major factor in the American Psychiatric Association removing homosexuality from its handbook of disorders in 1973. Homoerotic artist Tom of Finland first published on the cover of Physique Pictorial magazine from Los Angeles.[36]

1965 – Vanguard, an organization of LGBT youth in the low-income Tenderloin district, was created in 1965. It is considered the first Gay Liberation organization in the U.S

1967 – The Advocate was first published in September as "The Los Angeles Advocate," a local newsletter alerting gay men to police raids in Los Angeles gay bars

1970 – The first Gay Liberation Day March is held in New York City; The first LGBT Pride Parade is held in New York; The first "Gay-in" held in San Francisco; Carl Wittman writes A Gay Manifesto;[56][57] CAMP (Campaign Against Moral Persecution) is formed in Australia;[58][59] The Task Force on Gay Liberation formed within the American Library Association. Now known as the GLBT Round Table, this organization is the oldest LGBTQ professional organization in the United States.[60] In November, the first gay rights march occurs in the UK at Highbury Fields following the arrest of an activist from the Young Liberals for importuning.

1974 – Chile allows a trans person to legally change her name and gender on the birth certificate after undergoing sex reassignment surgery, becoming the second country in the world to do so.[86] Kathy Kozachenko becomes the first openly gay American elected to public office when she wins a seat on the Ann Arbor, Michigan city council; In New York City Dr. Fritz Klein founds the Bisexual Forum, the first support group for the Bisexual Community; Elaine Noble becomes the second openly gay American elected to public office when she wins a seat in the Massachusetts State House; Inspired by Noble, Minnesota state legislator Allan Spear comes out in a newspaper interview; Ohio repeals sodomy laws. Robert Grant founds American Christian Cause to oppose the "gay agenda", the beginning of modern Christian politics in America. In London, the first openly LGBT telephone help line opens, followed one year later by the Brighton Lesbian and Gay Switchboard;[citation needed] the Brunswick Four are arrested on 5 January 1974, in Toronto, Ontario. This incident of Lesbophobia galvanizes the Toronto Lesbian and Gay community;[87] the National Socialist League (The Gay Nazi Party) is founded in Los Angeles, California.[citation needed] The first openly gay or lesbian person to be elected to any political office in America was Kathy Kozachenko, who was elected to the Ann Arbor City Council in April 1974.[88] Also in 1974, the Lesbian Herstory Archives opened to the public in the New York apartment of lesbian couple Joan Nestle and Deborah Edel; it has the world's largest collection of materials by and about lesbians and their communities.[89] Also in 1974, Angela Morley became the first openly transgender person to be nominated for an Academy Award, when she was nominated for one in the category of Best Music, Original Song Score/Adaptation for The Little Prince (1974), a nomination shared with Alan Jay Lerner, Frederick Loewe, and Douglas Gamley. The world's first gay softball league was formed in San Francisco in 1974 as the Community Softball League, which eventually included both women's and men's teams. The teams, usually sponsored by gay bars, competed against each other and against the San Francisco Police softball team

1977 – Harvey Milk is elected city-county supervisor in San Francisco, becoming the first openly gay or lesbian candidate elected to political office in California, the seventh openly gay/lesbian elected official nationally, and the third man to be openly gay at time of his election. Dade County, Florida enacts a Human Rights Ordinance; it is repealed the same year after a militant anti-homosexual-rights campaign led by Anita Bryant. Quebec becomes the first jurisdiction larger than a city or county in the world to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation in the public and private sectors; Croatia, Montenegro, Slovenia and Vojvodina legalise homosexuality.[citation needed] Welsh author Jeffrey Weeks publishes Coming Out;[99] Original eight-color version of the LGBT pride flagPublication of the first issue of Gaysweek, NYC's first mainstream gay weekly. Police raided a house outside of Boston outraging the gay community. In response the Boston-Boise Committee was formed.[100] Anne Holmes became the first openly lesbian minister ordained by the United Church of Christ;[101] Ellen Barrett became the first openly lesbian priest ordained by the Episcopal Church of the United States (serving the Diocese of New York).[102][103] The first lesbian mystery novel in America was published; it was Angel Dance, by Mary F. Beal.[104][105] The National Center for Lesbian Rights was founded. Shakuntala Devi published the first[106] study of homosexuality in India.[107][108] Platonica Club and Front Runners were founded in Japan.[95] San Francisco hosted the world's first gay film festival in 1977.[109] Peter Adair, Nancy Adair and other members of the Mariposa Film Group premiered the groundbreaking documentary on coming out, Word Is Out: Stories of Some of Our Lives, at the Castro Theater in 1977. The film was the first feature-length documentary on gay identity by gay and lesbian filmmakers.[110][111] Beth Chayim Chadashim became the first LGBT synagogue to own its own building.[78] On March 26, 1977, Frank Kameny and a dozen other members of the gay and lesbian community, under the leadership of the then-National Gay Task Force, briefed then-Public Liaison Midge Costanza on much-needed changes in federal laws and policies. This was the first time that gay rights were officially discussed at the White House 

1980 – The United States Democratic Party becomes the first major political party in the U.S. to endorse a homosexual rights platform plank; Scotland decriminalizes homosexuality; The Human Rights Campaign Fund is founded by Steve Endean; The Human Rights Campaign is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality.[120] Lionel Blue becomes the first British rabbi to come out as gay;[121] "Becoming Visible: The First Black Lesbian Conference" is held at the Women's Building, from October 17 to 19, 1980. It has been credited as the first conference for African-American lesbian women.[122] The Socialist Party USA nominates an openly gay man, David McReynolds, as its (and America's) first openly gay presidential candidate in 1980.[123]

1987 – AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power(ACT-UP) founded in the US in response to the US government's slow response in dealing with the AIDS crisis.[142] ACT UP stages its first major demonstration, seventeen protesters are arrested; U.S. Congressman Barney Frank comes out. Boulder, Colorado citizens pass the first referendum to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation.[143][144] In New York City a group of Bisexual LGBT rights activist including Brenda Howard found the New York Area Bisexual Network (NYABN); Homomonument, a memorial to persecuted homosexuals, opens in Amsterdam. David Norris is the first openly gay person to be elected to public office in the Republic of Ireland. A group of 75 bisexuals marched in the 1987 March On Washington For Gay and Lesbian Rights, which was the first nationwide bisexual gathering. The article "The Bisexual Movement: Are We Visible Yet?", by Lani Ka'ahumanu, appeared in the official Civil Disobedience Handbook for the March. It was the first article about bisexuals and the emerging bisexual movement to be published in a national lesbian or gay publication.[145] Canadian province of Manitoba and territory Yukon ban sexual orientation discrimination.

1990

Equalization of age of consent: Czechoslovakia (see Czech Republic, Slovakia)

Decriminalisation of homosexuality: UK Crown Dependency of Jersey and the Australian state of Queensland

LGBT Organizations founded: BiNet USA (USA), OutRage! (UK) and Queer Nation (USA)

Homosexuality no longer an illness: The World Health Organization

Other: Justin Fashanu is the first professional footballer to come out in the press.

Reform Judaism decided to allow openly lesbian and gay rabbis and cantors.[148]

Dale McCormick became the first open lesbian elected to a state Senate (she was elected to the Maine Senate).[149]

In 1990, the Union for Reform Judaism announced a national policy declaring lesbian and gay Jews to be full and equal members of the religious community. Its principal body, the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR), officially endorsed a report of their committee on homosexuality and rabbis. They concluded that "all rabbis, regardless of sexual orientation, be accorded the opportunity to fulfill the sacred vocation that they have chosen" and that "all Jews are religiously equal regardless of their sexual orientation."

The oldest national bisexuality organization in the United States, BiNet USA, was founded in 1990. It was originally called the North American Multicultural Bisexual Network (NAMBN), and had its first meeting at the first National Bisexual Conference in America.[150][150][151] This first conference was held in San Francisco in 1990, and sponsored by BiPOL. Over 450 people attended from 20 states and 5 countries, and the mayor of San Francisco sent a proclamation "commending the bisexual rights community for its leadership in the cause of social justice," and declaring June 23, 1990 Bisexual Pride Day.

The first Eagle Creek Saloon, that opened on the 1800 block of Market Street in San Francisco in 1990 and closed in 1993, was the first black-owned gay bar in the city.

1993Civil Union/Registered Partnership laws:Repeal of Sodomy laws: Australian Territory of Norfolk IslandDecriminalisation of homosexuality: Belarus, UK Crown Dependency of Gibraltar, Ireland, Lithuania, Russia (with the exception of the Chechen Republic);Anti-discrimination legislation:End to ban on gay people in the military: New ZealandSignificant LGBT Murders: Brandon TeenaMelissa Etheridge came out as a lesbian.The Triangle Ball was held; it was the first inaugural ball in America to ever be held in honor of gays and lesbians.The first Dyke March (a march for lesbians and their straight female allies, planned by the Lesbian Avengers) was held, with 20,000 women marching.[156][157]Roberta Achtenberg became the first openly gay or lesbian person to be nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate when she was appointed to the position of Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity by President Bill Clinton.[158]Lea DeLaria was "the first openly gay comic to break the late-night talk-show barrier" with her 1993 appearance on The Arsenio Hall Show.[159]In December 1993 Lea DeLaria hosted Comedy Central's Out There, the first all-gay stand-up comedy special.[159]Before the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy was enacted in 1993, lesbians and bisexual women and gay men and bisexual men were banned from serving in the military.[160] In 1993 the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy was enacted, which mandated that the military could not ask servicemembers about their sexual orientation.[161][162] However, until the policy was ended in 2011 service members were still expelled from the military if they engaged in sexual conduct with a member of the same sex, stated that they were lesbian, gay, or bisexual, and/or married or attempted to marry someone of the same sex.[163]Passed and Came into effect: Norway (without adoption until 2009, replaced with same-sex marriage in 2008/09)US state of Minnesota (gender identity)New Zealand parliament passes the Human Rights Amendment Act which outlaws discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation or HIVCanadian province Saskatchewan (sexual orientation)

1998Anti-discrimination legislation: Ecuador (sexual orientation, constitution), Ireland (sexual orientation) and the Canadian provinces of Prince Edward Island (sexual orientation) and Alberta (court ruling only; legislation amended in 2009)Significant LGBT Murders: Rita Hester, Matthew ShepardDecriminalisation of homosexuality: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, South Africa (retroactive to 1994), Southern Cyprus and TajikistanEqualization of age of consent: Croatia and LatviaEnd to ban on gay people in the military: Romania, South AfricaGender identity was added to the mission of Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays after a vote at their annual meeting in San Francisco.[182] Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays is the first national LGBT organization to officially adopt a transgender-inclusion policy for its work.[183]Tammy Baldwin became the first openly gay or lesbian non-incumbent ever elected to Congress, and the first open lesbian ever elected to Congress, winning Wisconsin's 2nd congressional district seat over Josephine Musser.[184][185]Dana International became the first transsexual to win the Eurovision Song Contest, representing Israel with the song "Diva".[186]Robert Halford comes out as being the first openly gay heavy metal musician.[187]The first bisexual pride flag was unveiled on 5 December 1998.[188]Julie Hesmondhalgh first began to play Hayley Anne Patterson, British TV's first transgender character.[189]BiNet USA hosted the First National Institute on Bisexuality and HIV/AIDS.[190]

sorry its long just these i didnt know half of all this and thought we should all know 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_LGBT_history,_20th_century

[aroworlds]

Could you talk a bit about amatonormativity and how it related to you? I know the 101 (aka the definition), but I have trouble identifying it in real life, discussing how it permeates in fiction, etc. and this is kinda weird but I think an informed discussion about it would help? IDK feel free to ignore it if you don't have the spoons for it, but if you want to it would be a huge help!

Anon, I told you this was going to be long, but … well, it’s long!

The problem is that amatonormativity is a wall I keep hurling myself against, as an aro and as an aro creative, and there isn’t much conversational space where I am permitted to go all out in talking about it. I fear discussing this with too much vehemence, to go beyond the hand-holding 101 conversations about being aro, in case I alienate the alloromantic folks who do support me. Alloromantic people aren’t interested in conversations that undermine their sense of the world, and aro-spec spaces are small; both things together result in silence.

Because of this, I think it’s reasonable that this is something hard to grasp, for aro-spec and alloromantic folks alike: the educative conversations are hard to find or don’t exist. When you add to the fact that for the last two years a-spec people have been fighting targeted hate, that our conversations have fallen back to claws-out defence or the shield of validation, how the hell are we supposed to understand our own experiences, especially something as-yet-unquestioned as the practical impact of amatonormativity?

I hope you don’t mind, but because this is so long, I’m going to concentrate on amatonormativity in media and its impact on me as a creative.

In terms of fictional media, I think amatonormativity shows itself most obviously in the concept of a happy ending–that two people in a romantic relationship is by far the most common variant. No, not all stories end witha romantic happy ending, but so many do, even if it’s only a romantically-happy-for-now ending. Think Disney films; think action films shoving in an unnecessary romantic side-plot because the hero gets the girl once the explosions are over; think every story where the guy got the girl for reasons we the audience are expected to accept without question.

Likewise, a film with a tragic or unhappy ending is often shown by a protagonist not falling in romantic love or the dissolution of a romantic relationship. While there are other forms of indicating tragedy, the lack of a romantic paring for a character expected to be in one is common. There’s a reason Romeo and Juliet has long been framed as a tragic romance even though the tragedy, I’d argue, lies more in the impact of feuding families on the next generation, not the death of two young people in a “star-crossed” romance.

Even genres that aren’t romantic in the sense that romance isn’t the focus of the plot will still include sexual and romantic tension between characters: many of the crime and thriller novels I’ve read, supposedly less romantic because they target a cishet male audience, devote a great many pages to depicting romantic relationships nonetheless. The majority of YA novels depict the development of romantic relationships (which is why I kept reading middle-grade books even when I was too old for them) and even low-romance adult fiction still has the protagonists having had or desiring a romantic relationship at some point. So many literary works deal with the breakdown of romantic relationships, affairs, being single, unrequited love, or the way dangerous or alien environments, or the tyranny of distance, places stresses on romantic partnerships. These often won’t have purely happy endings–often tragic or complicated–because they’re Literary, but they’re just as obsessed with romantic love as any romance novel. In constantly going on about romance’s failure without ever making the point that someone can be happy and self-fulfilled without it, literary works are as amatonormative as anything else.

Romantic love and relationships don’t have to be successful: we just have to show a character desiring these or struggling with these, just so the audience knows that the protagonist is human. Characters who are shown as disdaining romance, or being uninterested in it, are usually antagonistic characters who are beyond redemption, are aliens or robots, or are coded as robotic–characters who are literally inhuman or portrayed as such. There’s a reason that The Big Bang Theory’s Sheldon Cooper becomes a kinder, more “normal”, less-autistic-coded man the more he falls in romantic love with Amy, despite being introduced as extremely aroace-coded, and it’s called amatonormativity.

This is the point in the post where we aro-specs are giving the world that long, pained stare, and for good reason.

Romantic love as a marker of human worth is the most succinct way I can describe the impact of amatonormativity. It’s not a flawless summary, but so often romance is treated as a universal concept, relevant to all, because Western society uses the possession of or desire for romantic love as an indicator of a person’s humanity. Romantic love makes us human, and so romantic love is everywhere, unquestioned and unassailable.

Elements of a more expanded sense of amatonormativity include:

- The idea that romantic attraction, love and relationships are universal to the human experience (predominantly a relationship encompassing, exclusively, one perisex heterosexual-and-heteromantic cis man and one perisex heterosexual-and-heteromanticcis woman).

- The idea that romantic love is the primary form of love and all other forms, once one gains a certain level of socially-acceptable maturity or adulthood, are naturally secondary.

- The idea that romantic love and relationships are relatable to and attainable by all, and any failure to relate to it or attain it is a personal or moral failing.

- The idea that people who do not experience, attain or desire a romantic partnership are, after a certain age, childish or childlike, immature, robotic, alien, inhuman.

- The idea that sex (especially non-heterosexual or non-vanilla sex) is only acceptable, for a person of high moral character, when it comes paired with romantic love. (Characters who have sex without romantic love are often coded as grasping, hateful, calculating, predatory.)

- The idea that the attainment of romantic love and relationships is a marker of character development, growth, adulthood or redemption.

- The idea that because romantic love and relationships are universal, to not depict them in media is to render one’s work childish or uninteresting. (Every aro-spec creator of narrative media knows the impact of this one.)

- The idea that the lack of romantic love or relationships, or the desire for these, is an indicator of a person of low moral character.

- The unquestioned idea that romance sells, accompanied with the assumption that the inclusion of romance in a work (or the story-arc of a protagonist) is a necessary part of making that work (or character) appealing to all audiences.

- No comprehension that romantic attraction can be felt and experienced in a diversity of ways and strengths, particularly with regards to fluctuation, intensity and circumstance.

- Very little comprehension of the difference between romantic attraction and romantic behaviours.

- An assumption that there is a certain set of behaviours that are only or best experienced with romantic attraction. (Engaging in these behaviours without romantic attraction is also often coded as predatory.)

Please note that all these discussions of romance are based on an alloromantic model: romance in and of itself is not inherently amatonormative. Aro-spec people’s experiences of romantic love and relationships do not fit the above because they do not and cannot assume that everyone fits this assumption of romantic attraction being a universal, unquestioned human. If your depiction of romance doesn’t assume that romance makes us a worthy human and everyone experiences it, it’s probably not amatonormative.

There’s heavy overlap with ableism, misogyny, heterosexism, whoremisia, etc, and this must be acknowledged. Amatonormativity hits hard on its own, but it seldom hits alone. More often it’s paired up with another form of oppression, which means people who better fit its norms can deny its existence by claiming the problem is due only to amatonormativity’s current partner.

Additionally, most mainstream amatonormative works are going to be about cishet romances (the romantic relationship between a cis heterosexual man and a cis heterosexual woman, presumed to be perisex and both alloromantic and allosexual). Women are far more subject to the need to be shown in romantic relationships than men; men are more often allowed to travel through the narrative without being subject to a romance, although most are shown as at least desiring it. Each experience of marginalisation is going to shape in different ways how amatonormativity impacts us, and this needs to be discussed (especially because if we don’t, antagonists deny the existence of amatonormativity altogether).

(I will say that amatonormativity and misogyny have a strange relationship in that excessive romance is treated as feminine and emotional, and denigrated because of it. We all know how literature is valued and respected over fanworks and genre romance. Cishet men, meanwhile, have a long history of treating the having of a romantic partner as a trap–phrases like “ball and chain” with regards to a wife, for example. Despite this, there’s still an unquestioned social expectation that men experience romance attraction and have, will have or want a romantic partner.)

I’ll use my experience as a trans aro to give an example of this kind of overlap.

Amatonormativity in LGBTQIA+ media is coloured by the fact that LGBTQIA+ folks have been denied romantically-happy-endings until recently; the rise of fandom and LGBTQIA+ genre media has done much to change this. Yet both are, predominantly, romance narratives, to the extent that there is little space for anything else. This history leaves me in an awkward position. The need for love stories featuring trans characters and trans bodies as worthy of romantic interest and desire is profound. In a world where romantic love is seen as the only kind of love worth talking about, powerful and primary, it’s natural many trans/NB stories are about just that.

I feel like I’m walking on thin ice if I talk about how depicting romance as the only acceptable trans happy ending defines my experience of gender by romantic experiences--and yet that is exactly what I feel. Furthermore, this is a narrative many alloromantic trans people need and deserve. In trying to tell stories about me, an aro trans person, who isn’t a target of romantic love, my stories are seen by alloromantic trans folks as mirroring the narratives that have long harmed trans people, treating us as unlovable. My work cannot provide the validation–that they are desired and loved romantically–alloromantic trans folks are looking for.

The amatonormativity isn’t in the existence of trans romance stories, but the fact there are fewer publishing options, and smaller audiences, for non-romantic/aromantic/gen stories about trans love and identity. The amatonormativity lies in the fact that romantic love for trans characters is the love on which trans genre media centres.

As a reader, I need stories that talk about different kinds of love, love for myself and my own body, a radical self-acceptance that isn’t tied to someone else’s romantic interest in me. Instead, I get stories telling me that I am accepted, as a trans person, if my identity is tied up in experiences I don’t have and don’t desire.

The intersection of amatonormativity and cissexism results in its own peculiar oppression for me as a trans aro, one that I find impossible to navigate in a world where it isn’t understood that romance doesn’t have to be the primary form of expressing love and acceptance for trans characters and even trans bodies. I’ve seen so many posts on my dash about people proclaiming a want for trans storytelling while getting no benefit from this movement because I’m writing about aro trans characters. That’s more than a little disheartening.

This kind of intersection does a lot of damage to aro-spec creators who are otherwise marginalised (so many marginalised experiences come with a heavy dose of we are lovable, our love is important, we deserve the right for our love to be accepted and protected and acknowledged, much of this conversation centred on romantic love) but just being an aro-spec creator who creates aro-spec narrative media comes with an inherent disadvantage that is difficult to surmount.

I’ve got some numbers for this disadvantage, actually. My latest work, The Wind and the Stars, has had fifty downloads in its first month, and I’m actually excited by that, because everything else I’ve posted with the tag “aromantic” has gotten approximately twenty downloads in their first months. A couple of works didn’t break the fifty mark until three or four months in! By contrast, with the same amount of promotion but published under a brand new name with no back catalogue to help (unlike my other works), my explicitly queer paranormal romance story got three hundred downloads in its first month. How am I supposed to provide representation for my community when I don’t have enough interest in my work to justify the work of its production?

The tag aromantic helps guide aro-spec readers, but it actively discourages most alloromantic readers (who exist in far greater number) from reading, and most of them won’t have any comprehension of why. They just see romance as normal and interesting, and anything that subverts this, be it specifically aromantic or just gen, undermines this worldview. It happens so subconsciously it’s near impossible to challenge.

In a way, one of the most damaging aspects of amatonormativity is its lack of recognition. Most people have some understanding, now, on what misogyny is and what harm it might cause, even if one disagrees with it or has a 101 understanding at best. There’s a social model for beginning to understand this. Amatonormativity, on the other hand, has no such basis. It’s so unquestioned that few people who aren’t aro-spec recognise it or need to, and it’s often seen as a lesser problem. As someone who is struggling as a creator because of amatonormativity, to the extent that I don’t know how I can possibly survive as a writer, it angers me to see this treated as less important than other forms of normativity. No, nobody will beat me up on the street as an aro, but if I can’t keep a roof over my head because only a small number of people are reading my free books and I have no belief they’ll buy my next book, how does this distinction matter?

Amatonormativity silences, erases and oppresses aro-spec people. It substantially disadvantages us in how we are seen by others and how we interact with the world around us. And almost nobody outside aro-spec spaces wants to acknowledge it.

Sorry for the rant at the end there, anon. Does this give you some idea on how amatonormativity is demonstrated through media and how it impacts aro-spec creatives?

[transgenderteensurvivalguide]

(1/6) In advance, sorry if this sounds clipped but I'm rewriting an 11 part ask because that's just too much and it feels like it would be rude to send such a long question. Somehow it's still long. So my background is: mostly used to aro and ace communities, don't have much experience with the lgbt+ community at large (trying to work on that), the way the aro/ace communities break concepts like attraction down really helped me figure out what my orientation was. Questioning my gender now and

(2/6) having a hard time finding resources that help me clarify my feelings instead of making me even more confused. I started researching thinking that they would be similar to aro and ace resources, going to the root of things and saying “What even is attraction, let’s define it” and breaking it down into chunks instead of trying to tackle the whole thing at once (see the split attraction model). Instead I found many lists of labels and pronouns, trans 101 that was at the same time too basic (3/6) and not basic enough, and “Gender is a feeling, masculinity/femininity/androgyny/etc are feelings too, no one can tell you what your gender is but you”. My request isn’t for anyone to tell me what my gender is, I’ll figure that out myself. But I feel I’m lacking the tools to do it. So does anyone have any resources, be they articles/blogs/life experiences and stories written by trans people/etc that breaks things like the feelings of gender as a whole, masculinity, femininity, androgyny,(4/6) agender, and dysphoria down (not coded behaviors or presentation, but what they actually FEEL like. These are the things that I’m most confused about and most want some sort of answer or definition for) in the style aro/ace resources do for attraction/orientation? To figure this out I need some sort of starting point or foothold or anchor for this instead of “it’s a feeling” when I don’t know what that feeling could be. But “Nobody can tell you what you are” sounds much more like defeat(5/6) than freedom to me rn. I’ve heard it said that gender is experienced differently by everyone, and if it’s really just some nebulous unidentifiable feeling that literally cannot be put into words then I can learn to live with the fact I’ll just never understand it, but… it just seems like there HAS to be some sort of commonality in the feeling of gender, the feeling of femininity/masculinity/all the rest that could be prevalent enough to say what that feeling IS and used to help people (6/6) figure out better who they are and who they want to be. For the ones like me who don’t even know what they’re feeling or what they want to be, just that they don’t want to feel like they do now.

Kii says:You’ve got a lot here, and you’re right. Gender is really confusing, and it really is something that 100 different people will give you 100 different answers about. Some people do feel their gender is best described by more visible aspects, such as behaviors, clothing, desired body, hobbies, etc, but some people don’t, and for them, it is just a feeling that isn’t describable, they just know internally what gender they are and can’t always explain why. 

However, just because there are feelings doesn’t mean that everyone’s feelings are the same, like the commonality you’re mentioning. You know the old “how do we know that your green is the same as my green?” Two people could be seeing the exact same item, both agree that it’s green, but how does anyone know that if I saw the same item through your eyes, I would still call it green? Your eyes might be structured completely differently than mine. Your green might be my purple, etc. I think the same goes for the words “masculine” and “feminine”- I can give you words that I associate with each, but a lot of people might disagree. 

Think of a person that you consider to be very masculine (whether they ID as a man or not)- why do you see them as masculine? Is it because of how they dress? What their body looks like? Because they like cars, sports, etc? How they act or other elements of their personality? Do the same for someone who you feel is very feminine (whether they ID as a woman or not). How is your “masculine” person different than your “feminine” person?

Androgyny is usually described as the intersection or mix of masculinity and femininity, so to figure out what you associate with androgyny, you kind of have to figure that out first.

We have a whole page about dysphoria, since that’s a more concrete concept. There are lots of descriptions there on how different people describe dysphoria and how it feels.

We also have this post, which a lot of people have tried to make helpful to questioning people, as well as this ask where various mods described what gender feels like to them.

Harper Says:I would also suggest a broader understanding of gender (and sexuality). You’re looking for a commonality that is not found uniformly in lived/expressed experiences - perhaps you might find it fleetingly, strangely, but I doubt it will come with much uniform clarity. The assumption that there has to be a commonality, a universality, is one that potentially assumes a (purely) medical/psychological account of gender and sexuality. Experiences of gender will necessarily intersect with other forms of systematic oppression: race, disability, and so on; and so each account of gendered experience has to be uncommon.Try instead understanding gender as part of a wider system of oppression rigged to benefit white cis men. In this, bodies, activities, sexualities, (and many other things) are codified and performed within a system of oppression. This is the way as far as I, and many other thinkers, understand gender. When you ask for gender as “not coded behaviors or presentation, but what they actually FEEL like” I think you misunderstand that gender is easily and always both. The performances, the risks, the transgressions, that commonly make up transgender experiences are inescapably coded behaviours - we don’t live in a society that isn’t oppressive. That is why there is such fear and thrill in a trans woman shaving her legs for the first time, or a trans man using the men’s bathroom for the first time. The emotion and feeling wouldn’t be there if such transgressions weren’t coded in a system of oppression that frowns upon such behaviours. Gender is always on some level something that is done and the doing is bound up with being. To strive for a definition that reduces one to the other or excludes one or the other is as far as I understand it, a misunderstanding, and this is perhaps where your confusion comes from.With this understanding I would then say that it is not very surprising that you’re finding dead-ends and confusion by trying to parse an understanding of gender through split-attraction model type thinking. This is a relatively recent way of thinking about sexuality within the LGBT community, (one that I personally find no stock in), butting up against around thirty years of queer feminist thought, and a whole history of LGBT lives and experiences. You will probably find that trying to think through gender in ace/aro modes of thought is an impossible task without this appreciation of transgender history or an understanding of heterosexuality as the oppressive action of gender.I’m not surprised then, that you find defeat instead of freedom; for many, gender is something that is survived. Freedom can only come with the abolition of gender, that is the end of the “material, social, and economic dominance of men and exploitation of women” (Escalante). So to speak of a commonality, perhaps start reading about how these oppressive systems work. Understanding all of this is not an easy task. Below I’ll feed a few pointers on a theoretical level, and as such can throw up inaccessible language. My hope is that if you do struggle with any of it, from here you can google keywords and hopefully find more sources that suit you better.For the theoretical exploration of such see: Judith Butler’s Gender Trouble, and Monique Wittig’s The Straight Mind and Other Essays (see One is Not Born a Woman - I haven’t yet managed to find a pdf for the whole book). Or key words: material feminism, Butler, gender performance, heterosexuality, the straight mind. CW: (this will be quite broad but I know Wittig talks about:) pornography, sexual harassment, slavery.For an account of gender which explores these concepts see Susan Stryker’s My Words to Victor Frankenstein…. In this Stryker mixes a lived personal experience with gender as a trans woman alongside theoretical musings. Key words: transfeminism, transgender studies, transgender rage. CW: surgery, suicide, TERF stuff, pregnancy, birth.I would also recommend investing yourself in transgender voices and histories, so you can see how a varied approach to gender throughout history has been undertaken and lived. How complexities and contradictions have been embodied and embraced complexly by trans individuals. See Paris is Burning for what has become an important moment in LGBT cinema and history. CW death, accounts of violence, mentions of surgery, talk about sex.Also check out One From the Vaults a trans history podcast by Morgan M. Page. (Also available on iTunes, etc. I think.) In this engrossing podcast, Page tells the stories of various trans - or at least gender transgressive - people throughout history, including clips of them, letters, interviews, etc.. It comes with “all the dirt, gossip, and glamour from trans history” and so shows the variety of our trans ancestors throughout history, good and bad, happy and sad; encompassing all different ways of doing gender and different ways of being.In terms of your own personal questioning of gender, I would do as I advised here. Do gender: evoke man, evoke woman, evoke neither. Try things out, see what you feel. Explore yourself and your own embodiment and explore the feelings that arise out of this. At the end of the day, gender isn’t something that originates from books and articles, it is lived and done out in the world.I wish you the very best on your journey!

[itsjules-here]

Good Bad Gays: An analysis of what it means to be acceptable in a heteronormative society

By Julia Brown

Modern Western Society is known to have certain cultural norms that are so pervasive many people cannot identify them: Anglocentrism, androcentrism, ablenormativity, cisnormativity, and heteronormativity (Herek, 1996; Ingraham 2013; Walters, 2016). Meeting these norms enables privilege, which enables people who meet them to advance socially, and in turn they perpetuate these norms.

Heteronormativity is defined as the way society values heterosexual monogamous relationships above all others (Walters, 2016). However, in recent times, social and political change has led to more acknowledgement on non-heterosexual relationships (gay, lesbian, bisexual, queerplatonic, asexual, etc.) (Ingraham, 2013). This, combined with societies preconceived notions of what it is to be non-heterosexual, has led to a phenomenon that I have entitled ‘The Good Bad Gay’.

The Good Bad Gay is a fictional entity created by this heteronormative society in order to distance itself from homophobia. The Good Bad Gay is a person who is non-heterosexual (queer) but performs in a way that is deemed acceptable by heteronormative society. The Good Bad Gay is a contradictory state because it requires a certain degree of invisibility and privilege, it functions as a mask for homophobic people, so they don’t have to acknowledge their homophobia.

The Good Bad Gay acts in the following way: - Their sexuality is never relevant, even in a conversation about sexuality and dating. - They will not dress in either an overtly gay fashion (no rainbows, glitter, no stereotypically queer or associated fashion), but they will still be clean, professional and presentable. - They will not act politically even when their own rights are in question. - They will remain calm and patient and explain everything about sexuality to people who could just as easily find that information themselves. - They will not defend themselves against bigotry.

(Clarke & Turner, 2007; Herek, 1996; Ingraham, 2013; McDermott, Roen & Scourfield, 2008; Walters, 2016)

From this we can deduce that the Good Bad Gay is complicit in their own oppression. They are a person who allows both themselves and others like them to be treated as sub-human.

While there is a benefit to being a Good Bad Gay - being accepted in a heteronormative society, being one only leads to more social consequences for non-heterosexual people. Instead of being a Good Bad Gay, be a Human Gay, be someone who will not be complicit in their own dehumanisation. If society refuses to accept someone, they are more benefits to creating a new society that accepts them, than hiding who they are (Clarke & Turner, 2007; Herek, 1996; Ingraham, 2013; McDermott, Roen & Scourfield, 2008; Walters, 2016). There is overwhelming evidence to support that accepting oneself and creating a supportive environment (even if it means cutting people out) is more beneficial to the mental health of non-heterosexual people than having them silence themselves for the benefit of heteronormativity.

If in order to be accepted by society one must conceal themselves, then it is ultimately better for them to reject that society.

References

Aguero, J. PhD, Bloch, L. & Byrne, D PhD (1984) The Relationships Among Sexual Beliefs, Attitudes, Experience, and Homophobia, Journal of Homosexuality, 10:1-2, 95-107, DOI: 10.1300/J082v10n01_07

Clarke, V., & Turner, K. (2007). V. Clothes Maketh the Queer? Dress, Appearance and the Construction of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Identities. Feminism & Psychology, 17(2), 267–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959353507076561

Herek, G. M. (1996). Heterosexism and homophobia. In R. P. Cabaj & T. S. Stein (Eds.), Textbook of homosexuality and mental health (pp. 101-113). Arlington, VA, US: American Psychiatric Association.

Ingraham, C. (Ed.). (2005). Thinking Straight. New York: Routledge, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203006368

McDermott, E., Roen, K.,  & Scourfield, J. (2008) Avoiding shame: young LGBT people, homophobia and self‐destructive behaviours, Culture, Health & Sexuality, 10:8, 815-829, DOI: 10.1080/13691050802380974

Orwell, G. (1945). Good Bad Books. Tribune.

The Tolerance Trap. (2016). Google Books. Retrieved 2 February 2019, from https://books.google.com.au/books?id=PP_LCgAAQBAJ&dq=the+good+kind+of+gay&lr=&source=gbs_navlinks_s

[itscosplay-dontbesalty-blog]

#3. Sexy Cosplay, Online Slut Shaming and Post-feminist Theory

In the online world where posting photos of blackface is political and trolls are so vast they form their own culture, slut shaming affects the personal life of someone online as it targets a specific person. Slut shaming is the act of labeling someone a ‘slut’ and in that labeling trying to make the shamed person feel bad about it. In cosplay, a large debate surrounds sexy cosplay and if it’s good, bad or something in between. Many people in the cosplay audience feel it is bad and this results in slut shaming online. This blog will firstly define what a slut is and what sexy and lewd cosplay is. From this, I will present post-feminist theory and slut shaming theory. Once post-feminist and slut shaming theory has been explained and discussed, an analysis of Jessica Nigri and Tenleid Cosplay’s received comments on their Instagram posts will be done in order to show what slut shaming is and how this slut shaming works in relation to a famous cosplayer versus a not-as-famous cosplayer.

Before one can analyse how slut shaming is theorised and theories surrounding it, one must first define what a ‘slut’ is considered to be.  According to the Oxford English Dictionary (2002: 853), a slut is defined as “a woman who is slovenly or who has many sexual partners”. Slovenly is defined as “dirty” or “careless” (Oxford English Dictionary 2002: 852). Therefore when someone slut shames a woman, they are saying the woman is dirty, careless and has sexual intercourse with multiple people, and she should feel bad about it.

It is important to note here that this definition specifically says “woman” (Oxford English Dictionary 2002: 853). What the dictionary is saying then is that a slut is automatically a woman, and although there has been a newly coined term called the ‘man-slut’ in common slang, slut automatically refers to a woman with many sexual partners and therefore a man with many sexual partners isn’t defined as a slut. 

Sexy or lewd cosplay is a less defined term. In fact, sexy is defined as “sexually attractive or exciting” (Oxford English Dictionary 2002: 824). This means that any cosplay that someone finds sexually attractive (this can be from wearing a bikini to wearing full body armour depending on a persons individual tastes) will be sexy cosplay. Lewd cosplay is more specific, as lewd means “crude and offensive in a sexual way” (Oxford English Dictionary 2002: 852). Therefore lewd cosplay is cosplay that has been taken and made sexy, regardless of whether the character is inherently sexy or not.

However, regardless of what is defined as sexy or lewd cosplay, people who find sexy/lewd cosplay off-putting have been seen to engage in slut shaming. This has ranged from a photograph where the cosplayers buttocks is the focus (Tenleid Cosplay 2017), to Jessica Nigri’s (2017) bare legs and cleavage. What is lewd about these cosplays is the sexualizing of the two characters that aren’t inherently sexy.

Post-feminist theory advocates that equality between men and women has been achieved (Nguyen 2013:158).  Therefore post-feminism believes that women should engage in stereotypical ‘girl culture’ if they so choose, as it can be a gesture of confidence (Nguyen 2013: 158). This type of feminism is known as power or girlie feminism, meaning women who experiment with youth and innocence through their personal choices (Nguyen 2013: 158).

Post-feminists position themselves in an individualistic ideology and encourage young women to find pleasure in femininity and to find self-fulfillment in it (Nguyen 2013:158). This means that post-feminism believes women should find enjoyment in things such as make-up, high heels, lingerie and the fact that they are beautiful and sexy because they are women. Post-feminism advocates this positive attitude towards stereotypical femininity rather than the violent critique of it (Nguyen 2013: 158).

I feel that sexy/lewd cosplay fits this post-feminist view. Instead of cosplayers such as Jessica Nigri being anti-feminist, I feel that she finds pleasure in her femaleness and she advocates the enjoyment of what it means to be feminine, regardless of if that femininity is stereotypical. Please note that I am not claiming she is a post-feminist, but rather that she meets post-feminist criteria. 

Armstrong et. al(2014) researched slut shaming amongst university students. What they found was that slut shaming had a very clear relation to status (Armstrong et. al. 2014: 101). Armstrong et. al (2014: 102) explain that people perform genders – this means that they act out certain ideas of masculinity, femininity and others. These are the ways a male ‘jock’ will act or the way a female ‘tom boy’ acts. However, certain performances of femininity are excepted while others are not and those with power in society determine which performances are good or bad (Armstrong et. al. 2014: 102).

 The act of labeling what is acceptable performances of gender and what is not polices other forms of performance (Armstrong et. al. 2014: 102). This means that when a woman does not perform the ‘appropriate’ form of femininity, a femininity that is not sexual and does not claim sexuality, she is labeled the negative term ‘slut’. Slut shaming thereby serves as a punishment for some women while those without the label are rewarded with positive labels (Armstrong et. al. 2014: 103). Unfortunately, this labeling punishes even the idea of sexual behaviour in women, but is appropriate of a heternormative form of masculinity (Armstrong et. al. 2014: 103) (Heteronormative masculinity is a type of masculine performance that is favoured over others – Donald Trump is an example of this as he is a heterosexual white American man with money and power).

 Armstrong et. al (2014:100) believe that when women slut shame other women it is due to internalized oppression, meaning the women slut shaming other women actually feel oppressed and therefore set out to oppress others who have the freedom and/or courage to express themselves sexually.

 In the past there have been what is known as SlutWalks (Nguyen 2013: 159).  These SlutWalks aim to change the idea that women are able to be judged and morally categorized by the way they look as well as subvert the idea that women are responsible for rape and sexual harassment (Nguyen 2013: 159). By calling the marchers ‘sluts’, the women claim their own potential sexuality and empower women and their bodies, removing the stigma attached to the word ‘slut’ (Nguyen 2013: 159).

I believe sexy/lewd cosplay functions much like these SlutWalks. When cosplayers are slut shamed for loving their bodies and their sexual freedom, a form of policing occurs which suppresses all women rather than ‘teaches’ one.

In an Instagram post of Nigri’s (2017) Ghost Busters cosplay, one sees Intagramer lando_white_boy (2017) claim she doesn’t have to work because she is choosing to make her money the “easy and unrefined” way. This Instagramer slut shames Nigri as he is saying she is unrefined and easy, rather than noting that she is claiming her own sexual agency as a woman.

Samyy.lr  (2017) replies saying she has no “honnor of self-proudness”. What I believe the Instagramer is trying to do is shame Nigri by saying she has no pride or honour.  Again, where Nigri can be said to be taking pride in her femininity and showing her sexual agency by posting the sexy cosplay on Instagram, these two Instagramers are trying to slut shame her for it because it does not suit their ideas of ‘appropriate femininity’.

The two Instagramers carry on wondering ‘how her parents feel about her cosplays’. This is a personal attack but also show the two Instagramers are assuming that her parents must not agree with her sexual agency and must be disappointed in her. This assumption shows that these two Instagramers are possibly ignorant in assuming that all parents look down on sexual agency but also show how there is an assumption that sexual agency in women should be looked down upon in society.

Samyy.lr (2017) also tries to slut shame Nigri by saying she doesn’t make “real cosplay” anymore and that she is another “simple playboy girl”. The idea of a playboy girl is meant to be a derogatory comment here, despite the fact that according to post-feminist theory, claiming ones sexuality as a woman isn’t a bad thing. Therefore, despite this Instagramer’s attempt to shame Nigri, they don’t achieve their desired affect. As seen in the previous blog about Internet trolls, the attempt to shame Nigri is by claiming her cosplay is not ‘real’ or worthy of the name ‘cosplay’ anymore. Despite this comment, the mass amounts of positive comments on this Ghost Busters cosplay and her other cosplays makes this comment fall flat.

However, Armstrong et. al (2014: 104) note that women with higher status in society are more sexually priviledged than women who are lower in status. This means that women who have a higher status are less likely to be labeled a slut for doing the same thing than those with a lower status.

As much as Nigri shows post-feminist sexual agency, this is unfortunately seen in comments online.

 I have analysed five negative comments on Nigri’s (2017) Ghost Busters cosplay post, however the cosplay still received 141, 085 likes at the time the screenshot was taken.

On Tenleid Cosplay’s (2017) Instagram post, she received three negative comments:

“Dude WTF” (serdar_silayir_kaya 2017; “Lol” (reaper_omg 2017) which I view as negative as the Instagramer is saying they are laughing at her; and “This isn’t about cosplay, you’re just a whore” (Kanyizzle_ 2017).

Tenleid Cosplay received three negative comments in one viewable section out of 7,665 likes at the time. When one does this in accordance to ratio, Nigri receives an estimate of 0.00003543962 negative comments per like based on the five negative comments, while TenLeid Cosplay receives 0.00039138943 negative comments per like based on the three negative comments seen.

This means that Tenleid Cosplay is more likely to be called a “whore” as Kanyizzle_ (2017) calls her than Nigri is. I believe this is because Nigri is more popular than Tenleid Cosplay, and therefore this popularity gives her a higher status that allows Nigri more sexual privilege.  

However, despite this, cosplayers thrive online, as it is the best platform for sharing cosplay creations around the world. The Internet allows cosplayers like Nigri and Tenleid Cosplay to claim agency, and as Banda, Mudhai and Tettey (2009: 26) state, voice and show alternative femininities that have been suppressed previously in history.

Therefore, regardless of sexually privileged cosplayers versus less sexually priviledged cosplayers, slut shaming polices women and how they choose to use their sexuality. Engaging in slut shaming online not only punishes certain forms of femininity and sexuality but it also reinforces dominant hierarchies – that is the hierarchy that allows men to be sexual agents but punishes women for the same agency. Therefore, any slut shaming in the cosplay community disempowers women in cosplay and elsewhere. If cosplay is costume-play, then cosplayers should be allowed to play with their freedom, be it sexual freedom or artistic freedom. 

For more information on sexy cosplay, take a look at South African cosplayer Maoukami Cosplay and her video on sexy cosplay. 

 References:

 Armstrong, E.A., Hamilton, L.T., Armstrong E.M., Seeley, J.L.
2014. “Good Girls”: Gender, Social Class, and Slut Discourse on Campus.  Social Psychology Quarterly. 77(2): 100-122.

Banda, F., Mudhai, O.F., Tettey, W.J. 2009. New Media and democracy in Africa – a critical interjection. In. Banda, Mudhai and Tettey (eds.) African Media and the Digital Public Sphere. London: Palgrave.

Nguyen, T. 2013.  From SlutWalks to Suicide Girls: Feminist Resistance in the Third Wave and Postfeminist Era. Women’s Studies Quarterly. 41(3/4): 157-172.

Nigri, J. 2017. jessicanigri Instagram Account. Instagram. Retrieved 29 October, 2017 from the World Wide Web: https://www.instagram.com/p/BaeeqqBFvhP/?taken-by=jessicanigri

 South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary. 2002. 3rd edition. Eds. Catherine Soanes. Cape Town: Oxford University Press.

 Tenleid Cosplay. 2017. tenleid Instagram Account, Instagram. Retrieved 29 October, 2017 form the World Wide Web: https://www.instagram.com/p/BaxreWYF7oj/?taken-by=tenleid