#if this post was not clear i am making them both GAY PARTNERS

[goblinroleplay]

im sooo normal about gustav and bonnie . anyway on a completely unrelated note im going to make two treasures ocs aha like the worlds butchest lesbian grizzled treasure hunter lady aha not like relevant to bonnie or anything at all haha and some guy idk i care less about men .

[faaun]

pls i need to provide updates

[ingydar-phan]

Ok I do want to chime in on the convo but actually this is gonna be really long because I’ve been planning to make a huge post about this since the tour trailer came out. Like genuinely I messaged some people asking for tips on how to make a big conversation post weeks ago and then just never did it. So here goes I guess.

I am a firm believer they are going to hard launch soon. In some way shape or form. Before tour starts. That is a stance I have held ever since I watched pizza mukbang 2. And I have explanations.

My main points come from the coming out parallel surrounding Dans internalized homophobia and trauma responses and fear of rejection (more on that later), and also my hypothesized “3 stages” of the gaming channel revival.

I believe that when the gaming channel was revived, starting with the Heartthrob video, they entered stage 1: experimenting with audiences desire for a return to content. This was a phase they themselves discussed in Dans Birthday Stream and in Pizza Mukbang 2. The first few months were experimenting with what a new audience would look like and how much they were wanted, in what contexts, and what kind of content. I also think this wraps into the dynamic difference between Dan and Phil as people. Note, I love them both dearly and want nothing but the best for them both. It has been made clear that they did very different things during the hiatus, with Phil initiating the gaming channel comeback. Before Dan came out, he was under an immense feeling of guilt and pressure, even by his own mind. He had the option of leaving the internet forever, and he certainly considered it. Finish off the gaming channel, go on one last tour, and leave. Never having to adress anything again. But he didn’t do that. He came back. He came out. And he was greeted with the kindest, warmest, most accepting response. And he did work! He wrote a book! He went on a solo tour! And to echo both Dan himself and all of the community, he needed this. He needed this time of healing and this era of self discovery. He wouldn’t be who he is today without it, and I’m so proud of him.

But Phil? Oh Phil was just cruising along. That’s not at all to discredit any form of hardship Phil went through, but it certainly wasn’t the same. Phil was making content before Dan was, back in 2006. In uni, Phil was comfortable in his sexuality (or some form of queerness). But he waited. He waited to come out until Dan was ready. Because he’s a wonderful partner. He was happy continuing Amazingphil regardless of hiatus, of Dans needs, because he knew he didn’t have to pressure Dan into anything he didn’t want or wasn’t ready for. And then, presumably when Dan was ready, Phil proposed a gaming channel comeback. Just try it out, just see how it feels, low commitment. And what happened? Once again, they were showered with love and adoration and support and acceptance. Was the fandom different than how it used to be? Absolutely. But it was beautiful and loving. So that’s stage 1. Experimenting with content and viewership and re-entering the branding of Dan and Phil (Games).

Then, I believe after stage 1 came stage 2. Experimenting with audience reaction to Dan and Phil as a couple. I want to stake my claim here that everything they do is meticulously curated. Sure, Phil’s toe popping out of his sock wasn’t purposeful, but it was certainly handled intentionally. They’re extremely seasoned creators, and everything they do is for a reason. (That’s why I love rpf hehe). This, my “stage 2”, is when they were dipping their toes more into phan stuff. The orange heart. The “gay” community tab. Using the “ph-“ prefix THEMSELVES a lot more. Dab and Evan comparisons. This was the middle ground. How would people react? Would they turn away because it’s too much? Would they begin stalking and creeping all over again? Or would they accept these people for what they are. As much as people like to think Dan and Phil are just silly whimsical guys who are perfect no matter what they do (which is accurate as well tbf), they also know what they’re doing. They do these things on purpose to gauge audience reaction, to see how people feel about it. As others have said, what we see publicly is just a tiny sliver of their real life. Yea, even the domestic videos. It’s curated. And it’s wonderful. It’s so endearing they choose to share these things. Even in times of uncertainty. But that uncertainty was met with absolute acceptance.

Which is how we get into stage 3. I think “stage 3” started developing around the time of Dans Birthday Stream, but really actually started when the tour trailer was posted, and then all the videos after that (pizza mukbang, dressing each other, chained together, tiktoks, etc etc). So, very recently. But something shifted. Maybe it’s in the air, maybe it’s just me, maybe we all need to go outside. But something shifted. Dan and Phil, but especially Dan, saw how they were being accepted and took that as an affirmation. An affirmation that everything is going to be okay. They can commit now. They can go full on. Full hard launch.

I think everyone has a different definition of hard launch, and even I think it varies by context. But what I mean here is not necessarily them making some video called “Dan and Phil are romantically together” and staring at the camera with a gun to their head. It doesn’t, and shouldn’t, have to be that.

Straight people get this privilege of being assumed straight without having to “come out”. They get this comfort of having relationships without having to scream it in everyone’s faces.

And I do indeed agree with what people mean when they say they have already hard launched. They’re husbands, soulmates, 4000 year old tortoises, “basically any other gay couple”, more than just romantic, yea. I get it. But people are fucking stupid. Non-queer people don’t understand nuance, and need everything handed to them on a silver platter. Dan and Phil are together. People who try to twist and turn to try and “prove” they’re anything but a committed romantic and sexual relationship are ignorant at best, but mainly using homophobic wishful thinking. However, there’s more to go. There’s a reason we’re all “terrified” for what is to come. Because everything, the past 15 years of all of our lives, of their life, is coming together. It’s genuinely beautiful.

So what do I mean by hard launch then? Well, I mean a lack of censorship (besides what’s reasonable. Though we’d all love to see them fuck on YouTube, I’m not sure that’s happening any time soon). I mean a lack of shame. A lack of hiding. And it’s already begun. That’s what I feel stage 3 to be and have been. In pizza mukbang 2, they say things such as “cheers dear”, which is intentional. The “gay uncles” and the “kneeing” is all intentional. It’s not just throwaway jokes, it’s them looking us in the eyes and saying “we see you”. I have a whole list of stage 3 things. The intentional Incohearant cards. The “my face hurts from smiling” comments. THE HANDS ON THE SHOULDER TO THE HAND ON THE KNEE. Them being so open about their secluded romantic holiday. The relentless Phil bottom jokes. The yaoi day tweet from the outfits video. The “who would jump for you like that dog jumped for that man” “you”. It’s all there. It’s all intentional. And I’m so grateful for it.

One of my mutuals who I talked about this with (not gonna name cuz idk if they want me to) talked about their theory that DNP have given barely any info about tour because it requires some form of hard launch to preface it. And honestly? I didn’t even realize that was a theory. I sort of already accepted that as fact. How open IS the door gonna be?

So yea, I hope this makes sense. Please feel free to respond with or send asks of any nuances or questions or theories you’d like to add. I don’t intend this to be shaming anyone who thinks differently. Even if I may vehemently disagree with someone in my head, I don’t think these people are evil or malicious or objectively bad or deserving of hate. These are just my thoughts. I’ll likely be adding more. Thanks for reading.

[charmac]

hey so just curious, i'm asking this as someone who pretty strongly believes that dennis is gay, but wants to understand other perspectives. so it seems like the common consensus of a lot of sunnyblr is that dennis is bisexual but dee is a lesbian. so i was just wondering about those headcanons, since it seems like lesbian dee and gay dennis have sort of similar trains of logic behind them (heterosexuality = societal power). just need to let you know that i love your blog and i didn't mean for this to come across as confrontational, but i just wanted to explore ideas which are different from my own. thank you xoxo

For sure, and this doesn't come across as controversial at all lol I love discussing this stuff and that you're interested in hearing my perspective means a lot tbh

(Just to preface, I wrote most of this while high and watching baseball, but that's when my brain works best so not to worry)

So as for the common consensus of "Bi Dennis, Lesbian Dee" in the wider Fandom, I think a lot of that is rooted in the idea that the Gang are the "letters" of LGBT, so to speak. Not to say that's a bad thing, but just that a lot of people kinda like that "headcanon" as, for as far as canon is concerned, both of their sexualities are currently still ambiguous and this works and makes sense, so I think a lot of the fan-art and text posts/tweets/whatever veer that way.

Past that idea, I'm not actually sure what the majority of the Fandom thinks of Dee's canon sexuality? While right now I assume lesbian Dee would win, I am actually kinda surprised how few people voted gay Dennis (so far) in his canon sexuality poll, so I think a Dee version of that poll might be a good follow up to answer this...

Though the difference in what we see in Dee and Dennis' portrayals of their sex lives is what I think leans people more toward Bi Dennis and Lesbian Dee:

On Dennis: There's a point we're at with him where he.. has a system for men. He's not in denial about fucking guys, he's probably currently having sex with men (well clearly he's having (e)sex with one), he might have been sleeping with men the entire goddamn time, but he's still been pursuing women and drooling over breasts. He finds women (their bodies, really) sexually attractive. And for as much as the idea of inherently having power over women drives him, it's well established that the use of his Systems is what really gets him off, and he has one to manipulate and control men (and he's had it for awhile)... I think if Dennis wasn't sexually attracted to women, he would have just stopped—because he's clearly had no romantic interest in a woman ever in his life (briefly mistaking Maureen for something along those lines and realising he doesn't want it). I think there's a complete absence of romance in his sex life, full stop, and his life almost completely... with the exception of the fact that he has a life partner (whom he goes on dates with, financially supports, apparently now shares a bed with, etc)... But he's still gets off to and/or with women (at least that's what RCG write every now and then).

(And on the topic of writing, I think maybe in some ways for me, Bi Dennis over gay Dennis theory is due to the coding just being more obvious?... If an Italian man wants to eat a sandwich... to the paralleled Systems being the reverse of each other, giving prostate orgasms to Mac one episode and then desperate to see huge fake tits the next...)

On Dee: Season 6 made it pretty clear she's duping men into sex, and her relationship with Bill Ponderosa speaks volumes. But while she was sleeping with men just to give them low ratings in Group Dates, she was only spurred to that point because she was rejected by a guy she thought she was seeing. Then Goes to Hell reestablishes Dee is pressuring men into sex using insinuations, clearly devoid of romance. PTSDee is interesting, because Dee is acting on scorn, but it's not that the guy she slept with didn't want to see her again, but that he insulted her game. Then, Time's Up says a lot more, because it's quite literally telling you Dee slept with her (arguably best) friend, this guy she does love as a friend, and still ended up doing what she does to all the men she sleeps with (and destroying their relationship), using them. By Season 16, she hasn't had a care for a boyfriend in years, but she's sleeping with men if there's date-rape drugs in the picture. I think it's made clear she has no romantic interest in men, this is pure (fucked up) sexual pleasure.

The difference with Dee in canon (which I think is pretty clear) is that she doesn't have the "other sex option" that Dennis canonically explores. There's nothing to show us that she's even entertaining the idea of sleeping with women, so it's easily interpreted that she's a repressed lesbian experiencing comphet. Once she has sex with a woman for the first time, men will be completely gone from the picture. As an interpretation and hope for Dee's character, I would be inclined to agree, but honestly I don't believe RCG have been/are writing Dee's sexuality as a lesbian, but as Dennis' parallel. So if they're going to keep giving her plots and writing that she's interested in men the way Dennis is interested in women, I'm personally inclined to believe she's canonically sexually interested in men (as objects? lol).

I 100% agree with your idea that their heterosexuality comes from this place of "sex with (control over) the opposite sex gives me power," but I don't necessarily see it devoid of sexual attraction (as they love to hammer that stuff in), just romance (for as surface level as "empathy" would be)

For me, the intention of the writing holds a lot of weight (and maybe I should loosen up a little lol), which is why I'm parked where I am, but if the majority of people in the Fandom do see Dee as a lesbian while still believing Dennis is sexually interested in women in some way, I think it's because, while Dennis and Dee are shown to experience sexual attraction (and hetero sex) in similar ways, they don't exhibit homosexual attraction the same way, and the interpretation of that in their plots and characterisation leads to more people seeing Dennis as bi and Dee as a lesbian.

But honestly I'm just speaking on my own thoughts, idk how many people would agree, will def run a poll on Dee's sexuality tomorrow.

Let me know your thoughts. I'm really interested in hearing back on this!

[slycopersicum-in-disguise]

Mostly buddie and bucktommy thoughts, but some general fandom feels too

I am glad Buck is canonically bi.

I am very sad Eddie is not canonically gay.

I want Buck and Eddie to get together.

While things in TV can turn on a dime, it looks clear from the most recent episodes that they don't intend to have buddie be a canon relationship.

At the start of the season I was very enthusiastic about the character of Tommy being around long-term.

I am not feeling any chemistry between Buck and Tommy when they are in scenes together. This isn't just because of my buddie shipping goggles - as much as I disliked Buck and Taylor together, they did spark off each other. I am just not feeling it from the other BT.

I am really disappointed by the structure of the few scenes with Buck and Tommy that we did have. If Tommy had turned up in a slightly silly costume to the party and still had had to leave I would be finding it hard not to love him. If they had just switched the dinner date scene around and started with the daddy kink flirting and then had Tommy go beyond that to ask if Buck was actually OK after Bobby's coma, I would be thinking that with enough time we might see as much of a connection between them as we see between Buck and Eddie.

Depressingly, I don't think the writing teams are trying to drop us subtle hints that Buck/Tommy are inherently doomed, I think they are just fucking up. Which doesn't bode well for future scenes between Buck and Tommy being something I will enjoy.

While I want Buck and Eddie to get together and didn't think their previous LIs would have been good life partners for them, in the fandom there was a lot of deliberate misreading of scenes involving the women and a worrying level of hate directed towards the actresses. Yes, there were some justified callouts about the actions of some of the actresses. We should never, ever accept bigotry. But we all know we have seen actual full-on misogyny from many fans too.

I read 911 fandom posts on many platforms and I have seen this behaviour on Tumblr, Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, Discord, you name it. While we would love to think the people on whatever platform we don't use are the horrible ones, I see it across the board.

That deliberate misreading of scenes and cruelty towards real people is now spreading to both Eddie and Tommy, and their respective actors. Part of me wants to flippantly say "Diversity Win!" but racism and homophobia are wriggling their way into 911 fandom posts and we need to do better.

I am feeling gloomy about S8. I don't think a summer break is going to fix any of the issues I have with the show. If you love how things are going then I am happy for you! I'll probably still boost the gorgeous fanart and insightful metas that I often see. But this is a reminder to others, and to myself, that if a show is making us sad, we can just go watch something else. It's OK. We're OK.

[radioiaci]

|| @cannibalxroses || Hello, I would like to chime in on this since it seems to be a matter of uhhh public concern now and I think it's time I said something! Putting it under a read-more because it'll be a little lengthy. Know that I want this to be as respectful as possible and that I am not upset or mad or anything about anything that's been going on! I just have some opinions and context to provide.

I have not made it a secret that I feel as though my portrayal of Alastor is veering more steadily towards MLM/gay relationships. This is just something I've discovered over the course of writing him. Now, when I initially posted about it, I made it clear that this does not mean that I wanted to outright dissolve or otherwise write off ships with female characters!

But in a similar vein to how literally every interaction with him is under the veil of his aro/ace experience, so too would every interaction be colored by the fact that he is starting to prefer men. This can lead to some VERY interesting conflict and nuance as these are all topics that I LOVE to explore via his inner monologue. And he is NOT ALWAYS going to make SMART or FAIR decisions to his partners as a result; both men and women. And I think that's a perfectly great way to explore lots of pathways for a ship. (All of his ships in general are never going to be 100% healthy. Alastor is a jealous, possessive, violent, and often emotionally DEAD individual.)

In this verse in particular, he cares about Rosie and does love her. He has explored sexual relations with her on a few occasions and he didn't dislike them (he, in fact, enjoyed them, given the context) - but I will say that outright, he is hard pressed to consider himself attracted to her as a default. This is ALSO coupled with the fact that Alastor - IN ALL of his relationships - has a very hard time getting his libido to react. It requires some specific parameters that can sometimes be a lot of work. And sexual interactions may not always be reciprocated or go as planned.

WITH THAT CONTEXT IN MIND:

Prior to the Unholy Crusade event, I was of an understanding that we could absolutely continue having he and Rosie be together and be married. I think that is an interesting plot point for him to have to cope with his sexuality (as well as the torch he still holds for Vox) in a married/committed relationship with a woman; particularly a woman who he very much cherishes still.

BUT - I know that when I get into those topics, I get VERY WORDY. I get VERY NOVELLA in my responses and that is not everyone's cup of tea. It was my understanding that, over time, some of Xixi's interest in those types of posts began to wane or she otherwise started to prefer short, sillier interactions with other characters, WHICH IS 100% OKAY AND FINE AND I HARBOR NO ILL WILL TOWARDS ANYONE INVOLVED, XIXI INCLUDED. Everyone is allowed to cater their experience in the way that makes sense to them and their character! But that is the impression I received.

However, in all honesty, when my long para replies are met with much shorter responses, I do get a little sad. And I know that not everyone gets as wordy as me, so really, it's just my bad for assuming that people WANTED to read/respond to that kind of thing in kind (I should have asked probably) but because of that, I started to draw back a bit because the effort and interest didn't quite seem to be on the same page.

So when Xixi proposed the death of Rosie and the end to the ship as a whole I was a bit taken aback, especially since we had spoken at least once after I made the initial post about Al's MLM sexuality and it seemed like it would be an okay thing to continue with. BUT I also know that Rosie's character does really like romance, affection, etc. and things that Alastor is not always fantastic at showing. So even though I was a little bit down about that being the inevitable conclusion (and it did, admittedly, make my participation in the event feel a bit moot which it was already sort of scant because I've been busy and can't always keep up with those quick timed events, as I've expressed before), I understood that it was what Xixi wanted for the character and for the ship and I do not fault her for it!

I did wish, at the time, that maybe it had been brought up to me beforehand, but I know events move quick, things can come up and happen, and I'm not gonna fault someone for that either.

Ultimately, I decided I was okay with it. I chatted with a pal and decided that with a little bit of their input I could write a nice little ending to Alastor's story in that verse so that I still felt like I had a bit of agency in how he continues on after that, even if we weren't necessarily going to play in that verse anymore. I like to have control of my characters and their eventual fates, so it made me feel better in an otherwise unfortunate situation.

But now that the plan B is being proposed, I really don't want it to seem as though I hate the ship/wanted it to end/am committed to ruining it out of spite. I think I'd just like to commit to what was proposed to me because I've already planned out how I would like to end that story and I don't want to put pressure on Xixi (or myself) to try and match up our writing styles or interest levels when it does not seem as though we're able to provide what we're each looking for in a ship between Rosie/Alastor.

All that to say that I am sort of sold on completing that story for Alastor in one way or another, but that does not mean that I hate radiorose, nor that I harbor any sore feelings towards Xixi. Nor do I have any disdain for her writing style whatsoever! I think it's great and if there is any future indication that our styles can jive together again, I'd be open to it.

But at this time, it just seems like it's better for the ship to meet a conclusion.

I HOPE THAT PROVIDES CONTEXT AND INSIGHT as to my decision making here. I really do not want it to seem as though I'm purposefully sabotaging their ship when I just sort of want to commit to what was initially proposed.

I hope that makes sense. I don't often go at length about these kinds of things, but since people were concerned, I wanted to make myself clear.

ANYWAY.

[yonpote]

I have a confession. i only just recently converted to the phan side because english is my second language and dnp are so damn confusing sometimes. because of all their emphasis on not wanting to share their private life and I think phil said he wouldn’t want us to know if he had a partner in one of his q and as? I just kind of went with that and was like “yeah they’re not dating!!” despite the proof in the opposite direction. that’s also why I get a little upset when people claim that those that think dnp are not in a relationship are homophobic bc honestly I don’t think that’s the case. I think some people are just confused about what the hell they’re talking about lmao

okay. there's a lot here i'm gonna go thru this step by step.

- heres both the clips of dnp's separate statements on privacy wrt their relationship. neither of them say that they are not dating but rather they want to keep the particulars of their relationship to themselves. these were posted in 2019 and 2021 respectively.

- dan did a bunch of interviews and podcasts from 2020-2023. in a couple of them, he extrapolated further upon his and phil's relationship, saying things like "best friends, enemies, husbands, partners in crime, who the fuck knows," "4000 year old tortoises watching the sunset" and the classic, "so youre just a normal gay couple?" "basically yeah."

- there's a difference between acknowledging things that they have said publicly and further prying into the details of their life.

- it's understandable that not everyone's heard about these interviews! and esp if english isnt your first language, it can definitely be difficult to read in between the lines, which dan and phil understand that some fans have done ("we know you know" at the end of a newsletter.) so the homophobia thing wasnt against you or people who just havent had full context

- i am talking about people who do know all of the context and still frame them as EXCLUSIVELY best friends or queerplatonic.

they ARE best friends! it's not INCORRECT to call them best friends! but some people then get upset when others are like yeah they're husbands and married and dating and in a relationship and love each other on the basis of "breaching privacy." when it's like, HOPEFULLY no one is stalking their family members, trying to figure out their address, harassing or spamming them etc. we're going off the basis of the things they have said publicly and more importantly RECENTLY. not when they were in the closet.

i hope this makes sense and i hope it doesnt sound like im coming after you! and like i said its understandable for people who havent had the full context, but at the same time if youre someone who's just watching their recent videos, the vibes are just clear to me.

[lurkingshan]

Shan’s Confession Corner: Minato’s Laundromat

I’ve just finished the second episode of Minato’s Laundromat 2, and I absolutely loved it. I love the clear intent behind this new season, and I love where the story is headed. And it made me think this might be a good time for me to unpack my complicated feelings about the first season. All gifs used in this post are by the wonderful @wanderlust-in-my-soul.

So here’s the confession: I didn’t love Minato’s Laundromat as much as a lot of you did. I respect it, of course. I recognize it as a very well-executed show that fulfilled its vision with smart writing and filming techniques and an excellent cast. I recognize that the characterization of Shin and Minato was very much based in yaoi tropes and that Shin being the pursuer while Minato resisted was a necessary construct to make the age gap palatable. 

But despite understanding all of that I didn’t love it, and Minato is the reason why. I always have a hard time connecting with emotionally immature adult characters. I struggle mightily with romances that feel too one-sided. I cringe away from the blushing maiden trope. I dislike it when I can’t quite understand what one character sees in another. And all of this came up for me in the romance between Shin and Minato.

Now before @bengiyo comes through with his bat let me just say that I get it. I get that Minato is this way because he is a lonely gay man who has been repressing his sexuality since adolescence. I get that he never had the chance to mature because he was hiding who he was. I get that he is defensive around Shin at first because he is being responsible, and then because he is so unused to physical affection and attention that he doesn’t know how to handle it. Minato strikes me as someone who is both, as Ben sometimes says, touch-starved and touch-repulsed. And all of that is rooted in his experiences with internalized homophobia and a life lived in the closet.

While I can understand and empathize with all of that, I didn’t understand how that was meant to work in the context of a relationship with someone like Shin. Shin who is so honest, and so brave, and so smart, and so responsible, and so damn all around desirable. In my meanest moments, I would think to myself that Shin should really just go to school and meet new guys, guys who are his own age with less hang ups who could return his affections. And while I enjoyed the finale of the first season, I was not really satisfied with where we left them because it still didn’t feel like Minato had worked through his issues enough to be a good partner to Shin.

Which brings me to Minato’s Laundromat 2, and my love for what it’s doing. Because y’all, this is exactly what season 2 is about! And it’s interesting to me that this season is not based on the manga, and instead features brand new material. It says to me that the creators of this show had some of the same questions I did about how these characters would actually function together in a relationship, and decided to explore it and figure out how it could work. And that is my absolute favorite kind of season 2, because I am always interested in how a couple stays together, not just in the getting together itself.

So in these first two episodes of the second season, we have seen that after their initial getting together, Minato retreated into his usual patterns. He is still holding Shin at a distance. He is still doling out affection sparingly. He is still struggling to verbalize his feelings and he is still cringing away from physical intimacy. And Shin is, as ever, being patient and giving him space to work through it while sometimes expressing frustration and continuing to ask for and sometimes scheme his way into the things he wants. 

I love that we are already starting to see the subtle changes in Minato. He is, internally, able to recognize now that he loves Shin even if he won’t say it out loud. He is starting to notice and unpack his own reactions—I love him so much I can’t look him in the eye—and trying to push through them to return affection to Shin in the ways he is comfortable with. He is engaging in acts of service like cooking as a means to communicate his feelings. He is giving Shin some of what he wants, like living in the same place and handing over his spare key. Is he still doing it all with a grimace and many verbal protestations? Of course, he didn’t change his whole personality overnight. But he’s doing it, and Shin knows him well enough to understand how meaningful that is. 

I am excited to see how far the show intends to take this growth arc for Minato. Shin is patient but he’s not a saint; he will sometimes feel unsatisfied and push for more than what Minato wants to give, and seeing them work through that is exactly what we need to feel secure in their future as a couple. I am so glad we’re getting this season 2, both for the sake of the characters and for those of us in the audience who really needed it.

[jennyboom21]

It was small, minor even. In all of the pageantry, hoopla, stunts and shows that come with the annual Met Gala — celebrities decked in haute couture, multiple costume changes, group chats and social media timelines rushing to outdo one another for jokes. But in the middle of all that, Queen Latifah walked the 2024 Met Gala Carpet with her longtime partner Eboni Nichols.

When I first saw it, well, I screamed a little. Ok, maybe I screamed more than a little. But you have to understand, it’s not that we haven’t seen Queen and Eboni walk a red carpet together before, they walked the Oscars carpet together in 2022 and more recently they walked a different red carpet together for an AmFAR benefit in 2023. She first publicly acknowledged Eboni, and their son Rebel, from a BET Awards stage by thanking them both as her “love” while accepting her Lifetime Achievement. But if you’re a queer person and especially a Black queer person, who has been a part of this community at any point in the last 30 years, I also know that you get it. This is the queen. After rooting for her journey for so long, after she was a queer awakening for so many of us across so many years, every forward step still feels lucky somehow for us to witness. Each one feels like a breath of fresh air.

I posted my all caps emotions to Twitter because for better or for worse, I am chronically online. I thought it would do maybe a few hundred likes. Some love from a few other fans. Again on some level I intellectually know… we have been here before. But somehow still, the Met felt different. Walking the world’s most famous carpet, with every camera trained on you and your partner in your matching black & white gowns felt different. Anyway, it ended up with over 45 thousand likes in a day. And that’s when I knew — I wasn’t alone.

To be very clear here, I do not believe that Queen Latifah owes us Dana Owens. In 2008, after being arguably the most famous woman rapper for nearly two decades and an Oscar-nominated actress, she told The New York Times that when it came to her romantic life, “You don’t get that part of me. Sorry. We’re not discussing it… Nobody gets that. I don’t feel like I need to share my personal life.” And she’s absolutely correct. We are not owed hers (or anyone’s) coming out. We are not owed beyond what she has left for us on stage and screen.

But it’s also hard not to feel this as a homecoming, deep in your bones. And I hope that if Queen sees this joy spreading across the internet as pictures of her and Eboni go viral, that she knows its meant with pride in her and gratitude for all that she already gave us. Everything else is a bonus.

I have loved Queen Latifah since I was eight years old. I loved her longer than I’ve known I was gay. In so many ways, she taught me a lot about strength, and independence, and loving other Black women and not taking any shit and womanhood. So it’s impossible, now, not to gush when Emma Chamberlin interviewed Queen and Eboni together on the carpet and asked, “Is this a date night?”

Queen takes a deep breath and smiles before teasingly calling Eboni “Eb.” Eboni fills in their banter and says that she playfully threatened Queen that this was the year they were doing the Met, and she better make it happen. Like an old married couple who’s been here a thousand times before, Queen Latifah picks up the story there, saying that she wanted to be “the hero of my household.” And so now, here they are.

I’m saying… this is Queen Latifah… being flirtatious and chivalrous to her partner, live and in front of cameras? I am on my knees. We used to dream for days like this!!

(No, literally. Do you know many times I have wished I could be silly and thirsty and overdramatic on the internet for their love story??? To even be able make a joke like “I’m on my knees” in same that’s usually reserved for an umpteenth number of white skinny lesbians in their 20s and 30s. To borrow even more internet speak: I cry 😭)

I think a lot about what it means to be Black and a lesbian or bisexual or queer and a woman over a certain age. In part, I think about it because of this job (writing about gay people on the internet), but also it’s because of this job that I know so many of the queer icons I grew up loving — for whatever reason, they’ve never felt like they could come out. Not fully. Not in such a way that we can openly write about them.

And there are a lot of days where, to be honest, that doesn’t matter. Everyone, even celebrities, is entitled to their own life story. It’s truly probably none of our business. But Queen Latifah did an interview with her longtime partner and after loving her for what feels like my entire life now I get to all caps yell SHUT UP YALL, THEY ARE SO CUTE and they are and it’s perfect. Sometimes, that matters too.

[maverickcalf]

I have some thoughts on Twisters, i will honestly remake these posts without the spoiler tag once the movie has been out for a while but fot now. Spoilers under the cut. Warning major spoilers and i ramble a lot.

So it's not too shocking that Kate's friends and boyfriend are killed off in the beginning. But i was surprised how while it is cleqr one visibly haunts her more than the others, when it comes to talking about who she lost it's always "friends". Even if she lost her significant other, there isn't like any line from Tyler about him. Honestly it's just nice that he treats her pain as legitimate.

The only time i feel it is implied "you lost your boyfriend" is when Javi says that he lost friends and that could be seen as him downplaying her lose because he lost multiple friends and she lost a boyfriend but i also think that would be a stretch and the trouble is they haven't talked about their trauma.

Javi feels guilty he left them all to die; Kate feels guilty because of the experiment.

I honestly love how friendship is portrayed as important. Tyler's team is his team but it's pretty clear they are all close. I like the friendship Kate and Javi have, especially after the time skip, it's very awkward and forced at time but that makes total sense.

Honestly i like Tyler in general, he comes off as a show off and that's what makes it so interesting! Because we have the wrong point of view and i like when the movie sets up stuff like that.

Also Tyler is very smart but also sort of silly and people are calling him a himbo and... no thats just what streamers are like. He does seem like a nice person and i like how he is also allowed to fail in saving someone.

I totally love the parallels. The failing to save someone while the tornado is on them. The hitting the machine to get to work. The injured leg! And how both her and Katie are allowed to succeed where they failed before. Katie saves everyone because her experiment works and Tyler saves Lilly, where he had failed to save the man earlier.

I really like Ben and how he does drop the camera and help people rather than document people's panic. And he is just like funny bystander.

Scott Javi's partner.... should've been gay and honestly until the end where he became full Saturday morning cartoon villain, the vibes were Bill Hader's character in Tropic Thunder but... ya know less interesting. Les and Rob actually seem to like each other though and Javi.... yeah picking up straight vibes. So a bit disappointing.

Last of all Katie. Oh boy, this girl has the weight of global warming on her shoulders. Like holy shit, i just wanna give her a hug. I love how the truama doesn't stop her from being smart and i also love the realism of being a bit rusty. But also she is just fun and funny. I loved when she and Tyler were trying to trick each other. Wouldn't be if they both turned into looney toons characters and feld the scene.

But also i like how she is a well rounded character. I didn't know going in we were following her story but i am honestly so glad, she is such a good protagonist.

Yeah okay i think i have rambled enough, if someone has thoughts they want to share please do.

[mrsfrecklesmarauders]

Responding to this post:

No, love. Not every single character has to have a romantic partner to be interesting. It is okay for characters to end up alone. Or not have romantic experiences at all. No matter their sexuality. Aromantic and Asexual characters can exist and be a good representation of the queer community. Not only gay couples represent queer struggle.

---

Preach!

Also, I'd also like to give another facet of this idea: NOT EVERY ALLOROMANTIC/ALLOSEXUAL NEEDS TO BE IN A ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP. People can be attracted to others but simply choose not to enter relationships because of a variety of reasons: 1) maybe they don't think they'd make a healthy partner and need to focus on their other non-romantic relationships first, 2) being in a romantic relationship isn't in their priorities/values (as opposed to career, family, etc), 3) literally any reason at all.

I hate how one of the only ways to convince a fandom not to ship a character with another is to make the character not attracted to the other's gender--- regardless of whether it's a hetero or homosexual relationship. (im not talking about casual shipping, that's fine with me. im talking about those who get irrationally angry when someone does not agree with their ship, even going as far as harassing the content creators because the ship won't happen).

Because it's possible to have a character whose personality/aspirations do not align with a future romantic relationship. And disregarding this is like disregarding their whole character??

I've seen some creators make their characters/OCs aroace purely to avoid them being shipped with another. (I HATE how that just sounded. Let me be clear that this is NOT criticism towards anyone under the aro and/or ace umbrella. Aromanticism/Asexuality is REAL and valid. This is criticism towards those who have made romantic relationships seem like "THE goal" one should aim for.)

Even making characters siblings or relatives to avoid shipping, even if being an only child/having a small family shaped who they were as a person.

this isn't me screaming at you btw this is me screaming in general. no aggression was intended with the all caps.

i hope this didn't come off as offensive. please let me know if it did.

---------- orchard

Hey! You are totally right with all your points. This is exactly what I am talking about.

Characters are given romantic arcs or stories just to make them interesting without the neccesity of them needing a partner in that particular story. No matter their sexuality. Like you said, people would choose not to be in a relationship for a various of reasons. And that is fine. What I've seen in stories or fanfics is that the character who ends up alone in the end, has a sad ending or is tragic thing to have ended alone. (The phrase: They would find their one eventually. But for now they are happy...)

Which shouldn't be true!

Also, just because a character or some characters don't have romances doesn't mean they fall under the aro / ace / aroace umbrella.

Again, characters that are headcanoned as Aromantic / Asexual or both are most of the time not interesting enough. They are not attractive enough. They are portraited as childish or cold, almost not human. These characters should be interesting enough.

If we are improving the type of queer rep was that the only arc of the gay character was that they were gay, we should improve that for aro/ace/aroace characters as well.

Another important thing you mention. It is annoying that characters are instantly shipped when they have a good relationship or chemistry, without the premise of there being anything romantic between them. I mean, people are allowed to ship whatever they want to ship (regardless if is Canon or not) but we have to practice to see friendships or platonic relationships as well. I don't want to make characters siblings, or for example make them one attracted to another gender, or clarify that they are not romantically involved for them to not be shipped. People tend to just ship whatever they can. Pair characters with characters just because.

I don't know, this is mainly amanormativity's fault. It ruins the way we prioritize relationships. (Thinking the romantic one is more important than others). Just like heteronormativity ruined homosexuality before.

Let's give friendships and queer platonic relationships the importance they deserve as well. Characters should be interesting despite their sexuality, if they get into a relationship or not, or they end up with someone or not.

And if two characters get along, they should not be instantly shipped or pretended to end together. They could have another type of relationship as well.

[pineapple-coffee]

Unfit To Lead: Thoughts On Growing Up, Queer History, And Feeling Unprepared

A short essay, written by Elliott (@pineapple-coffee, aka me)

(As context, I am a bisexual, genderqueer/gender questioning individual. I use they/she pronouns.)

In every community, there are elders. These elders pave the pathway for the generations that come after them—creating literature, sharing stories verbally, and educating the new generations on history and culture. Elders are essential beings in all communities, and their presence cannot be understated. Without those who came before us, history is lost, and the new generations, who will one day teach others, will have nothing to go on.

So what do you do if your elders died in the AIDS epidemic of the 80s? What do you do when queer history is often so underrepresented, so rarely accessible without proper guidance? Where do you go from there?

That's not to imply that there aren't elders. I know a man online named Ian—early 20s, not quite "old"—who taught me about queer cowboy culture, both of the Old West and of the modern day. Through video essays and documentaries, I learned about the true lives of notable figures, such as Oscar Wilde and Eleanor Roosevelt, instead of their more sanitized media portrayals. Thanks to queer artists and educators on social media, I proudly display a sticker of a green carnation on my laptop, still using it as a queer signaling device even over 120 years after Wilde's death. But most of the elders that I've looked up to online have two things in common: they're younger—typically between 21 and 40—and I know them only online. Rarely in my life have I physically met a queer person over the age of fifty. Only one person immediately comes to mind.

This came to a panicky culmination a few weeks ago when I realized, "Oh, damn. I'm nearly old enough to be considered a 'queer elder.'"

This thought freaked me out. I'm a young adult. I have so much to learn. I don't have a lot of elders to teach me. I've only ever been to one Pride festival in my life. Yet, to the youngest pre-teens out there who are just coming into their identities, I might be perceived as someone older and wiser.

Let me be abundantly clear: queer rage is the most powerful emotion that I have ever experienced. My queer elders did not "fail" me or anyone else—the government did. It was the government who let my queer siblings die slowly, whilst they did nothing but spit in the faces of the queer community and take the chance to spread their visceral hatred. Every day, I am filled with rage that generations of queer people have been ripped away due to the neglect of the government. I mourn the artists, musicians, partners, siblings, and activists who passed away. Every single AIDS victim deserves to tell their stories.

In my melancholy, I turned to the Internet. And through the Internet blogs, decades-old archives, and unsanitized history books, I found community.

I am thankful. I am grateful to those who archive gay and trans magazines, newsletters, zines, and adult magazines. I am grateful to those who survived, who share their stories about queer culture in memoirs and blog posts. I am grateful to those who keep history documented and make detailed accounts of each subculture and pivotal moment. I am thankful for those who create queer and trans sex education, relationship advice blogs, and provide information for trans people who want to physically transition. I am grateful to the AIDS Memorial for keeping memories alive. I am thankful for queer lawyers who debunk the nitty gritty details of anti-queer and anti-trans legislation so that everyone can understand the letter of the law.

I’ve learned about the culture of gay and lesbian bars. I learned about the Hanky Code, Hays Code, and Flower Codes. I learned about pre-Internet queer dating, the ways that people lived, and the subcultures that exist within queer communities. I learned about the brave trans women of color who gave us our rights through protests and riots. I learned, and I learned, and I learned. And at some point during my learning, I found myself with tears streaming down my face.

Never before had I learned the other side of history. The sides that include the radical activism via art and music, subcultures full of passionate people who yearn to share their craft, and the history that wasn’t touched by the mainstream.

I may feel unprepared to lead future generations, but the communities I have found have filled me with nothing short of euphoria. I feel proud to say that I’m queer, that I’m a fag, that I will be the elder one day. I display my Keith Haring merchandise with glee, sing Freddie Mercury’s songs at the top of my lungs, and abide by the motto that a day without lesbians really is a day without sunshine.

And in the times of uncertainty, perhaps community is the drive we all need. Whether you’re young, old, or somewhere in between, the queer community is always there to rally behind you.

Maybe being the next generation to lead others won’t be so scary after all.

[batmanisagatewaydrug]

i am so sorry, i didn't realize how vague that sounded until i saw it posted. whoops! anyway, do you have any tips on how to build confidence in initiating play? not just sex - making out, foreplay, etc. we've talked about it a few times because i don't like feeling like i'm always initiating play, and there's been some progress with them being the one to start. we're both really into each other, and have said so multiple times bc i don't want them to think that i'm upset when i initiate 1/2

2/2 but they’re still hesitant about just, like, going for it? like, I respond positively both in words and in literal horny-ness and I just don’t know how else to go about helping them be more confident? neither of us are super experienced overall, but we were both open about that from the start and I want to grow with them, not make them feel like something's lacking

hi anon,

GREAT to hear from you again, and I'm so glad to be able to approach the situation with so much more information! you've given me a great amount of info here, and it sounds like the two of you are in a really good place of mutual understanding and concern for each other's comfort and just need a liiiiiiittle nudge to get more on the same page.

first and foremost you should talk to your partner and help them try to identify what's causing this hesitation in spite of your positive feedback. if it's a case of being nervous about their intentions being reciprocal, or something of that nature, I'm going to recommend the sexiest thing on earth: clearly stated boundaries and, possibly, periods of time marked specifically as sexytimes.

sit down and make a very clear list of ways both of you would like sexual play to be initated. figure out where there's overlap, talk about things that are new to either of you, identify what may be one person's "yeah!" and another person's "no, thank you." most importantly, identify if there are any obvious conflicts in how each of you communicate and want to be communicated with. if your preference is to get slammed down big style on a mattress and going directly to poundtown and your partner prefers to start things off with a three hour cuddle session, that's going to take some working around!

I doubt your preferences are actually that drastic, but the fact may be that your partner just isn't as naturally inclined to take charge as you. that's fine, but it also means you'll have to get creative finding ways to make sure you don't always have to initiate, since it sounds like that's bit of a chore for you. this is where things like scheduled sex nights (or whatever times work well for you) come in. set aside a night you can be together without interruptions or time constraints, taking off the pressure to perform quickly or on any particular timetable. prior to getting together, agree to the expectation that you're both interested and looking forward to having sex - with the rule that your partner has to initiate, whether that's physically, verbally, or something else. doesn't matter, as long as they're the one to take the plunge and get things moving. having a very clear window in which a particular behavior is both expected and desired can take a lot of pressure off an anxious mind!

you could also make a fun little game that allows you to flag when you're interested while still having your partner sometimes be the one to properly initiate. that could be anything from a play on real gay flagging tactics (putting on a certain accessory, including an actual hankie tucked on your person) to sending them a suggestive emoji or something flirty like "surprise me." the point is to have you give your partner tacit permission that puts the ball in their court, so to speak, to escalate things in a more sexual direction.

as always, the process of navigating and negotiating what sex will look like for you can be dead sexy, and I truly believe the two of you can have a lot of fun figuring this out together :)

[coochiequeens]

Tuft has made it clear she’s willing to lace her boots back up and re-debut — not as the “monster of a male” she says she once was, but as a trans athlete who loves her body." If he really wants to show he's not a "monster of a male" he would only go against oppents who went through male puberty. Or switch to the other wrestling company that does have TIM performers.

BY SAMANTHA RIEDEL December 8, 2023

Former pro wrestler Gabbi Tuft says she wants to return to a WWE ring “very shortly” and face one of the company’s biggest stars, two years after publicly coming out as transgender.

Tuft, who underwent open-heart surgery in 2019, revealed to TV Insider she recently stepped between the ropes for the first time in over a decade while visiting a training school owned by industry veteran Dustin Rhodes (formerly known as Goldust). “Since I did that there has been a huge resurgence and feeling for what I love,” Tuft said, adding that she was actively seeking medical clearance to compete once more.

“I said to my doctor, ‘Hey, review my scans. Am I clear to go wrestle if I want?’” Tuft said. “I’m hoping to hear back from [them] this week to see if I’m a hundred percent clear. If that’s the case, very shortly I may resume training.”

In her original run with WWE from 2008 to 2012, Tuft wrestled under the moniker “Tyler Reks,” a troublemaking villain or “heel” who played a reliable foil to the company’s heroes. As Reks, Tuft faced off against numerous high-profile male stars of the era, some of whom are still active in WWE, like Kofi Kingston, The Usos, and (somehow) CM Punk. In her comments to TV Insider, Tuft praised one potential future opponent who’s rocketed to wrestling fame and Sapphic adoration over the past few years: Rhea Ripley.

Ripley, the current Women’s World Champion and resident leather-clad demoness of the “Judgement Day” team, has become a huge breakout star over the past few years, appealing especially to queer wrestling fans who dig black lipstick and shoulders. (It helps that calling her “mami” and/or “papi” is, according to WWE’s storytelling, canonically appropriate.) Ripley “is such a force in WWE. She is powerful,” Tufts told TV Insider. “To be honest, when I look at her and her athleticism and tenacity, I see a phenomenal opponent. A phenomenal match in the making.”

Elsewhere in the interview, Tuft praised fellow trans wrestlers Nyla Rose and Gisele Shaw, who perform in All Elite Wrestling and Impact Wrestling (soon to be rebranded TNA, again) respectively. “I love Nyla and Gisele [....] It’s incredible to see them part of the women’s division,” Tuft said, hinting she feels “like there is a spot there for WWE” to finally introduce an out trans wrestler.

“You haven’t seen it there yet. It’s raising questions as to why. Are they waiting for the right opportunity?” Tuft wondered. “It’s definitely a question in my mind. Maybe someday there is someone who can fill that hole very soon.”

Although WWE has yet to feature an openly trans or nonbinary wrestler on TV (and no, “Santina” and other comic-relief drag characters don’t count), the company has slowly opened its doors to queer authenticity, both in and out of the ring. WWE wrestler Steffanie “Tegan Nox” Newell came out as bisexual in 2020, followed by ring announcer Kayla Braxton the next year, while lesbian star Daria “Sonya DeVille” Berenato got engaged to her “ride or die” partner this February. (Kimberly “Piper Nevin” Benson made a coming-out post in 2019, but has since deleted it and hasn’t discussed her sexuality since.) And while WWE’s stories about gay relationships can get, uh, messy, Tuft is right to point out that the company could just hire a trans wrestler and let them wrestle, much as AEW has with Nyla Rose.

Whenever WWE is ready, Tuft has made it clear she’s willing to lace her boots back up and re-debut — not as the “monster of a male” she says she once was, but as a trans athlete who loves her body.

“[T]he day I stopped caring about what other people thought, was the day I truly became limitless,” Tuft wrote in her 2021 coming-out post. Alas, “limitless” is already taken as a wrestling catchphrase, but if Tuft does get cleared for an in-ring return, we’ll be first in line to get her merch regardless.

[greggorylee]

Wait are you okay with asexuals??? I found out that you're against ace inclusionism :(((

Yes, i’m okay with ace/aro people. Yes, i’m against “ace inclusionism”

Honestly, these asks are so exhausting because ive made myself clear for nearly a decade now my stance on whether or not being ace/aro makes you lgbt. I’m going to put all the points ive gathered into one place, so this post can simply be referenced if you’re curious.

Keep in mind these thoughts are in no particular order, but altogether represent the problems with ace/aro inclusionism and the behavior of the inclusionist community over the past years

Asexuality and aromanticism are valid identities

Allow me to get this out of the way. The experience of being aro/ace not being the same experience as an lgbt person does NOT mean that these experiences are invalid. If the label of asexual or aromantic fits you, thats awesome. The ace/aro community as a whole is its own resource, and support and understanding is deserved for people who fall under these ids.

However, that does not mean you are oppressed for being ace/aro, especially not in the same way the lgbt community is oppressed for being gay/lesbian/bi/trans. When considering peoples oriantations and identities, cishets have different experiences than lgbt people, and ace/aro people have different experiences from both. 

The straight ace/aro fallacy

If being gay and ace doesn’t make one any less gay, why would being ace make straight people less straight? Asexuality/aromanticism is about whether or not you feel sexual or romantic attraction to your partner, not WHO you are attracted to generally.

To emphasize, what a cis straight ace/aro person experiences is NOT the same as what an LGBT person experiences. The fact that they are cis and straight does not change with the amount of sex or intimacy they have, just like the amount of sex and intimacy of a gay/bi/lesbian person does not affect whether or not theyre gay, bi or lesbian. LGB orientations are about WHO you are attracted to, not HOW. 

Sexualizing the LGBT community

Treating asexuality or aromanticism as lgbt orientations assumes that every other orientation is sexual by default, which is not only wrong, but dehumanizing. terms like bisexual/homosexual etc do not literally mean Horny Only. these labels were coined back when sex (as in genitalia) was often used for gender, but these terms have evolved in meaning beyond “who you have sex with”. 

asexuality and aromanticism arent orientations, theyre modifier identities. The fact you can be gay and ace but also straight and ace should end the inclusionism argument altogether, but the ace/aro community have developed such a victim fantasy that even suggesting our experiences are different is somehow oppressing them. Which its not.

Even worse is treating microlabels like demisexual as LBGT orientations, because it assumes that not only are the other orientations sexual by default, but they are careless in their intimacy / sleep around / are “easy”. It doesnt matter if ace and demi people arent literally saying these things–by acting like their ace/demi identity makes them LGBT, that by default is saying “i dont have sex / i dont have casual sex and therefore i am different and separate and special from you”. 

Let’s talk about the term “allosexual”. Its insulting and degrading for the ace/aro community to refer to LGBT people as “allos that contribute to our oppression because they Have Sex and dont want us in their club”. seriously think about the implications of creating a term that is supposed to represent an oppressive group, and applying it to LGBT people that have sex. Especially since that cis/straight ace/aro people have been given the understanding that their sex drive or desire for romance is something theyre oppressed for, even oppressed by the “sex havers” that include lgbt people. Which they are not. 

Think about that, and stop using it.

Bullying vs oppression

Oppression requires massive, widespread cultural AND systemic power imbalances that target a group of people for a harmless trait or behavior. For these cultural and systemic powers to be oppressive, they must force the oppressed into changing or hiding. To be oppressed is for religious masses, entire governments, and thousands upon millions of people wanting you dead for something you cant control, for simply existing. To be oppressed is to fear being yourself at the cost of your life. Not a life of constant terror, but living with the reminder that you are always in potential danger and always at a disadvantage that was set up against you on purpose because of who you are.

This is not something that asexuality or aromanticism faces. Do ace/aro people face stigma? Absolutely. Even targeting bullying based on their identity. And to live in the hypersexualized, hyperromantic heterosexual hellscape that is pervasive through most of the world is stressful for anyone who doesn’t fit that mold. That is real, and that struggle and hurt is real. But it is not oppression.

ace/aro people are not being targeted as groomers like lgbt people are. ace/aro people are not the victims of hate crimes and murder because of being ace/aro, like lgbt people. ace/aros do not have specific laws taking their rights as humans away because of being ace/aro, like lgbt people have for our entire existence and still are. To be LGBT is literally deadly because we are hated for who we love, who we are attracted to. To be ace/aro is NOT deadly, not oppressed, because there has not been a campaign to eradicate them from public life for not feeling romantic or sexual attraction

This is not “oppression olympics”. This is what oppression really means and is. Microaggressions are a PART of oppression, a SYMPTOM. Real oppression is defined by generations of systemic abuse. Facism and bigotry hate ANYTHING that is different. ace/aro people inevitably will be stigmatized for their identities by facism, and that is fucked up, and can even be traumatic, but the source of that trauma is bigotry that already exists, not aphobia. 

Your sex life and romantic life are intrinsically linked to your gender and orientation. If you’re a straight ace/aro person, you’re going to be under the pressure to have sex because of sexism/cissexism. If you’re a gay/trans ace/aro person, you’re going to be under the pressure to start having sex in a cis straight relationship because of homophobia/transphobia. Oppressive actions that ace/aro people face are because of oppression that already exists, and happens to overlap with characteristics of their ace/aro identities.

For example, furries are notoriously bullied and harassed. On a surface level, it is because “cringe animal person”, but beneath the hatred is genuine bigotry. Furries are always compared to being gay or trans, mentally ill, or it means youre a sexual predator because of your “deviant” behavior. That’s not furryphobia, that’s facism, specifically ableism and trans/homophobia. Cis straight furries are also subject to ridicule, but that is because of their proximity to the “dangerous deviance” thats lgbt or “insane/autistic” coded. The reason that there have been actual gas and shooting threats at fur conventions is because of the diversity of body and identity that the fandom is known for. Furries are not oppressed for being furries. There simply happens to be a lot of furries that also fall into oppressed communities. The same goes for asexuality and aromanticism.

“But the bigots say they hate LGBTQA+ now! That includes us!” 

The very fact that trans/homophobes are even thinking to complain about ace/aro people is because the ace/aro community has pushed their oppression fantasy into the public eye so hard for literal years, demonizing anyone who pointed out that a cis straight person who doesnt fuck is not “queer”. 

It is quite literally self inflicted bullying. ace/aros are only ever targeted by bigots because of their proximity to the lgbt community, or like mentioned previously, the punishment of any kind of deviancy under facism. Bigots dont understand or care that our experiences are vastly different, they just want victims to target. And the ace/aro community stood in front of the lgbt community for nearly 10 years and screamed “look at us! We’re just as weird as them!”. You think that some reactionaries arent going to take advantage of that?

Blue’s clues including ace/aro and other microidentities does not actually “confirm” theyre lgbt somehow. The very idea that someone would be targeted for not wanting intimacy in the same way someone is targeted for WANTING intimacy, and how they perform their intimacy, is insulting. The idea that being called “weird” or “broken” is in any way comparable to literally fearing walking down the street being yourself, is insulting. The idea that struggling with oversexualized media is in any way comparable to being killed for who you have sex with, is insulting. Remember what i said about microaggressions and how they do not add up to oppression without literal legal and cultural abuse of power?

The redundancy of microlabels

labels such as demi or grey romantic/sexual are even more insulting to pretend like they are lgbt orientations. There is literally no abnormality to being demiromantic or demisexual. The need to develop intimate feelings for someone else is an experience that is MUCH more common than feeling no attraction at all. Despite what the hypersexualized media may tell you, your experience of needing a friendship before romantic attraction is not rare

Its so common, in fact, that demirom/sexual identities are in essence the same thing as going “i need to get to know someone before i can be intimate with them, and that makes me queer.” really? The experience of making friends and falling in love or sexual desire is not exclusive to being LGBT, nor is it something that is even remotely stigmatized in the way LGBT people are, or even ace/aro people. A LOT people are demiromantic and demisexual without knowing what those labels even are. Treating demirom/sexual as lgbt orientations is treating a cishet person that doesnt kiss on the first date as an lgbt person.

And yeah, there are LGBT ace/aro people. But what makes them LGBT is the LGBT part of their identity. Once again, the fact you can be ace/demi and gay OR straight means these identities are not orientations

This redundancy and ignorance applies to most of microidentities, such as pan/omni which were only made under the misunderstanding that bisexuality wasnt already inclusive of nonbinary people or that bisexuality hasnt meant “many or all” for DECADES, but thats an entire other post

Ignoring trauma

Another thing that is harmful about treating asexuality as an lgbt orientation is that not everyone is asexual in the same way. 

What i mean is, there are some people who simply dont feel attraction to others. Thats absolutely cool, deserving of respect and its own unique support. However, some people are ace/aro because of trauma, mental illness symptoms, inexperience, dysphoria/dysmorphia, racism, disability, and internalized hatred and fear. These things are NOT an lgbt orientation, OR an identity, and treating them as such dangerously ignores the possibility of recovery.

Im not saying “ace/aro people are all just traumatized” or whatever because thats literally not true. But a large amount of them are. I was one myself, and im close with several people who also went through this identity because of some form of trauma and/or depressive symptoms and/or dysphoria. For all of us, labeling these symptoms as “ace/aro” kept us from truly examining our problems with intimacy, because we had simply accepted said problems as “being ace/aro”. After self exploration, we discovered we were in fact not ace or aro

AGAIN. Being ace/aro does NOT inherently mean you have problems to work through with your intimate life. My point is that when people see symptoms of things that ARENT inherent to asexuality or aromanticism and so readily misdiagnose them as a sexual or romantic orientation instead of, yknow, literal trauma, it leads people to misunderstand themselves or simply not try to explore their feelings toward intimacy.

And that doesnt even mean that you have to or will automatically change from ace/aro if you examine why you identify that way. Plenty of people are ace/aro because of trauma and know this and their identity helps them in their recovery. But things like dysphoria, internalized homophobia, and trauma symptoms that are genuinely distressing NEED to be addressed beyond the concept of “being ace/aro”. Healing is what’s important, not using your personal distress as a public identity

TMI / no one asked

The thing that’s strange i find about the push for ace/aro inclusionism is the seemingly complete lack of awareness of what you’re actually telling strangers when you say you’re asexual specifically

When you introduce yourself as LGBT, for example, it’s because its an intrinsic part of your identity. Gender and orientation are face level facts appropriate in all situations. Introducing yourself as trans is saying “hey, i’m not cis”. Introducing yourself as LGB is saying “hey, i’m not straight.” as i mentioned before, both of these things can be exclusive to peoples sex lives, and even if they arent, mentioning their identity is not bringing up anything sexual whatsoever. (again. If you hear that someone is lgbt and your first thought is i wonder how much sex they have, maybe youre the problem)

However, when you introduce yourself as asexual, you are specifically bringing your sex life into the conversation. “I dont feel sexual attraction to anyone” is not usually something you’d bring up to a stranger when introducing yourself. Like, idk, no one asked how much you’re not fucking, yknow? Especially not the underage people that you may be around. This oversharing is worse for asexuality since you’re directly mentioning your lack of sex drive. 

By NO means is it anything like sexual harassment or whatever, but seriously please just imagine yourself meeting a stranger and “im not really into sex” is one of the FIRST things you tell them. Is that necessary?

Sexualizing minors

One of the most dangerous results of specifically asexuality being pushed as an lgbt identity is now minors are being open in public about their sex drives. Under no circumstances do strangers online need to know how much sex a child wants or doesnt want to have. I have seen predators that draw CP label themselves as ace, and i can all too well see a scenario where a minor is groomed under the pretense of asexuality, seeing that they share a sexual identity with an adult and trusting them because said adult apparently doesnt want sex either. These predators obviously are NOT a part of the ace/aro community, nor is being ace/aro somehow predatory, but my point is that its become incredibly normal for kids to make their sex drives public knowledge, which can EASILY be taken advantage of

“But being ace is about NOT wanting sex! Isnt that the opposite of sexualizing?”

This argument is still astonishing to me. Not only is asexuality specifically about how much SEXUAL attraction one feels, but ive seen people insist that asexual people can still feel sexual attraction and have sex. This identity is ABOUT sex, whether or not the identifier wants sex or not. It is literally a description of your sex drive.

Which is also why adults making asexual headcanons about minor characters actually IS borderline predatory. No adult should be thinking in depth about whether or not a child feels sexual attraction. Period. There is no reasonable explanation for looking at someone underage and going “i bet that literal 14 year old doesnt want to fuck anybody. And i bet theyre really proud of it too and want to tell everyone else.” is there seriously nothing uncomforatable about adults making headcanons about how much sex a minor has? 

Stealing from other communities

The biggest one to talk about are cishet ace/aros who, by all accounts, do not experience the oppression that lgbt people do. Therefore they do not need our resources. Our community is for our own support. Its not a “fun diversity club” that anyone can join just because theyre a ~little different~ than ~normal cishet people~. This is the biggest example of the acearo community laying claim to experiences and resources that arent theirs. Look me in the eyes and tell me that a straight cis person deserves a spot in the lgbt community because they feel weird for not wanting to have sex. Meanwhile the lgbt community are at the same time hypersexualized and punished for their sexual partners by straight and cis people. What about that to you isnt stealing?

“Aspec” was being used for the autism spectrum well before asexuality was popularized, being autistic myself i had known it as part of our community before 2014. “Allo” sounds suspiciously close to “allistic” which is the term used for people who are not autistic. Also, if the aro flag came first please correct me, but its weird that the agender and aromantic flags both were made in 2014 and the aromantic flag is just the agender flag cut in half

Also, as a rape survivor, i do not even want to touch on the fact some inclusionists have co-opted corrective rape as a part of aphobia, even though corrective rape has specifically and historically been targeted towards trans and LGBT people, lesbians in particular, to turn them cishet. i'll just say it really pisses me off and move on.

Really Evil Gays

One of the ugliest behaviors of specifically the inclusionism movement is to compare and conflate lgbt people and survivors of abuse with our abusers and oppressors. Any lgbt person who does not want cishets pushing themselves in our community and claiming our suffering as their own is “aphobic”, or using “terf rhetoric” (which some of yall really need to learn what that actually is) and are now a bigot. “Exclusionists” are listed right next to trans/homophobes, predators, and racists in DNI lists and banners as if literally being bigoted is in any way comparable to going “the amount of sex you have doesnt make you queer”.

Like, it is genuinely revolting to act like lgbt people explaining the differences between our experiences is not only oppressing you, but is just as bad treatment as us experiencing hate crimes and abuse. Like the “radical exclusionary” sex having gays and transes are gatekeeping you out of the Fun Club. being progressive does not always mean “validating uwu”  people’s compulsion to find ways to feel ostracized for oppressed points, because once again, stigmatization alone not oppression. and the validity of these experiences can be mutually exclusive

I as a marginalized white person suffer under capitalism. however, i’m not about to cry racism when someone reminds me that i have objectively different experiences and advantages under capitalism over people of color, because capitalism is inherently tied to white supremacy. Some of what we go through under capitalism may overlap, but my whiteness is not a factor in my suffering under capitalism like how anyone elses race is. Asexuality and aromanticism suffer under the hypersexual patriarchy, but that does not mean that aphobia is a system of oppression, and certainly not one that lgbt people are somehow perpretrating by literally just not wanting cishets acting like they belong in our community because they dont have a sex drive.

Also, claiming that “your sex life doesnt define your orientation” is “terf rhetoric” is SO insulting to your transfem sisters. Please look up what a terf even means and where that description is applicable, instead of throwing it around at things that are not even about something that affects trans women in particular

ace/aro: not straight but not gay (a secret third thing)

What about people who are both ace and aro, some argue? I definitely agree that they are not straight and it’s not fair and insulting to label them as such. However, they aren’t any form of LGBT either if they are cis. Being lesbian, gay, and bi are specifically about intimacy and attraction to gender, and being trans intersects with this intrinsically. We connected as a community because of our shared persecution of who and our sexual partners and self presentation outside the gender binary, not who we DONT love or have sex with. Stonewall was not about asexuality or aromanticism. 

No one is being oppressed for not having attraction to anyone at all. Once again, i direct you to the section comparing stigma to oppression, and ask if there are laws making it illegal to not be in a romantic or sexual relationship. If there are people being killed for the sole reason of not having an intimate partner. I will repeat myself: the struggles aroace people go through under an entirely too sexualized and romance obsessed cishet culture are VERY real and absolutely deserve understanding, support, and a community of their own. However to compare said experiences to the active oppression and lets, be real, ongoing genocide of the lgbt community is frankly ignorant at best and actively insulting and degrading at worst.

Accept that your experiences as aroace people are unique, and push for understanding on your own instead of hijacking the lgbt community for validation. If you’re not trans, you do not experience what we do.

Dont try to change my mind

The reason replies and reblogs are turned off is because i have literally been talking about this for 9 years and i have so many better things to do. My stance will not change by being discoursed at online by strangers with a victim complex. I’ll be blocking any discourse asks as well. If you made it here (or didnt) and feel compelled to argue, just block me instead, go take care of yourself and be with friends and reflect on what ive said.

However feel free to screenshot and share or reference back to this post. Obviously i cant stop anybody. But hopefully this will be helpful for anyone left with questions about whether or not im “okay with ace people”. (hint: i am, and just because i dont think being ace makes you lgbt means i’m against ace people existing)

[mothmanslovechild]

I'm losing my mind over GO2

Okay, so I'm having a lot of feelings about Good Omens Season 2 but I know not everyone has seen it yet so I'll hide this a bit, even if I am trying not make it as non-spoilery as I can and also I need to talk to people about this

First of all, if I see anyone trying to fucking boycott or get pissed at Neil Gaiman, you can go straight to hell. Or worse, heaven. And I hope Terry Pratchett makes fun of you. Neil has said that this is act two of three (I'm paraphrasing and act three is not definite just a hope) and to leave these characters on this cliffhanger? If we don't get a season three, it will not be by Neil's choice. Boycotting will only hurt chances of getting that season three and a (hopefully) happier ending. I was bawling my eyes out and am still a mess over the end of the last episode but I also firmly believe that this is not the end. Keep it together, people. We're not going down the toxic landslide of blaming creators and causing a fuss and demonising ourselves as fans and making people hate us and destroying something we all love.

Secondly, I need to talk about that ending. I do not and will not hate Aziraphale for it. Our Angel is definitely being manipulated but it also shows the depth of religious trauma. If anyone has religious trauma, it's Aziraphale. Throughout both seasons he speaks party lines of Heaven even when he's clearly unsure about them. Even when he disagrees, he keeps repeating that god's plan is the right way and if (insert whatever monstrosity) is god's plan than it must be right. Look how far he pushed it with Job - he kept checking and double checking and questioning to be sure that Heaven was doing the right thing. And when he sided with Crowley and helped instead, he genuinely thought he was going to hell for it. Even though it was a good thing and he recognised that it was a good thing. The same goes for the situation with Elspeth to a degree. Aziraphale kept trying to take the moral high ground with her and ruin her chances until it became clear that doing bad things now meant good things later. Like god, he was focussing on the big picture instead of the small one. Not about Elspeth and her needing to eat and survive, but that humans will learn more and be able to survive better as a whole.

Someone else worded it much better than I will (I'll try and link their post later if I can!) but there's also the fact that Aziraphale and Crowley are having two different conversations at the end of the last episode. Go read their post to get the full story because I wholeheartedly agree with them and it really is worded much better, but long story short is that "nothing lasts forever" means two different things. Crowley hears that they don't last forever, that the bookshop doesn't, that nothing does and it's not worth it because what's the point (which has been in Crowley's own thoughts), while Aziraphale means that they can't continue like this forever, they can't be static, they need to adapt because what they tried hasn't worked. Honestly, just go read the post. Please.

NOW FOR NICER THINGS

I'm genuinely not sure some scenes were even real. The dance (the ball and sorry), the Bentley, just some of the lines where I just wanted to melt and live in that moment forever. Seeing their love spanning centuries and the ridiculous mischief they get into. Jim in the fucking fur coat. BEFORE the fall. The fact they all REMEMBER before the fall and the war. Bee being goals, honestly. Them and Gabriel. I just...Oh my god.

Also, you have no idea how much I lost it when I saw posts comparing to the end of Supernatural. I can't with you guys, my neighbours probably heard me cackling.

AND and that was the queerest shit I've ever watched. And there was no bury your gays, nothing homophobic, nothing like that even mentioned. And not just our three main couples, but in the background too. The magicians partner, so many generally NB angels/demons, tough bloke with grindr, it's all over the place. I love it. All I ever want is queer media that doesn't make queerness the main part of the plot. And by that I mean that it's just two people falling in love or just queer people existing without things having to revolve around traumatic/uncomfortable experiences or reactions. All I ask for is happy queer media.

And Michael Sheen's twitter picture....Boy, you're killing us. Not to mention Neil and "wait and see"

I have a lot more feelings so, anyone, feel free to message me and become internet friends because I NEED TO TALK ABOUT THIS SHOW.