#it's also biphobic and transphobic but bi lesbians always are

[damnfandomproblems]

Fandom Problem #6541:

In my fandom there is a huge issue with fandom bullies not just harassing people left and right, faking callout posts and lying to third parties about what happened, suicide baiting and death threats, but also TERFs using the local femslash ship for recruitment.

Most of these bullies would not label themselves as TERFs, but they sure repeat their transphobic (”all men are always evil rapists and all women, no matter how abusive, are pure angels, and trans women are tainted by men tm”), biphobic (”if you dislike this/not cater to me you can only be cishet” “bi women are not actual representation”), aphobic, ableist and racist talking points and love to single out fans of minorities to abuse them.

This ship is ideal for this because it involves one woman brutally abusing another for several seasons, plus a very short, badly written redemption arc, but many of the bullies also see themselves in this woman because she is a lesbian with a dark past. Of course it is easier for them to think she (and they) could never do anything bad ever because lesbians are always right instead of acknowledging their flaws (I mean, you can obviously like flawed characters, but there is a difference between that and using said character to feed into your own toxicity).

And its impossible to talk about this, because the moment one criticizes this they label you as lesbiphobic. They also started throwing around other -isms to protect their abuse of other fans. Odd how we are the bigots now, when me for example being a pan, disabled, abuse survivor woman never hindered them at harassing me.

[flowergirlmiwa]

promotion of the validity of bi/mspec lesbians is literally just 'progressive' lesbophobia and erasure

[genderkoolaid]

actually fuck it im gonna deconstruct this carrds shitty argument about bi dykes and stereotypes

"Every woman is attracted to men in some capacity, even lesbians." The implication is that lesbians can be attracted to men, which is LESBOPHOBIC.

Again: bisexual women who used to identify as lesbians until they found themselves attracted to a man can also be used to say that all lesbians are attracted to men.

"It's possible for lesbians to be in a healthy romantic or sexual relationship with men." This is blatantly LESBOPHOBIC, as lesbians are often pressured to enter relationships with men (compulsory heterosexuality).

This one is just fucking ridiculous. It is not up to you to define what a healthy relationship is for other people. To suggest that any relationship between a self-identified relationship and a man must be unhealthy deprives the lesbian of the autonomy to decide how they feel about their relationships. Even if the lesbian ends up not wanting to date or fuck men- there are lesbians who dated men and have nothing but fondness for the relationship, they just realized it wasn't for them. This is like saying its impossible for an asexual to have a healthy sexual relationship or for an aromantic to have a healthy romantic one.

"Bisexuality is a phase. Bi people always end up picking a side." The implication is that bisexuality does not really exist and that the bisexual label is just a temporary placeholder until they find their real identity, which is blatantly BIPHOBIC.

See the first statement but in reverse. This would suggest that lesbians who used to identify as bisexual- perhaps because of that compulsory heterosexuality that exclus love to throw around as the answer anytime a dyke does something they don't agree with- are being biphobic because they can be used as "proof" that bisexuals will always "pick a side." If we are judging the worth of person's identity based on how it can be used by queerphobes, we have already fucking lost.

"Bisexuality means that you're equally attracted to men and women." The implication is that you're no longer bisexual if you have a preference for one gender is BIPHOBIC. "You cannot be bisexual unless you date both men and women." The implication is that you're not bisexual anymore if you don't have dating history to "prove it", which is BIPHOBIC. "Bisexuality means that you're half-gay half-straight / part-gay part-straight." By supporting bi lesbians (and bi gay men or bi straight people) you're treating bisexuality as a modifier rather than a full identity, which is BIPHOBIC

grouping all these together because they are essentially the same argument: "bi lesbian meaning this which means that "bisexual" must mean that!!!!" which is not true. Bi lesbians existing do not mean anything for other bisexuals' definition of their identities, & the same applies for lesbians.

Some trans men define their manhood as being just like a cis man, but in a female body. They may transition and no longer identify as trans. Meanwhile, other trans men feel like their manhood is fundamentally trans, and while they and cis men may both be equally male, their manhood is fundamentally different to cis man's.

By the above logic, the second group is TRANSPHOBIC because they "say" that trans men can't be the same as cis men. Unless.... just maybe........ we consider that one label can be used to describe a multitude of experiences........

Of course, the creator of this carrd couldn't stand for that idea. Since their second argument as to why bi dykes are bad is:

"We have created these labels to understand ourselves and each other and to effectively communicate with one another. Once you abstract it to the point where it is impossible to communicate an idea to another person without them having to ask for further clarification, those labels lose their functionality and become useless."

Which is funny, because there are plenty of bi lesbians who are active in both their local bisexual and lesbian communities without issue. Because they can still effectively communicate; people, surprisingly, have the ability to understand abstract concepts and nuanced identities.

Not every asexual never wants sex; there are asexuals who enjoy sex. The fact that you can't assume every asexual is nonsexual does not pose this great, existential threat to asexuals who don't fuck. The fact that you have to ask people things about them & can't just assume based off of a single label is not the end of communication itself, actually. If "lesbian" tells you that someone is attracted to women, either in a WLW way or in a way that is rooted in lesbian culture, then all you have to fucking do is not assume that they never fuck or date men.

The problem is, of course, that most of these people are "anti-TERF" radfems who don't realize it, and they have gotten in their brains that if there is no special "women only" term then the entire fucking world will collapse into a blighted misogynistic hellscape. And of course they don't need to think critically about why they feel this way, they just know its bad... but they think trans women can be lesbians so it has nothing to do with TERFs and how dare you imply it does!!!!!

[tirfpikachu]

i think so many wrongly trans-identified people - which obvs isn't all trans folks, just ppl like me as a detrans dyke - are just gender criminals. they're made to think that means they need to separate themselves from their agab entirely instead of just seeing themselves as a post-gender sexed creature, like a female rabbit or male dog, just a neutral body type while messing around with gender roles.

i fought all the gender off my body like it was a plague taking over me from my sexist misogynistic upbringing and Society tm. you can be cis/non-trans and still be post-gender. you can be gnc as hell and not be trans or dysphoric about your sex, or disassociating from your sex category, and instead just be anti-gender. you don't need to be trans or nonbinary to be post-gender and gnc. it can even be a political thing, a protest against the patriarchy. you just can't assume that every cis person has stereotypical cis privilege. you just can't assume that anyone who isn't trans-identified or nonbinary-identified doesn't face gncphobia that can be just as horrific as transphobia, or be uncomfortable with the gender roles forced on them. anyone visibly gnc or transitioned, or both, faces bigotry in society. this should be a better indicator of oppression than simple label terms. it should be about real, tangible experiences of gncphobia, misogyny, sexism etc.

this is why nonbinary used to not be a trans-exclusive term, btw. some people truly were like "i'm cis, i'm not trans, but i'm agender." but then people jumped in and yelled that no, that couldn't be true, they must all be trans and they must all be dysphoric, even when the person was straight up openly like no, i'm not trans, i'm fine with my sex, i just think gender roles are dumb and i think being nonconforming is cool. but that's not the case anymore; you say anything about gender being stupid, hating gender roles, hating how you're treated for being female or being male and feminine, and boom! people say you're a repressed trans person and you need to accept your "true self" away from the category of your birth sex, instead of expanding what it means to be a man/woman. you can't say you're male/female and just fooling around with presentation. unless you're a gay male drag queen of course, but even then many get pressured nowadays to identify one way or another. this helps nobody. literally nobody. just like telling a bi person they're a repressed lesbian, or telling someone straight that they "look gay" is shitty and unhelpful, and honestly often gncphobic, sexist & biphobic/homophobic... you can't simply say that someone is looking or acting trans. the feeling of not belonging to your sex category to an extreme extent, of being dysphoric, is not something you can tell from the person's appearance or behavior, right? that's not just gncphobic but also lowkey transphobic to say that you can always "just tell" unless they straight up visibly transitioned (and aren't detrans). it's shitty rhetoric. you can't get all creepily giddy at the thought of someone you know being trans too, just like it's gross when straight girls fetishize their male friend coming out as gay bc they have the classic gay bestie fantasy stuck in their head. with dysphoria there's also an ableist fetishization aspect to it as well, bc it's a disorder but its suffering and treatment is often romanticized even outside the trans community and seen as a fun little glowup. we cannot keep enabling this kind of behavior. it's simply unhealthy and actually reinforces gender roles. we should ALL be post-gender. we should ALL throw away stupid gender roles and instead be ourselves and do what we want, no matter what the patriarchy wants us to do.

it's okay to use the trans label, or to be dysphoric. it's okay to be nonbinary. but it's also okay to not be trans, yet still feel post-gender. this goes doubly for people affected by misogyny and homophobia!

[antlered-angel]

Friendly Reminder that Bi Lesbian is inherently biphobic, transphobic, lesbophobic, and acephobic

Reminder: i am speaking as a trans and biromantic person on the ace spectrum and i have asked lesbians on the matter. One of my best friends is an asexual lesbian who helped educate me on the matter. I have also done my research and i know what im talking about.

Bi lesbian was a term coined by a terf who didn’t consider trans women real lesbians because of the false idea that they were still men. The same terf also didn’t consider cis lesbians being attracted to trans women to be real lesbians for the same reason. This sort of mindset boils trans people down to their genitals, rather than their actual gender identities.

the label boils both bi and lesbian down to just sexual attraction, excluding other types of attraction. Speaking as a demisexual biromantic person, that type of exclusion treats bi people and lesbians as just sexual beings. This has also lead to some bi lesbians claiming to be more “pure” than run-of-the-mill lesbians because their attraction isn’t purely sexual (as though ace lesbians don’t exist)

Bi people and Lesbians were never and are never consulted on whether or not a label like that could exist, is a common experience amongst their groups, or even make sense. Speaking as a bi person with lesbian friends, often times our opinions on the matter are disregarded and invalidated.

Bi Lesbian is inherently self contradictory and actively ignores the definitions of bi (attraction to two or more genders) and lesbian (people who don’t identify as men being exclusively attraction to people who don’t identify as men). Once again, bi and lesbian people are actively ignored when this is called out.

Bi Lesbians are often men who are trying to invade spaces not meant for or inviting to them. Lesbians are people who don’t identify as men exclusively attracted to people who don’t identify as men, not nonmen occasionally attracted to men. Labels are not always about comfort, they’re often more about safety. And you cannot be comfortable unless you have safety. And this label creates less safety for lesbians and trans people alike.

if you’re going to argue, do your research first and consult the people this negatively affects. Remember that it’s not about you, it’s about making sure groups like lesbians, trans people, bi people, and ace people feel safe enough that they can express who they are without their identities being threatened or completely disregarded for the sake of comfort.

If you’re uncomfortable with the idea of women existing without men, imagine how lesbians feel when their safe spaces are invaded. Have some goddamn compassion with a little sprinkle of empathy, and educate yourself for once.

Made some edits to this to make it easier to understand!

[posi-pan]

https://www.tumblr.com/toyherb/748434177303658496/geiser-i-know-pansexuality-is-not-just-going-to?source=share

i saw this and do you know if this is true or not? because it made me sad / feel bad because before i came out (i didn't have plans to, at first) i was thinking long and hard on which labels fit me to the point of having sleepless nights because of it and then i found out about pansexuality due to this blog and that made me feel peaceful inside and that's how i figured out that this label fit me.

and now everyone on that post is like: think long and hard on the labels you use!!!! i don't want to exclude anyone. i don't want to erase anyone. this label just fits me. it fit me then, it fits me now. it's as simple as that.

sorry to dump this into your askbox during pride :((((

that post is absolutely not true. i have many posts on here calling out the idea that pan is somehow damaging bisexuality or whatever. pansexuality is not biphobic, individual people are. if someone is saying something biphobic, it’s because of their own flawed thinking or understanding, not because of whatever their sexuality is. funny how many heterosexuals and gay men and lesbians say horribly biphobic things, yet i don’t see any viral posts about how heterosexuality or gayness or lesbianism are biphobic. that logic only applies to pansexuality, i guess. *eye roll* it’s almost like the goal isn't calling out biphobia, the goal is spreading panphobia.

(and let’s not forget that pansexuality and pan people did not create any of these misconceptions about bisexuality that panphobes always talk about. those existed before pan got any kind of mainstream visibility. and don't believe panphobes when they say pan folks “changed the definition of bisexuality” either, as that’s just another panphobic lie.)

you don’t have anything to worry about. the only people doing damage are the people who make and share those kinds of posts telling people they’re queerphobic and hurting the community because they use a different word. pan has always existed and wasn’t created to be biphobic or transphobic and has always been welcome in the bi community. claiming otherwise is what’s wrong and damaging.

and idk when op posted that, but the earliest replies i saw were from 2020, so it’s interesting that people are sharing a years old post where the go-to example of a pan person being biphobic is even older: miley cyrus in 2016 saying she hates the word bisexual for putting her in a box. which. i remember that and pan folks, including myself, were criticizing her word choice. (even though she simply said she doesn’t like that label for her own sexuality and feels it’s too restrictive for her own sexuality and feelings. which isn’t queerphobic ffs. queer people of all kinds feel certain labels are too restrictive or don’t fully encompass their feelings. like. why is it only bad when a pan person says that about bi? i’m so tired of the double standards. also, where are these people when bi celebs are spreading biphobic narratives? they’re awfully silent then.)

please try not to give panphobes like that the time of day. their words have no weight because they’re rooted in hatred and queerphobia. they do a good job of masking their panphobia in supposed sadness about biphobia or concerns about the community (and sometimes wrap their message in faux intellectualism), but all of that rings false when you know where they’re coming from and what their intentions are. pan people are just trying to live our lives as authentically as we can, with language that feels true to us. panphobes on the other hand are actively spending their free time trying to make other queer people feel bad for *check notes* using different words. as if that isn’t the most ridiculous thing in the world.

i hope this helps make you feel better!!! and no worries about sending this during pride!! 💖💖💖

[redtail-lol]

bitch putting 'die now' in the tags automatically disqualifies you from being better than anybody, esp if it's for being an mspec lesbian. You're literally on the same level as homophobes if not worse. If you can't accept that bi and lesbian can't be mutually exclusive because genderfuckery exists then you're misunderstanding queerness entirely.

Oh, and gotta love you pulling the race card. Ain't nothing in this thread had anything to do with race so I don't see a point in you saying anything about white people for any reason other than to look better.

Anyways, stop hating all enbyspec people, stop hating bisexuality that doesn't include men, stop treating lesbian like it's always exclusive when that's literally solely because of TERFs, stop telling queer people to die for being queerer than you, and stop accusing actual lesbians of lesbophobia for realizing that bi and lesbian have overlapping definitions and complex history. You're literally more toxic than Chernobyl. Just interacting with you will probably give me radiation poisoning and I'm surprised you're still alive.

FI HAVE NEVER SEEN YOU BEFORE OTHER THAN THIS 1 TIME WTF DID FI DO TO YOU MAN 😭

[olderthannetfic]

/726901861182996480/ a lot of the Richard Siken response is honestly so homophobic, trying to come up with some sinister reason for why a gay man would be interested in writing or reading sexy fanfic about attractive men in a TV show. There was a viral post going around here by some person with a Stranger Things username (not insinuating that fandom is especially weird or anything, just that I remember this person had one of the characters from that show as their username) that suggested he was a creep or groomer or something because he had not responded well to a teenager basically wanting him to do her homework for her, but “he happily writes fanfic of shows for her age demographic” (or something like that) which is both a truly bizarre description of Supernatural, a show that’s always been aimed at adults even if it also has a fair number of teenage fans, but also is really clearly trying to invoke some sort of Groomer Panic in a time when that’s rising as a form of violent homophobia toward LGBTQ+ people especially those who are AMAB. And it’s just such a bizarre statement: even if we were talking about a drama that was aimed at teenagers, in what ways is it “groomer” for an adult to watch this show (lol, on the website that is full of adults freaking out over kids’ shows) or for that adult to find the adult characters played by adult actors attractive enough to write sexy fanfic about them? It’s just really obviously reaching for an excuse to call a gay man a groomer.

In general, I feel like this website has a serious problem (it’s been the case at the very least since the panic over CMBYN, and before anyone gets pissy, I’m not talking about anyone taking issue with the content of the film itself, but the people making weird insinuations about gay/bi men for liking it or “the gay community” for embracing it or over the bi male novel author’s own sexuality or reasons for writing it, etc.) where a lot of people who are not gay/bi men think it’s okay for them to make weird homophobic assertions about it, and generally not bother to question their homophobic beliefs about gay and bi men, because they themselves are some other kind of LGBTQ+. I’m a cis lesbian and a lot of this particular seems to come from cis lesbians and bi women, often trying to couch it in a general sort of skepticism that women as a marginalized group might have toward men as a privileged group, but then it only ever seems to be directed at men who are also marginalized such as gay/bi men (and also MOC) and specifically for things that are a result of those marginalized identities and that don’t affect women — NOT a situation where a man is using his marginalized identity as an excuse for misogyny or anything like that. Anyway, people need to knock that shit off. Not every person in the LGBTQ+ community has the same experience, and being, say, a cis woman who is queer doesn’t necessarily make you any better of an authority on gay or bi men’s lives than cishet people if you aren’t making an effort to talk to them or read stuff by them or learn about their lives, and certainly doesn’t mean you can’t be homophobic toward them — just like how in turn, queer men can be bigoted toward lesbians and/or bi women. I don’t understand how people can be aware of other kinds of intra-LGBTQ+ bigotry — cis gay or bi people being transphobic, gay people being biphobic, etc. — and not be aware that this is also a thing that can happen from other LGBTQ+ people toward gay men.

And being ANY kind of queer absolutely does not give you a get out of jail free card for buying into and disseminating the moral panics about groomers, “kink at pride,” “drag is problematic and always sexual” etc. which are used by the right wing to hurt all of us. This was bad enough in like 2018 as part of the perennial brain worms people on this website have about Pride (that are because way too many of them don’t leave their houses and actually go to a Pride parade) or when people could plausibly believe that “groomer” was purely about shipping discourse and maybe the occasional actually kind of creepy older adult in fandom spaces who spends a little too much time glomming onto teens specifically. But in 2023 you don’t really have any excuse for not being aware of how those terms have broken containment and are now part of regular right-wing propaganda, and particularly a concerted right-wing campaign to try to re-mainstream homophobia in places where it had become socially taboo. Your discomfort around a real adult gay man just enjoying fanfiction, which does not affect you, is not justified and you need to work through that. Using terms like “groomer” for fucking fandom discourse when it’s come to mean what it does in the broader culture is just completely morally reprehensible. Get a fucking grip

--

[ugly-anarchist]

lesbian literally means non-man attracted to non-men in what world is bi lesbian a valid identity

In this world it's a valid identity! Mostly because "non-man attracted to non-men" isn't the definition of lesbian and is both exclusionary and, weirdly, still inclusive to bisexuals!

Bisexual means you're attracted to two or more genders. There's a lot of genders out there that aren't "man" or male/masculine aligned. By your definition of lesbian you can, in fact, be a non-man who is attracted to multiple non-man gender identities. Which would make someone, ya know, an mspec lesbian.

However, let's say that someone is bigender. This hypothetical person is both a man and a woman and they are exclusively attracted to women. This is, by definition, a woman exclusively attracted to other women. But because they're also a man, they would be excluded from your definition of lesbian.

Also, you are defining lesbianism based solely on the exclusion of men which is, and I can't stress this enough, fucked up and weird. Like, I don't know how to explain it, focusing lesbianism on men instead of attraction to women is kind of weird.

It also implies that non-binary is woman-lite. Like if you're an agender person who is exclusively attracted to other agender people then by your definition that would be lesbianism. Assuming of course the hypothetical agender person is afab and presents femininely. Because, let's be real here, if an amab agender person who presents masculine identified as a lesbian then there would be no question about what you thought about that. That person would immediately be called a male invader and told they weren't welcome.

Lesbian has always meant "gay attraction towards women". There are people alive today that I have personally spoken to who confirm this. My mother is 50, she identified as a lesbian when she was in her early twenties and she has told me stories about what it was like being a queer woman back then. She told me stories about how the community was full of political lesbians (straight women who identified as lesbians as a political statement) who shunned bisexual women and excluded them from the community. That's right, anti-bi lesbianism was started by straight women who identified as lesbians as a fucking political statement. And guess what? These women were also very transphobic and even homophobic towards gay men.

Redefining the word lesbian specifically so you can exclude bisexual women from lesbian spaces is, in fact, biphobic as hell! Bisexual lesbians aren't invaders, predatory, or anything! If you are uncomfortable sharing a space with bisexual lesbians then that's not anyone's problem but your own. There is no danger whatsoever with bisexual people sharing a space with lesbians nor is there an issue with bisexual people identifying as lesbians! Every single argument I've seen as to why it was "dangerous" for bisexual lesbians to exist is complete and utter bullshit and steeped in biphobia with a sprinkling of transphobic dogwhistles!

You are not on the side of good here! You are on the same side as straight women who hate men so much they CHOSE to become lesbians! You are on the side of a community that has solely defined their identities on not liking men which leads to exclusionary behavior towards bisexuals and trans women!

This isn't the hill you want to die on!

[violottie]

yes that does help!! thank you </3

i have been repeatedly harassed by people who say that “mspec lesbians” and “lesbian men” are real and who tell me that i am “being transphobic” and “keeping trans people from expressing themselves freely” because i think that those ideals are, at their core, lesbophobic.

it really sucks to be called transphobic and lesbophobic as a trans lesbian. :,) i’m glad that there are still people with a little bit of sense

oh gods, im so sorry youve been bothered by them too, friend.

it can be really overwhelming to have so many of them screaming so loudly, but i assure you that they are a minority. and they only exist on the internet. in real life, everyone knows what a lesbian is. and it will never change

and yes, it is indeed lesbophobic but also transphobic and biphobic for them to claim their contradicting identity is true.

the best piece of advice i got from the incredible group of lesbians im honored to call friends that i met here is this:

to always and immediately block "bi/mspec lesbians" whenever you unfortunately come across them. they are not worth your time or mind or energy ever. they dont want to listen and learn. they want attention. dont give it to them.

focus on finding and cultivating lesbian community and uplifting other lesbians by sharing positivity, learning from and celebrating each other, and being proud to be a lesbian. lesbianism is the single most beautiful experience in the universe, and the lesbian community is full of such vibrancy and diversity and culture and fervour and passion and life. it can be hard in the face of such constant bigotry, especially when it comes from within the wider lgbt "community", but together, we lesbians are the single strongest, most beautiful, most perfect beings in all existance and as a lesbian, so are you

know that on my blog you will be respected for your sexuality and gender completely, anon, as you deserve to be

❤️🧡🤍🩷💖

[redheadbigshoes]

First one is a trans man the second one is a bi woman why am I surprised that they always gotta be the ones speaking over us and we also need to talk about predatory bi women who say they are lesbians but date men this literally pushes the idea that lesbians can like men

Ironic how it seems to be always a non-lesbian trying to speak over lesbians… The same people who complain about lesbians being transphobic or biphobic with them…

That dude talking about getting laid but if he was actually getting laid he wouldn’t be so pressed about including men in lesbianism lol this shit is the kind of shit people who are rejected by lesbians talk about

[utilitycaster]

I’m I the only one who finds it alarming that most of this fandom who ship Imogen and Laudna (especially on twitter) don’t realize the unhealthyness thats going on in their relationship? They literally see two women to are affectionate with each other and say “ENDGAME!” “GIRLFRIENDS!” “MARRIED!” “KISS KISS KISS!” Then they focus on quotes that are kinda alarming, and Imogen’s Jealousy is pretty fucking Alarming! Saying that they are in love and just haven’t realized it yet. (Don’t get me started on that one blog on here counting down the days “till imodna realizes their in love.” I find it so fucking annoying.) Loving someone and being IN love with someone is two different things. Also another thing! I HATE THAT PEOPLE CALL THEM LESBIANS! THE BOTH HAVE EXPRESSED FEELINGS FOR MALE PERSENTING PEOPLE! I dread the day when the campaign ends and they don’t end up together or during the campaign fall IN love with someone that’s not each other. Especially if it’s a male persenting person, because the Laura and Marisha will be harassed and the shippers will yell Queerbait, also the men hating/haters will be in full force. 

Hi anon,

I agree with most of this; I'm answering under a cut in the hopes that people who will be upset by an answer will be able to avoid it, without me having to explicitly discourse tag it and in doing so throw it to people who troll that tag to get mad at things. Also this is SUPER long and covers a lot of the thoughts I've had percolating on the CR fandom/shipping culture in general.

I think I and a lot of people who primarily deal in meta/analysis in this fandom have been inching ever closer to a lot of the points you've made here, and I am generally very willing to be the one who snaps and says "yeah has anyone noticed the emperor has literally no clothes on like what the fuck".

Let's start with the end and work backwards: It's happened before, it will happen again if Laura and Marisha's characters do not get together, and it's irritating, but like, I will take a good story and the consequences of a shitty segment of the fandom rather than the path of least resistance every time. I almost said something to this effect on the positive vibes ask last night, but like...there will always be people who are hateful and stupid on the internet, so you may as well stand in your own truth rather than fear their consequences. (Not that I don't respect the choice to quietly avoid harassment; I am the way I am because I know at this point I can take a pretty hard hit and shut it down, but that has not always been the case.) Anyway, people called an actual canon ship between lesbian characters queerbaiting last campaign, so it's not like those accusations hold any weight or need to be taken seriously; outside of their tiny circle, everyone thinks those people are idiots.

I do, as a bi woman, hate the tendency among hardcore shippers to erase bisexuality. They do it because a bi character's competing ships cannot be as easily dismissed as 'obviously can't happen, they're gay or lesbian', and they don't care how biphobic they look doing it. You are absolutely correct: Imogen and Laudna have both indicated interest in men or masc nb people. (Others have also pointed out that people tend to exclusively use he/him pronouns about Ashton when they are being critical of them, so they don't care how transphobic they look doing it either, apparently; also I don't think Ashton identifies as a he/they lesbian but there are in fact people who do identify as such so like...if your goal is to eliminate Ashton/Laudna as an option by saying Laudna is a lesbian, against all evidence to the contrary, you also need to make a number of presumptions about Ashton's sexuality and gender identity as well.)

This brings me to a tricky section about fandom in general but I think it's worth saying. In the real world, homophobia and transphobia are very real. They negatively impact our lives in heartbreaking and deadly ways. It is still the norm in most US media for the bulk of relationships shown to be between a cis man and a cis woman, and for protagonists to be cis and straight (note: also often able-bodied, male, white, etc but the focus of this discussion is queerness so I'm not covering all axes of oppression). However, in many fandom spaces, queer characters and ships are the fan favorites. Tumblr's userbase does skew heavily queer, and additionally, tends to skew towards women. In other words, a lot of things that are very true in real life do not hold in fandom spaces.

Which is to say: we're in a situation where an F/F ship is the massive juggernaut for the fandom right now. It does not mean that lesbians (or bi women who enter into relationships with other women) are not oppressed in the real world; it does mean that within the highly specific space of the Critical Role fandom, people are more likely to be in favor of this ship than not. It also means that a lot of the people who aren't into it are not homophobes, but are queer people - often even wlw - who are saying "I would like F/F ships! I would like them to actually be good." Like, to me, the only difference between Imogen and Laudna and every M/F canon relationship on network TV that's made me go "you're telling me they should be together, but I don't see it" is that they're both women (and I would bet a large sum that for a lot of people, this isn't about the dynamic, but purely about the gender of the people involved, ie, if Imogen were a man played by one of the men in the cast people wouldn't ship it, where as I personally can comfortably say I'd ship any of the canon ships from past campaigns regardless of character gender. This also admits that biological essentialism is fake and that Exandria is pretty gender equalthough, which some people don't want to do.)

Part of why I've been so frustrated is that, at least from my perspective, the overwhelming majority of hate and harassment I've seen within the fandom in Campaign 3 - and in Campaign 2 - has been from people who have shipped Marisha and Laura's characters. There has, in fact, been pretty considerable hate as well as measured criticism levied towards M/F ships (we're seeing some with Ashton/Laudna here, but both Fjord/Jester and Caleb/Jester, the latter of which I actively dislike and have openly criticized, received pretty vehement hate last campaign and most of it came from people who shipped Jester with Beau) and M/M ships (less harassment per se but people who shipped Caleb with Jester said some truly awful things about Caleb/Essek; also while I have not, you know, harassed people, I have said essentially the same things about how Taliesin and Liam's characters are shipped every campaign despite often having little connection as I have about Marisha and Laura's. I just don't talk about it as much because while I think and have said that Ashton/Orym is basically nothing - and that Widomauk, which most people vaguely classify as M/M, and for that matter, Percy/Vax, all are basically nothing - no one who ships those has called me a cunt or reblogged my posts in an abusive manner or called me out for the grave sin of preferring canon to fanon, so I respect the ship and let ship of it all.) For that matter, the bulk of hate towards Beauyasha came from people who shipped Beau and Jester. Like...I am confident there are people who dislike this ship specifically because it's between two women, and they are homophobic, but that is not the quarter where I think most of the criticism on Tumblr or Twitter is coming from.

So let's get to the last point. Why do people ship two women simply because they're standing next to each other? Why do they ignore countless red flags - and I am specifically talking about treating Imogen and Laudna's relationship as healthy and loving; not about shipping it in general. I cannot stress enough that if you treat Imogen/Laudna as some kind of toxic Briarwoods situation and are into that, I support that entirely.

There are a few reasons. First and foremost, I think a lot of people project onto characters rather than letting the characters provide them with differing perspectives. I find this deeply sad. It's not that you can't draw parallels between your own life and that of fictional characters or see yourself in them - you're supposed to! But it says something depressing about your empathy if your qualifications for which characters speak to you are only those who match your demographics. Like, I've said before, but my favorite characters from past campaigns are Vex and Fjord, and they have a lot in common! If you relate to one based on their themes of Who You Are In The Dark and the mask you present to the world over a face you don't particularly like, you will probably relate to the other! But also...I am a cis bi woman, I am not a person of color as both those characters are often considered coded to be (though am an ethnic minority), nor did I personally experience extensive emotional abuse and poverty as a child. I think there's value in wanting to see people like you! But also...representation is not just "I want to see people like me"; it's also "I want to humanize people who are not like me". If you cannot relate to someone simply because they don't match your gender or sexuality, then that's a really shallow and cold way to interact with the world. And, specifically in relation to queerness within Critical Role: this is a world that has consistently been depicted as not having homophobia or transphobia. I understand wanting to explore these themes and seeing characters who have experienced them, but like...this is not the media that will reasonably have a one-to-one portrayal of homophobia or transphobia, and you often will need to bend over backwards and project a lot of stuff that simply isn't in the canon to read that into them because the worldbuilding simply doesn't support it. And, to be clear, you can do that; but at that point you're applying a lens that only you can obtain, so you shouldn't be surprised if few people come along with you. (I also think it's kind of dumb to watch a show with 5 cis men on it, four of whom are married to women, and be mad that the story has men in it and that those men sometimes are attracted to women; unpacking this would easily double the length of this already incredibly long post though.)

So: this sets a stage for people coming into the show saying "who looks like me, or can I make to look like me" rather than engaging with what's actually going on. Part of why I've been hesitant on Imogen and Laudna the whole time, though started out much more open to it, is in fact that it was heavily shipped from quite literally the moment that Laura and Marisha were indicated to be playing two women who knew each other from before. We knew nothing about their dynamic other than "existing friendship". So I think a lot of people put the cart before the horse and started shipping, and I do think - and I could be entirely wrong - a lot of them, deep down in their hearts, know that they are twisting their interpretations to match an idea of these two characters that has increasingly been proven not to be true onscreen. Like, I think a lot of people kind of realize that Imogen is putting Laudna in a horrible position here; I think a lot of people realize that their so-called 'unconditional' love that transcends words means there's no room to resolve or even express conflict. Perhaps they don't, but like, I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt. It's just...I think that because this ship is so all-consuming within the fandom, and because so many people have staked their identities within the fandom on it, they don't know how to leave it and are scared of retaliation if they do.

This is backed up by the slow shift I've described - Imodna started out with "they're already girlfriends" or "they're already in love but just haven't said it" or "what could ever happen other than they become ever closer and eventually kiss" (as witnessed by these questions) to "they realized they were in love during the campaign" to "Imogen is in love with Laudna but Laudna isn't aware" to "god remember how they used to talk, I'd give anything for it" to "I guess a QPR is okay" (which is itself bizarre, like, the issues I see in their relationship are still just as much issues in a nonsexual partnership as a sexual one; honestly, it's not a healthy friendship though it is an interesting one and the problem's I have are not going to be fixed by kissing.) Like, it's not the normal evolution of feelings one might have about a ship as the show goes on and more information is revealed, or rather, it's a ship that's becoming less and less confident as time goes on which is the opposite of how canon ships tend to go. (Which, I need to stress, does not discount that it could not be canon; it's just that I think it would require a pretty profound shakeup and conflict to do so). The signs and signals are becoming more and more tenuous and the shippers keep lowering and lowering the bar.

Since I've already brought up past campaigns and ships, let's do it again for the sake of illustration; this feels like how people who shipped Caleb and Jester went from ENDGAME to "Caleb is pushing away Jester to protect her" to "I think Laura is biting her lip when she's looking at Liam! This is a SIGN" even in episodes where Jester was like, actively making out with Fjord, to, and I am not making this up, posting pictures of the CR shop showing Laura in Caleb merch as evidence. Or how the bulk of Vex/Keyleth shipping in TLOVM rested on a scene in the trailer where Keyleth was staring dreamily and drunkenly into space while Vex was across the table only for the show to reveal Keyleth was staring at Vax. Like, all shipping does require a certain degree of cherrypicking, but there is a point where you are focused only on subtext and never text, and while that was how one had to interact with queer stories in the past, it's ridiculous to be doing it on a show where Marisha has openly RP-ed Beau eating Yasha out. Like, if they wanted to show two women being romantically involved, they will. (There's been a lot of Xena comparisons thrown around, and like...not that Xena isn't an important part of the history of depicting F/F relationships in media, but it is also a syndicated show from the 90s and couldn't show an explicitly lesbian relationship, and Critical Role very much can and has.)

I do think there are a subset of people who don't realize how unhealthy this is. Like...this is a whole psychological thing that I am unequipped to unpack, but I do think there are people for whatever reasons genuinely do believe that love means never having to say you're sorry. I am hoping this is because of youth and inexperience, because being able to communicate and advocate for yourself is a crucial part of relationships, as is the ability to express and resolve conflict. As you've noticed, the people who ship this have all said "well, obviously, Imogen won't betray Laudna" - but we don't know that. Honestly I think it could go either way. But they have to make that assumption to keep shipping it, because if Imogen might betray Laudna, then that does mean that there would have been more meaning and value in Laudna speaking up and that conversation was deeply flawed.

I also think some of this comes from unconditional love being an unreasonable expectation foisted upon us all at large. There are always conditions, or rather, you might always in some way love someone, but there are conditions under which you'd leave or boundaries you will draw. You can love someone who (for example) is dealing with an addiction but still refuse to let them drive while intoxicated or steal your stuff to pay for drugs. You can love someone who cheats on you but still want to end that relationship. I mean, while fear, self-doubt, and resources/logistics are all factors in people leaving abusive relationships, it's also true that a lot of people have some affection for the good times and that is a factor as well. Love is not a simple on/off switch. You can feel multiple things at once - honestly, that's what Ashton basically says this past episode, that they both love and hate the party! I think Imogen and Laudna do genuinely love each other, though I don't interpret it as romantic; I just also think that there's a lot of stuff they don't like about each other but are unable to express, and which will only become more and more of a threat to a potential romantic (or queerplatonic) relationship if left to fester unresolve. And, to be honest, I suspect real-world homophobia and fandom purity issues are part of why people are so unwilling to discuss why Imogen and Laudna's relationship is unhealthy; because it means admitting that queer relationships can have most of the same problems as straight ones, and possibly admitting that you still find an unhealthy relationship interesting and want to see it played out.

[angelhummel]

not to be a hater i was just thinking about this recently. the biphobia in Glee is so inconsistent with how its addressed.

like i’m pretty sure the ONLY person who ever gets called out for saying anything remotely biphobic is Kurt (which like im glad bc it was a shitty thing to say. tho i think kurt antis use it to frequently paint this rhetoric that kurt is a bad person bc of one (1) shitty thing he said)

meanwhile santana can say shitty things about bisexuality bc shes mad that brittany is dating sam and thats apparently fine???? she really has the idea that brittany is betraying her for penis which is bizarre. also i feel like she enabled dani’s biphobia as well.

i love santana, but i feel like this issue is heavily glossed over by fans while kurt’s comment is apparently bad enough to crucify him :/

I know we've talked about it before but I also just thought of it again recently. Bc there was a poll with Here Comes The Sun and someone in the tags was like "I'll vote for anything over Dani's biphobic ass" and it's like well baby girl Santana's biphobic ass is literally standing right next to her. And people sure don't have a problem voting for Santana's songs despite how blatantly biphobic she also is

And also transphobic, we can throw that in there, bc it's always about Penis and Boys hand in hand like there's no other option. Never mind Unique has been on the show for over a season, let's keep equating dick with gross boys and pussy with beautiful lesbian 100% pure sapphic goddesses 😍😍 Bleh it's like they tried to cram in every last shred of offensive sexual language they could think of into one two minute scene

BUT it's not like I'm judging that specific tagger, or anyone else who dislikes Dani. Bc at least Santana is a character with a million other things going for her besides the worst things she's said (exactly like Kurt hi) whereas Dani had like ten lines in her time on the show and half of them were "sapphic goddess" and "i love lady parts" barf

"She enabled Dani's biphobia as well" yeah literally. She could've just said "I was dating a girl and it didn't work out and we broke up" but she specifically threw "and she was bi" into the middle of it like that's part of the reason they broke up lmao. Santana, who tells Brittany that it's okay for her to date someone new, boy or girl, just to throw a fit when Brittany ends up dating Sam and makes it into some weird thing about her need for dick and how she's Less Than bc she's bi. And telling that to a potential new partner so she can reinforce her shitty stereotypes by also being gross about bi people (: Amazing

And anyway bringing it back to Kurt and double standards but like. That's pretty much the only offensive thing Kurt ever said lmao. Like yeah he said some dumb or thoughtless things here and there but if you take out that one glaring fuck up, you're not really left with anything that bad. Whereas if you extract Santana's biphobia from the equation, you're still left with six seasons of racism, homophobia, transphobia, antisemitism, fatphobia...

So yeah :) Double standards, anon, double standards x

[stackslip]

btw the reason it took me years to id as a lesbian wasn't even because of internalised lesbophobia, it was specifically because of these kind of people who were also so fucking obsessed about Lesbian Identity Purity! that and the number of irl cis lesbians i met who were very vocally and casually transphobic and biphobic and directly tied it to their lesbian identity--"lesbians cant like dick", "bi women are tainted by manhood", etc. i always find it kinda eyeroll-worthy when i see all these posts whining about cis and tme lesbians being ever tied to terfs, as though most terf theorists (and i mean radical feminists not your fucking straight conservative british columnist or jk fuvking rowling) WERENT lesbians who directly tied their lesbianism and feminism to hatred of trans women. like genuinely let's start cleaning our own house before sobbing about how it's mean to ever imply that lesbians could be transphobic because Lesbianism Has Always Included Trans Women (which is flat out a lie for a majority of cis and tme lesbians. there are fucking studies man. cmon.)

[feralfawne]

NSFW BLOG AHEAD. Please leave if you are under 18.

Blank/no age blogs get blocked. “I’m an adult/of age/old” does not count.

Some things I post may be completely unrealistic outside of fantasy. It’s just nice to have space for imagination.

this is a side blog - any follow back will come from my main. (fu********wn)

About me

25 ✩ nb high femme switch ✩ devoted loverslut ✩ feral hare ✩ soft bunny ✩ sacrificial lamb ✩ devious little ditz ✩

I adore my guard dog dyke more than anything on this earth.

t4t les4les stone4stone

This blog is NOT consent to flirt with me.

All my posts are about my butch.

Lesbianism takes priority here.

Any mention of dick/cock/bulge is still lesbian dick/cock/bulge (aka strap)

my own posts are tagged #fawn’s a freak , reblogs are currently untagged

❌Men and minors are blocked on sight.

❌Will block on sight if you are: lesbophobic, transphobic, homophobic, biphobic, racist, xenophobic, classist, conservative, “male lesbian”, “bi/pan/omni ‘lesbians’”, ableist, sexist, misogynistic, radfem/terf/swerf, straight.

I’m block happy and I check all my notifs, if your vibe throws me off you’ll probably get blocked. Never sorry for who I block, this blog exists to make me feel safe and happy.

ᶠᵁᴺ ᵀᴴᴵᴺᴳˢ ᴮᴱᴸᴼᵂ ᵀᴴᴱ ᶜᵁᵀ

Let’s talk kink

always practice kink with RACK, SSC and PRICK in mind. having one is good, being aware of and understanding all three is for the best.

kink has always meant to be for fun. kink should not be the active practice of putting anyone/anything at serious risk. if you find yourself falling into darker, more dangerous kinks please seek outside guidance. the conditioning of the mind that occurs when associating depraved actions with pleasure can ruin your life and/or someone else’s if you are taking it serious.

my practices +/or posts are RACK and PRICK content heavy.

this means I'm probably posting about;

Primal -> #primal play

CNC/Somno -> #cnc /#somnophilia

Overstim -> #overstim kink

Biting/oral fix -> #or4l fixation / #vampy bun

Pet play -> #pet play / #puppy butch / #bunny sub

Breath play -> #breathplay

Intox -> #weed intox / #drug intox

TBC

Everything will be tagged appropriately - please block the tag if you don’t want to see that content. Please also block me if you do not like/want to see my content. I won’t be offended, I promise.

Your kink blog will get blocked if you are posting about;

vomit, piss, scat, incest roleplay, CBT, sounding (to each their own, it’s not for me.)

Race play, ageplay w/ underage characters, orientation play/“dykebreaking”, genuine incest, genuine misogyny, genuine abuse, genuine rape, detransition, genuine snuff, beastiality (you deserve to be locked up)

[olderthannetfic]

The only real issue I got with microlabels or new-labels is when they're literally defined in a way to shit on labels who's sexuality the new label is based on. I think 10 years ago bi and pan is the best example, though I still see people using the biphobic and transphobic definition of "Would date trans people, because we don't just care about what's inside someone's pants." or whatever the different variations sounded like, and how people would call bisexuals bigots. Which never made sense when using the "is attracted to trans people." Because... if you not only need a specific label to ALSO be attracted to trans MEN and WOMEN you are kinda saying that trans is a "secret third". But also always made me wonder where's the lesbian, het and gay version of that? The more common and neutral version of Pan that more people seem to use is much less passive aggressive-openly aggressive: Pan don't have a gender preference. Since ya know, bisexuality is considered to be a spectrum where attraction levels can vary.

If a label seems to be built on shitting on another label, or be condescending I feel like those labels ain't shit because being an asshole about how special you are and how shitty you think someone else's label is, is just really childish. If your entire shtick is that you're so much better than everyone else, and that your label specifically is so much more superior then you're just a virtue signalling asshole.

--