#its also why there is no shared queer or trans or gay or etc. experience

[thepileofclothesonyourdesk]

Intersectionality is not like math

It not like being trans gives you +1 oppression and being a man gives you -1 oppression

Intersectionality is like chemistry

you add being transgender to being a man and you get a completely different chemical (experience)

it may have some of the properties of the parts it is made up of, but its ultimately its own thing

and no identity is neutral

Growing up rural vs urban is a part of the cocktail of your experience, even if that isnt something you would bring up about yourself when talking about your identity

[angelkittycore]

not to invite discourse but after i've been on tumblr solely for a few months after leaving twitter i've sorta let go of a lot of things that i was vehemently against and my opinion HAS shifted a bit.

(just saying straight away that you're welcome to engage with me on this topic but i am not seeking to incite arguments, fighting, or heated debate whatsoever and you're not likely to get me to change my mind on this. also if you're going to yell at me for using the term monosexuality please shut up and stay in your lane. if your first thought to reading that word is "bisexuals are being homophobic" then you have a biphobia issue.)

so it's not that bi lesbians/gays don't exist, i think their experiences are very much real. it's just the choice of contradictory labels, and the inherent biphobia, lesbiphobia, and taking self-autonomy from both bisexual men and women by attributing our entire bi rights movement to being a product of terf lesbian separatists, that i have a problem with.

terfs/political lesbians/gold star lesbians did spur an exodus of bisexual women from the umbrella of lesbian, but what came after was all us. and i both feel and think that it was a natural evolution of the communities because bisexuality is more than just women who love women and men, it's also men who love men and women. and nonbinary, abinary, trans, cisn't, gnc, and whatever else. (not to say that the last few aren't also included in monosexuality but i'm talking about bisexuality here.)

attributing the fight for our rights and voices to be heard solely to terfs is ahistorical and insulting. the want to be seen as a whole, valid, separate identity and community than both lesbian and gay has absolutely 0 to do with terfism and similarly aligned political bullshit (such as fascism/white supremacy/plain ol transphobia.)

wanting to go back to lesbian being an umbrella term for all lesbians and bi women feels way too traditionalist and downright conservative (in terms of the literal meaning of the word) for the lgbt/queer community. it's not about challenging cishetalloamatonormativity by simply existing or being unapologetically queer in a word that wants to stamp us out violently in this regard, it's wanting to reclaim a space and label that is no longer theirs because they feel entitled to do so.

to me, lgbt/queer progress is about growing and changing, and adapting to the world, and thriving in spite, and despite it all. and not clinging to relics of the past, however recent or not it was. as some examples, the meaning of asexuality has changed from its original coining. same as bisexual, and pansexual has gone through it's fair share of bullshit as well. why can't and why shouldn't lesbian do the same? however i do not feel that a change backwards is a change for the better.

as an another example, lesbian also used to mean homosexual women exclusively attracted to homosexual women but now it includes every flavor of nonbinary you can think of, who may or may not be women, women aligned, or even feminine at all.

lesbian no longer includes bisexuality under it and that should be okay. lesbian is a monosexual label, and that's okay. you do not experience bisexuality by also being attracted to similar/same genders, regardless of binary or nonbinary umbrella. because bisexuality, inherently, means attraction to similar/same AND opposite/different genders. (note, my descriptions here also includes xenogenders, alternative alignment systems, etc. it's up to the individual if they want to be included in any attraction, including lesbian, gay, bisexual+, and straight. grouping a wider group under lesbian attraction just because they are nonbinary is inventing a trinary and misgendering at worst.)

on the reverse, having a preference, however strong, does not make you a lesbian, or a monosexual gay. you are still experiencing bisexuality, you just have a preference. that is all. not everybody is bisexual, and not everybody is monosexual, and that's okay.

(should also note that comphet doesn't make a lesbian bisexual.. that's comphet.)

anyway tl;dr i think the language, terms, and labels you use you justify your valid experiences is.. not great, to put it politely, lol. i think your insistence that you should be able to call yourself bisexual or a lesbian when you're the other has problems stemming from misunderstanding both labels and attractions, and misunderstanding what exactly nonbinary is. i've also seen definitions of bisexual lesbians that say they are bisexual because they are also attracted to trans women which is.. do i have to say it?

anyway bisexual is not a dirty word or attraction. bi is beautiful, and the convoluted ways people try to get out of identifying as bisexual or solely as bisexual (if they are allo) is internal biphobia, which is not something to celebrate or be proud of. you should work through it.

[vaspider]

'only tenet of TERFism is transmisogyny' EXCUSE ME NO ITS ALL TRANS PEOPLE. They don't want any trans person to exist. What the hell.

Some people just gotta center their own suffering always, even when they're hurting other people by doing so. I've seen this a lot in younger queer folx of all stripes, this need to be the one that hurts the most, you know?

There's a reason the phrase Oppression Olympics exists, and it's because it's a common behavior or phenomenon in oppressed communities. I see it in the disability community, too.

What I think is important to understand when we talk about how trans people suffer under transphobia is that different groups are targeted differently. I'm not the first person to say this, of course.

Now, like, this is very rough sketchy stuff, and each person's individual experiences will vary, but in my general experience, the rough breakdown of the way in which transphobia lands on trans people kind of breaks down like this:

Binary trans women tend to suffer under a lens of hypervisibility. Everything they do is seen, analyzed, and torn apart. Their struggles are generally the ones centered in the arguments of allies, "allies," and transphobes. Even when trans women are the focus of helpful attention, that hypervisibility can cause exhaustion, because they need to perform perform perform, and be perfect, all the time. It's hard for trans women to just be without feeling like they're on camera, all the time. A lot of the time, they are on camera, because trans women's bodily autonomy and right to privacy are just never respected by transphobes (and often by supposed "allies" who feel free to ask the most invasive questions and get upset when trans women won't answer them), and even if they're not literally on camera, they're supposed to perform as the best examples of transfemininity, because if they don't, then they become the next 'look at this bad trans, all trans are this bad trans' example that TERFs point at and use as a broad brush to paint all trans women. If they're not perfect all the time and have a day where they snap at someone while someone is recording, or make a mistake, or anything, it has a horrible tendency to go viral. You can think of at least three instances right now off the top of your head, right? Right.

Binary trans men tend to suffer from hyperinvisibility. This comes from inside and outside the community -- a lot of trans men talk about being told they can't lead in community because they've 'got male privilege,' that their struggles are discarded, that they're talked over and unable to discuss the things they face, which means they don't get the support they need. Now, there are TERFs and transphobes who absolutely do focus their attention on trans men to the exclusion of or to the deprioritization of the oppression of trans women -- that's where we get Tavistock and Irreversible Damage and Fourth Wave Now and all the other bullshit which focuses on the idea that trans men are "transing the gay away," specifically "transing our butch lesbians" and "stealing butches." But again, generally speaking, trans men face harmful levels of invisibility where trans women face harmful levels of visibility. That's why transmascs in general have issues like lack of understanding even by supposedly trans-competent doctors as to how HRT affects our bodies, why trans men (and transmascs in general) report things like transphobes attacking them with transmisogynistic comments and assuming that every trans person online is a trans woman, etc.

Non-binary (here used as an umbrella term for all identities outside of binary man/woman, to include agender, genderfluid, non-binary, and infinite other identities) AFAB people tend to suffer from a different, very specific form of hypervisibility, unless they start to appear too masculine, and then they slip into hyperinvisibility. This is where we get things like "women and non-binary people" that codes all non-binary people as "AFAB people I can sort of squint and view as women," and people who fall into this category tend to get a lot of attention, a lot of derision from all sides of the spectrum. This is the "blue-haired tenderqueer" sneering that we get from both within and without the queer community, where there's an assumption that these people are just cosplaying an identity, that they're not really trans, etc. Having been in the visibility category and slipped into the invisibility category within the last, oh, year or so, and having two binary trans women in my family to compare notes with, the experiences are unnervingly similar. The difference between the experience that those women have had and the experience that I have had is that according to transphobes, I'm a traitor to my womanhood and performing femininity wrong and taking on a fake identity to escape female oppression because I'm not strong enough to bear up under it, but too cowardly to become a trans man, or... something, whereas they're taking on a fake identity to sneak into women's spaces because they're perverts.

Non-binary (umbrella identity etc) AMAB people tend to suffer from their own very specific form of hyperinvisibility, unless they start to present "too feminine", and then they slip into the hypervisibility which affects binary trans women, but with a little different fuckery in which everyone just assumes they're a trans woman, and therefore they get misgendered by everyone across the spectrum of queer/non-queer/etc. Non-binary AMAB people are generally treated like they don't exist, and when they are spoken about, are often discussed in the context of 'they should just admit they're trans women or gay men,' or if they present 'too feminine,' are subjected to the same sort of horrific attention that trans women get.

Again, a lot of this is very simplistic, and doesn't add in a lot of other complicating factors like race, disability, class, etc. Trans men of color, for example, can run into a different sort of hypervisibility because as they move further through their transition, they begin to be seen in the world as a man of color. It's not really mine to speak on beyond that, but I don't want to neglect saying 'this is really really simplistic and there's more to it than that' over and over.

I really hate breaking it down this simply because it feels like creating another binary (our society does like a binary!) for non-binary people, but like, I can't really talk about my shared experiences with other trans people without putting some framework around it. Someday, I'll be able to do that without categories. Wouldn't that be awesome?

I think we do our entire community a huge disservice when we talk about transphobia as if it's a single snake trying to take bites out of only one part of the community, and not a many-headed hydra, able to attack us from multiple different directions. I also think that focusing on one form of oppression keeps us from forming meaningful solidary and coalitions; the more divided we are, the easier it is for the people who literally want us all to stop existing to pick us off one by one. We see this all across the queer community and it's only ramping up as the attacks on our community escalate from without; people tend to turn on the ones closest to them when they get really scared, and to blame the person standing next to them for the pain they're suffering. It's the "close enough to hit" phenomenon, and it's why we see ridiculous things like "bi women make cis men think that lesbians can be won over," rather than acknowledging that bi women aren't the ones causing that: cis men are the ones causing that. The bi women in that case are close enough to hit. Transmascs are close enough to hit. Trans women are close enough to blame for the problems of transmascs, which makes it possible for TERFs to lure transmascs in and attempt to detransition them, subjecting them to gaslighting and manipulation and then using them as sock puppets.

TERFs do focus a lot on transmisogyny. They focus a lot on transmisandry, too. Debating which one is more prevalent and 'worse' not only misses the point, because transmascs and transfems face very different and totally rotten attention from cis society as a whole, including cis queers. We need to like, not do that anymore: we need to give each other the space to talk about our unique circumstances, but we also need to work harder on looking at each other through a lens of solidarity and trying to see that our struggles are different but not unrelated, and that if we keep downing on each other like this, we're not going to get anywhere except in a much more difficult situation as the people who don't want any of us to exist keep picking us off.

[hualian-blessing]

why mcyttwt does not think some (if not most) of the time when it comes to mcc

if i post this in twitter, i’d surely get hated upon but someones gotta have to say this one day. also this does not target to mcytblr!!! this rant is more of towards mcyttwt!!!

remember how mcyt was so chill before all of this shit? how we would watch our favorite minecraters when the community was so small? or how mcc was an event that both ccs and fans can have some fun and entertainment once per month? and that was only last year too. now look at the new generation of mcyt fans and see why some of the old fans dont really associate the new ones.

as a fan of the old gen mcytbers like DanTDM, SkyDoesMinecraft, Aphmau and CaptainSparklez. heck im a fan of pewds’ minecraft series before dream or tommy or ranboo or the new gen of mcyt ccs blew up (a year before them if im correct), and we dont see drama or bad shit all the time when it comes to their content.

now compare that to the new gen where every single fucking day, a bored fan or anti would post shit drama in twitter where some of the people from twitter moved to tumblr just to not get a headache from the batshit craziness mcyttwt brought forth. and it just snapped more when the mccp21 rolled in.

heres some of my takes about the mccp21 issue:

1) “there’s a lack of representation of lgbtq+ in the teams!!!”

heres something to tell yall about that. scott doesnt have a fucking choice. scott smajor has told time and time again, WEEKS before the announcement of teams, that there are certain requirements and limitations to mccp21 thus there will be difficulty in choosing whos entering or whos not. limitations and requirements such as it will be streamed on youtube or how streamers with twitch contracts aren’t allowed to stream or (god bless scott’s good heart) scott not allowing some of the lgbtq+ streamers in joining the special event due to wanting them to have a chance to stream and experience their first mcc (so to those who said that ranboo should have been in mccp21, shut up ‘cuz scott wanted genderman to have fun streaming his first mcc but cant due to ranboo being a well-known twitch streamer). to those who complained that ant and velvet should be in the mcc, stop being selfish and do some actual research on why scott didn’t include them. a simple question to those two’s fans would answer that they can’t make it due to them camping for a week which within those days is the mccp21. they’re having time to themselves, not wasting it on a minecraft championship. 

take in the consideration that, oh i dont know, not a lot of lgbtq+ ccs applied to the event? its not a free invite championship (in fact, mcc has always been like that), it’s an applied with the sufficient and correct requirements kind of event. the artist who created the icons from the previous mcc for the teams said that scott let in some of the new ccs in last minutes due to lack of applicants not meeting the requirements thus not having custom artworks for the teams if they want to announce the teams in time.

2.) “there’s no lesbians or trans in the teams >:(((”

sadly enough, there’s not much of the players from the lgbtq+ community but to say there’s no trans people in mccp21 is utterly false. by definition, trans mean  denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender does not correspond with their birth sex. other genders such as non-binary, genderfluid, androgyne, bigender, gender expansive all fall under trans. you define yourself with the gender you personally chose and comfy with from you birth gender. so saying there’s no trans in the teams when there are players from the event like eret or sqaishey who are nb and genderfluid respectively are there to also represent not only the sexuality but also the gender identity of others??? like c’mon, please make sense mcyttwt. 

also, while its sad to not see lesbians, please know that lgbtq+ doesn’t strictly be defined by lesbians. ffs, lgbtq+ literally means Lesbians Gays Bisexuals Transgenders and Questioning (or Queer but im not too sure about that one) which means that there are still other representatives for the community in the event.

3) “technoblade is in the event?!!! WHAT THE FUCK, HES A HOMOPHOBE/LESBIPHOBE-”

utter clowns, toxic twitter users are. do you really think that scott smajor, an openly gay man, would let a supposed “homophobe/lesbiphobe” in an event that focuses in supporting the lgbtq+ community? do you hear yourself? do you even do research where the joke he made was when he was the same age as me and it was based on a historical article back in WW2? or how he passionately supports the community especially the lesbians because a lesbian couple complimented him to which kickstart his confidence? the man willingly went to this mcc event despite being flamed a lot in twitter because he (and everyone) knows that his chat, his fans and supporters, are literal millionaires. if you saw a stream from foolish where he auctioned canonical characters for funs, a techno fan donated thousand of dollars to get technoblade, and that’s only one fan, now imagine a hundreds of thousands of them.

like it or not, technoblade has always been open about his support to the community, especially that majority of his fanbase are from the same community that mcyttwt allegedly swore that technoblade hates.

4) “since this mccp21 is pointless because theres no dteam, quackity, punz or (insert cc name), let’s have a watch party of the previous mccs to spite mccp21!!!” “let’s hope (insert cc name) stream on the 26th so mccp21 doesnt have the same amount of viewership like before!!!” “where are (insert cc name)??? gosh, this mcc is so boring without them!!!”

shut up shut up shut up shut up shut the actual fuck up. are you really seriously hearing yourself? are you willing and proudly boycotting a once in a year special event that is seriously needed by the lgbtq+ community? are you that cruel and selfish to sacrifice a project that helped tons of people just for your sick entertainment and desires? are you that evil to stop others from enjoying and donating to the trevor project? are you that inconsiderate of other ccs that aren’t part of dsmp and calling them boring? and for what? because your favorite cishet streamer isn’t there? oh booofuckinghoo! you’re so fucking petty to even post about this kind of tweets in public.

(edit: did yall honestly thought that without your favorite streamers that the mcc is not worth watching because they aren't there? well let me tell you, im a ranboo fan. ive watched him when he first entered the dsmp and watched him spinning in his unicorn chair for 5 minutes. the boo community waited for so many months for genderman to join mcc yet we didn't even do that kind of disgusting action and behavior every time he isn't in mcc. 8 months. that's how long ive watched him. ive waited 8 months for him to be in the event yet i still watch other povs like tommy's, puffy's, wilbur's, and etc., because it's fun and entertaining to watch them despite the beloved not participating in the games.

if you're that spoiled to not even watch mcc because (insert cc whose not part of mccp21 name here) isn't part of the roster then you most likely have a one dimensional humor because there will always be someone more funny and entertaining than them. i like dsmp don't get me wrong, but i found parrot's school smp funnier than dsmp yet you don't see me insulting both series, do you? learn to keep yourself if you're calling ccs as boring or dull or not entertaining enough due to not having the same big platform as the dsmp members.)

you don’t deserve to call yourself a fan if you’re doing this kinds of actions. in fact, people like you should be kicked out from the mcyt community because your kind of people are the reason why we look so bad from the outside. your toxic and self-entitled to these content creators are the reason why famous ccs like sbi, purpled, tubbo and almost ranboo left twitter/implied strict rules to their subtwts. you drove out an entire friend group that tons of fans found comfort in from the platform and you still have the audacity to this kind of shit? honestly, just leave before you give me a headache.

what im sayin’ is that mcyttwt is one of the worst, if not THE worst, subtwts out of the other subtwts in twitter. having no actual research or evidences or spreading false information is common in twitter where you would have to take what they said with a micro size grain of salt. mcyttwt already ruined the fun and spirit of mcc during its comeback in mcc14 due to the glitch and beta testing shit (ey i still stand for the ranboo beta testing but i know that will be worthless since theres hints of him joining soon in mcc15). if you’re still in mcyttwt, i suggest to get out of there while you still can. we’ll never know if there’s a bigger shitstorm than this in the mcyttwt that may happen in the future.

edit! hi bella again, ive been told by a polite and cool user that not all people from mcyttwt are toxic and/or cruel. im going to clear something up here. ive written this during the heat of the announcement of mccp21 teams. so there's a lot of complains and/or entitled people in the app (you can even see it in my previous post too if you want evidences!) that gave off mostly negative vibes towards the event.

ive seen the cool ones who actually took the consideration for scott's side and the criticism of the lack of representation of other communities within the lgbtq+ umbrella (ive even share some parts of it above so im also a bit upset to the lack of numbers in the community). and some of them are correct about recruiting lgbtq+ creators in youtube but! like i said, it's an applied event and not invitational one, so its up to that content creator if they want to join or not. the amount of cishet in the roster are just those who want to support the cause and/or backups/stand-ins in case scott and noxcrew can't find enough ccs in time!

just wanna clear this up because mcyttwt these days are covered by really cringe fans (ive noticed a pattern of them mostly new ones but there are still awesome new fans (like my irl friend who just joined this year) within the community) that covered the good ones where they enjoy, have fun and share some neat ideas and thoughts to the community within the platform!

when i said to get out of the mcyttwt while you still can, i meant to get out of there to avoid drama (that is really small contrast those who really need to address the issue) and take a break from it. it's still your choice if you want to be surround by it or not or if you want to come back to the app. all im saying is to buckle up for the shitstorm cuz this is not the last time that the twitter side of mcyt will cause negativity to the community.

[garetthawke]

i do get the whole "don't hyper analyze your identity to an extreme degree and arrive at micro labels that individualize your experience to the point you think you can't relate to anyone and only focus on the differences between you and everyone else," its a good post and concept.

but like. i do not like the idea that's present in some of the comments, that anyone who points out differences within the broader community is voluntarily drawing lines, and that all narrower identities are bad and restrictive. some of those lines are drawn FOR us. some of us exist within the broader community and actively get othered by our own community members for our differences.

talk to a butch about their experiences with other community members. talk to trans fems. talk to people with some of these "micro labels" about why they sought out specific other people like them, why they needed solace and community specifically within those smaller identities instead of just within the broader lgbt.

even the letters of "lgbt" are technically micro labels under queer, and exist for a reason. talk to any trans person and ask why its neccessary to have a specific community outside of just "queer." there are needs that quite literally will not be met if we don't have spaces to specifically cater to them. it stands for, at the very least, every large branch of the lgbt+. there are practical reasons why many of us need our own spaces, our own care groups, our own funds, etc.

and i have SEEN people say that we don't need to identify as gay, lesbian, or bi; or to identify as any particular gender other than "nonbinary" or "trans."

theres is absolute poison in the idea that embracing our identities is somehow an evil to be avoided. that having labels is some unhealthy fad.

ANYTHING is problematic when taken too far. there IS a trend, especially on this site, of people over analyzing and taking micro labels to a degree they don't need to, for their own mental health.

but swinging to the other extreme is. literally just as bad. telling people not to have any identity or labels and that they basically only need to identify as "a sexual/gender minority" is beyond fucking stupid and harmful.

its GOOD for people to realize the value of having a broader community and that bonding over our shared experiences is important. but as a gnc nonbinary lesbian it absolutely reeks of privilege to say to us that there is no value in smaller communities/identities, and that we are making those distinctions on our own in the first place. you think cis queer people don't draw those lines FOR us? you think the gender conforming people in the community don't ever treat us poorly?

there is SAFETY in plenty of our sub communities, and you can warn off over self analysis WITHOUT belittling the importance of many of the smaller communities/identities we have. and you can also do it without sounding like the privileged douchebag that assumes we made all those distinctions about ourselves in the first place, instead of having been discriminated against for them.

[soulvomit]

stuff with gender anguish about not fitting in with today’s current gender constructions

From another post I made: I need to talk about 20th century gender norms at some point as a living breathing 20th century fossil and how different it was. To most straight people, being gender non conforming meant gay, trans was on the far end of the gay spectrum, and gay was associated with being socially Not Normal at a time when you had to be Normal to get a white collar job. (The whole Normalhood thing im gonna talk about is VERY connected to mid-late 20th century construction of the white middle class.) Apropos of gender specifically... I’m not sure how 90s/00s genderfluid/genderqueer map to NB, or whether they do. It’s a big reason I am weird about IDing as NB - because it seems to mean something else than my particular understanding of my identity as it was formed in the 1990s. (Another thing is my social world being more people over 45 at this point and also I’m in a hetero relationship.) Part of 90s GQ stuff was that you could identify as a man part time, a woman part time, you could contain multitudes. “Woman-identified person with a male side” was a legit identity within that, so was “man-identified person with a female side.” You could be one person in the streets and another in the sheets. You could be several people in the sheets, especially if you were aligned with kinky culture. (And for a long time... I was.) There was a greater sense in the 90s and early 00s in genderqueerness culture that you could be GQ for no other reason than wanting to be and it wasn’t assumed to be bundled with physical dysphoria or even desire to change your public social identity. Some spaces - like West Coast geek culture and goth culture - had enough flexibility baked in that we didn’t really need to go to LGBTQ culture to explore our identities, and there was a whole geek queer sensibility that was evolving alongside of the broader LGBTQ culture that was definitely its own... thing.  And while people *say* that NB doesn’t mean any one particular thing or any of these things, that’s not always the message I get when visible NBs on TV/in film are almost always at present one very specific image or “type” of person, and that doesn’t resemble me. NB representation on TV amounts to presenting NB as a third gender with very specific codified behaviors (androgynous AFAB person who binds and has body dysphoria).   The message I get is that whatever my experience is, is better described some other way. Also the discourse around relationships with NBs is that a relationship with an NB is necessarily a queer relationship yet having been in relationships in and out of LGBTQ culture, I’m not really sure how to distinguish “a queer relationship.” My relationship is non-traditional in lots of ways and we’re both gender non-conforming in lots of ways though it doesn’t parse to most people because it’s along the lines of stuff that shouldn’t have ever been gendered in the first place. What my partner does not ever question however is his actual gender identity.  The thing is, actually publicly identifying as anything but a woman would create weird problems in my life in terms of social dynamics, and other stuff, and probably an unpredictable series of ripple effects downstream. But - that... just means I’m closeted, right? And closeted doesn’t mean your identity doesn’t exist or isn’t as unreal as someone who isn’t? And what if - as a “shapeshifter” - my relationship to myself within my relationship *is* part of that shapeshifting?  One of the things is that I’m in a heterosexual relationship. My relationship *is* one of my few spots where I’m happy in my skin, let alone happy in the world and I have no complaints with how I’m perceived in this relationship, and part of it is that practically every assumption about my gender is true, or has been true at some point, including the fact that I’m fine with being seen as a woman in the context of my relationship.  It’s in other spaces besides the intimate, that gender stuff makes my skin crawl. My deep interior gender identity is “pixels floating in the ether, which can assume any shape or form.” My gender identity among other people in non sexual friend spaces is “friend.” My partner identifies as a cis het man. I don’t feel like my relationship has any special quality that’s different from queer relationships I’ve been in, other than identities people have. If my partner doesn’t feel our relationship is queer then I don’t feel it is, either... though it’s not exactly *traditional.*  I don’t feel like our relationship is different from our hetero neighbors’ relationships regardless of whatever history I have. I have no way of knowing what my ostensibly-female ostensibly-heterosexual neighbors’ interior identities really are, or what their history is. And because we’re monogamous, it just never ever comes up. Our social world is about half queer and half not so nothing has changed. After decades of only dating people who had LGBTQ identities, and having a particular social world, now I’m with a cis het man from that same social world and nothing really has changed about the shape of my life.   I’ve moved between different spaces my entire life, sometimes I perceived myself as a boy in a girl’s body, but sometimes I didn’t, and don’t. And gender is one of the spaces in which I feel like a chameleon. There seem to be a ton of gender expression based communities that disappeared since the 90s that either disappeared or were erased from discourse and that makes this weirder/harder to talk about.  Another thing is that a lot of the discourse around pronouns (if pushed I’ll say I’m she/they but I am literally comfortable in anything, depending upon context) makes me really uncomfortable. Even in LGBTQ spaces it makes me uncomfortable. There’s the me that my friends know, and some of my family knows, and it’s a big enough world to contain that part of me at this point. I would rather not put my identity under a microscope in any space that matters. It’s weird but I wish I could just be “they” in the work, creative, etc, spaces, without the loading of what “they” means. I wish it meant nothing about the people who love me, or who I love, or how I love, or how I live my life, besides what pronoun I use. But it doesn’t mean nothing. That is why I hope more cis identified people will actually identify as they in the public sphere. There are plenty of spaces in the public sphere that I don’t think should be gendered at ALL. My wanting to be a “they” is in some ways more about wanting public anonymity and having formed my sense of self - at a tender time - online, than about my gender identity. Which means I’d be potentially appropriating “they” from people for whom it IS a deep identity, and yet... haven’t I spent half of my blog talking about how I’m not exactly the gender identity I advertise?? Haven’t I spent a long time up to now advocating for “they?” Isn’t feeling like a they, evidence that I’m a they?  And the thing is, this is such a YMMV issue and the problem is that EVERYONE has competing access needs with EVERYONE ELSE. Anything one queer person wants or needs seems to oppress some other queer person, and it sucks. But sometimes I wonder if I even need to just recognize how cis het passing my life is and acknowledge my privilege. The thing is though at that point... is it how much oppression we’ve experienced or are currently experiencing, that alone makes our identity? That’s as silly an idea as saying I’m less of a Jew because I haven’t personally experienced a hate crime. And yes there’s a lot to shared oppression experiences forming group identities, but I’m not talking about group identity. I’m talking about personal feelings of identity.

[flying-elliska]

Just binge read the Bone Season series by Samantha Shannon and !!!!!! amazing. Now I want to yell about it for a bit, bear with me (essay incoming sorry)

- the concept already, urban fantasy dystopia, just feels both so fresh and so obvious it's surprising it's not more of a Thing, and the world building is next level. the modern technology + Victorian aesthetics is not just cool (although it is) it evokes the fact that Victorian England was a brutal, very unequal and fucked up society, so it really fits a dystopia. Plus Scion is also an evil empire that invades other countries, which is also thematically relevant, as is the fact that the MC is Irish.

- I'm obsessed with the concept of a magical mob and Underworld (unsurprisingly) and people who are pushed to the margins of society because their very existence has been outlawed and bond together to find freedom but are also forced to exist in a state of constant brutality and the damage it all does

- the first book throws a lot of plot and world building at you in ways that can be a bit overwhelming and confusing, and doesn't give you a lot of time to connect emotionally to the characters, so that took me a while, but it's really worth pushing through for, i love them all now.

- I love the main character, Paige, so much. she's a survivor ; clever, witty, action oriented and very down to earth ; she's also very competent in ways that feel earned, and interestingly flawed, not some gratuitous emotionless Strong Female Character with plot armor or a 'not like other girls' complex. She's proud and she has a mean, ruthless streak. She's brave, too loyal for her own good, and impulsive to the point of recklessness, and sometimes her gambles pay off and sometimes she has to pay a very heavy price for them (it made me yell at the page several times). It's really cool to see a female MC that is so invested in the politics of her world. I hate that so many female mains in fantasy or dystopia are these isolated loners who hate politics, only really care about a handful of people and want to retire to their husband/2.5 kids happy ending as fast as possible, with a plot-line that focuses over personal development rather than political goals, because it sends this weird message that women are not meant to be in the public space. (Not making this into a rant about the Shadow and Bone books but lol I could)

Paige has to shoulder massive burdens that nobody in their right mind should want and that's understandable, but you do get the sense that she enjoys being a criminal, running free and scheming and climbing over roofs and outwitting her enemies and sticking it to the government. She doubts herself sometimes, worries about people only valuing her for her powers, but she doesn't have a lot of time to waste on self-consciousness, angsting or moping about her feelings. It's very empowering to read. And she's fiercely compassionate in moments where it's actually very dangerous for her to be. She has this constant struggle between the part of her that finds injustice intolerable and the part of her that is grimly pragmatic. This is exactly what women in fiction have been excluded from for too long, complex dilemmas about action and morality taken seriously, not just love triangle shit. It's great. Although wow does she deserve a break. Ouch. Baby </3

- the world is incredibly fucked up but there seems to be no sexism/homophobia/racism, which is refreshing to read. the main romance is m/f but there's a lot of ambient queerness, just because and not to 'make a point' ; the author has confirmed that the MC is demisexual, her bff is gay, the love interest is pan, there's a badass trans commander/mob boss, you get randomly informed that this henchwoman has a wife or that this mobster is trying to save his boyfriend, it's great (and it's not a word-of-god after the fact thing like jkr it's actually shown on the page, they just don't use any labels)

- the main romance is a slow build that is very low-key at first, enemies to reluctant allies to friends to lovers, but becomes really powerful over time. the fact that the MC is demi means it can't rely on 'omg so hot i can't stop thinking about him!' clichés - nothing wrong with attraction at first sight but it often leads to lazy storytelling and irritating instalove, tell over show romances. the characters are drawn to each other but it's more of a meeting of minds and souls at first, admiration and common goals, and their actions are still first and foremost guided by strategy, not sentiment. (sidenote I've often wondered if i wasn't at least a little demi myself. that would explain why i have such high standards for credible romance lmao.) also there's a significant power imbalance at the start but it gets very much deconstructed before anything can happen and it's an interesting negotiation. Warden could easily have fit in the 'brooding immortal douchebags' category but there's an alienness and gentleness to him that lifts him above that, along with the respect and space he gives to Paige and their shared experience of trauma and hopes for a better world. Her hot-headedness and his calm, deadpan sort-of-humor play off each other really well. Also I love the idea that develops over the series that their connection isn't a distraction from their fight but that it makes them stronger and allows them to resist and find solace from the deluge of constant horror that is their world. their whole dynamic in s4...no words. also the second time i read a scene where one character is bandaging the other's wounds and there's touch aversion involved and like, I LOVE that.

- lots of complex different bad guys. some are just brutes, some are sadistic masterminds with superiority complexes, some are deceptive and manipulative and morally ambiguous. love that the Big Bad Guy is a woman - female characters being fully realized means that sometimes, they're just incredibly evil (as long as it's not tied to their gender, i love that). Paige and Jaxon's relationship is fascinating - he's a terrible, manipulative person but i do feel in his own way, he cares about her and wants to see her thrive ; but that's not necessarily a good thing as he sees it as a justification to make her go through awful things. She knows he's awful but she can't get over the fact that he took her in, taught her, believed in her and gave her a sense of belonging and freedom when nobody else did ; she was super proud of being his mollisher and it makes sense it would take time for her to rebuild her sense of self without that, on her own. I like that the ambiguity isn't resolved (it's also a very good illustration of how emotionally abusive parental dynamics can get their hooks in you). The fact that he's aroace really works there too, could have been a lot creepier otherwise and i feel that's really not the point.

- also it's really cool how each book really feels like its own thing, it never feels repetitive, there are huge twists and a shift of focus each time - the penal colony in Oxford in the first, the London Underworld in the second, traveling through England in the third, Paris in the fourth, etc. The pace is pretty breakneck and i wasn't bored for one moment - actually at times i would have liked more quiet moments w the characters. There are two novellas that focus more on that and the second one is an exploration of trauma and recovery that's particularly hard hitting and beautiful. The first book does feel like a beginner novel, it's a bit clunky in terms of exposition, pacing and character development etc ; and there are moments where all the violence and brutality feel a bit repetitive ; but overall the story builds up so beautifully and in so many complex ways it's just really worth it and it's not for nothing i read the four books and two novellas in five days. just have to wait for the next one now though argh

- anyway more people should read it

[posi-pan]

Do you think there's a real way to tackle exclusionist rhetoric? I see so many "well" intended people fall for it because of how eloquent it is, because of how much it makes sense (in the same way people fall for trans-exclusionary rhetoric, radical feminist rhetoric, sex-negative rhetoric [including kink and sex work] and so and so...). I saw some people sharing posts that made very thoughtful and easy-to-follow points that were also really exclusive. Stuff like how "fragmenting" the community was bad and would cause a loss of identity in individuals, and that we're strong in a collective, not individually, and I was like... ok, I get it, that's really valid. Then I open the article and it's a bi person basically dunking on pan and omni people (and other mspec) and I close it immediately 😅 The post has thousand of notes and my mspec ass is baffled that: 1) no one see anything wrong that and "well maybe all those special snowflakes coming up with different words are just bi" and 2) mspec-phobia aimed at anyone who isn't bi is the norm in LGBT+ spaces. How do we even start fighting so much misinformation and bad faith from exclusionist if it seems like people will always take their side? We can't get angry, we can't dare to correct or call some bis on their bullshit, we can't talk about our experiences because "you're just bi" and it feels so very discouraging! Why is "fragmenting the community" bad? Putting people in one big umbrella that might not fit them doesn't sound good either. Why is "we're strong in a collective, not individually" bad? Excluding/ostracizing/erasing/silencing people for not fitting in the "collective" also doesn't sound good at all.

how are more labels "fragmenting" the community? how is that leading to the "loss of identity"? more labels encourage individuality and the exploration and expression of oneself. more labels enrich the community.

the only that fragments the community and leads to the loss of identity is trying to force everyone to be the same. when you try to shove people into boxes they don't want it creates tension and bad blood and creates divides. when you try to shove people into boxes they don't want you erase and encourage them to hide or repress or deny their actual identities.

like do people not care about queer history? they are literally advocating for the same things that were done to them/others. there was a time when bisexual wasn't included in the overall community name or event titles etc. it was just gay and gay/lesbian. that didn't encourage community and solidarity between gays/lesbians and bi people. it didn't make bi people feel part of a collective. it made bi people feel erased and unimportant and left out and misunderstood.

and that's not even getting into the fight to include trans and nonbinary people, because certain people had the exact same idea about inclusivity and expansion.

restricting self-expression/identification and trying to cram everyone into a few preapproved boxes regardless of how they actually feel about it is what fragments the community and destroys identity. prescriptivism and assimilationism harm the community; not people daring to define their identity on their own terms.

my take on how to tackle exclusionist rhetoric is posts like this, others on my blog, other blogs and accounts like mine.

exposing it for what it is, showing its roots in the narratives that queer people generally know are bad and damaging, pointing out how they're regurgitating that and repeating history, challenging it in whatever way you're comfortable with (my way is usually indirectly so i don't have to actually interact with queerphobes), and/or boosting it when other people do the same.

basically spreading accurate information however, whenever, and wherever you can. the more you do that, the more other people will see it and share it and take it in.

i don't think you can reason with exclusionists, because in my experience they actively reject any attempt at educating them and will see what they want to see even if they do read anything you send them,

but spreading accurate information can help other people not fall for exclusionism. like you said, a lot of it is purposely disguised in language that sounds reasonable, so reaching them before the exclusionists do or while they're still open to the idea of the exclusionists being wrong is always helpful.

[i-did]

If you dont mind me asking, I'm really curious about your opinion of kevaaron as its growing increasingly popular. From the perspective of pairing a (bi?) guy with someone who is homophobic in canon. Often times it seems like Aaron overcoming his homophobia is rushed so that him and Kevin can get together.

Hey! So this is actually a very interesting ask because it shows how prevalent fanon is, that even you anon have stated that Kevin is bi and aaron is homophobic.

Aaron's homophobia is complicated but in my opinion there, especially considering it is 2006 and he is a straight guy. He definitely shows signs of being the "I'm not homophobic just don't shove it in my face/do stuff like that so public" type of homophobia. He is often HC as ace, sometimes ace/aro to combat this flaw and make him more likeable in a similar way people do with Kevin's homophobia.

Thats right! Kevin is probably homophobic! He never says a slur like seth, but going off of context he is about the level of homophobic as aaron, but in a much more dismissive rather than disgusted way. He says "it would be best for neil to remain heterosexual" (not a direct quote but you get the idea) this line is often used as evidence that kevin is bi in a similar way that Aaron's discomfort is used as evidence for him being ace. This type of dismissal and belief that being queer is a choice, is harmful. I've been told by a family member to stay in the closet because my life would be easier, and thats by someone who doesn't think its a choice.

Ace aaron isn't nearly the level of fanon as Kevin is bi is. But the other common HC of kevin is that he's ace/aro as well.

Again, as always, people can headcanon and interpret and interact with canon however they want. I think its just good to notice the line between fanon and canon. Fanon is inherently self indulgent.

I like to keep Aaron straight and homophobic because I think its important to show, and how people who are homophobic aren't secretly gay/bi the whole time trope. Also, ace people can be homophobic. Anyone can be homophobic. Its mostly straight people, but lesbians, bi non-binary people, ace women, gay men etc can be homophobic. Each group of queer person experiences homophobia uniquely, lesbiphobia is not the same as mlm homophobia, which is often based in femphobia, misdirected trans misogyny, and misogyny. And in fandom/media mlm homophobia takes on a whole entire form of fetishization (which isn't always inherently sexual).

Now! For my opinion on kevaaron.

I dont like it lol.

People can like what they like but personally if I don't like something I filter the tag and I have kevaaron filtered because I don't want to see it.

I think there is over emphasis on mlm ships with no chemistry over wlw ships that are arguably with more chemistry.

Overcoming your internalized homophobia is a real thing a lot of gay men have to face. And its hard, its really hard. And its not a thing to be rushed. A lot of peoples first gay relationship is really unhealthy because of this, dating someone who is closeted or freshly out, or being closeted or freshly out yourself is taxing.

Aaron and Kevin have less chemistry than renee and dan, (nora originally mentioned wanting them to maybe have something between them)

Most ships with aaron in my opinion seem to be based in the fact that it would be so cute for this short grumpy boy to be with someone so much taller, it also seems like a work around a lot of times with andrews trauma because you have his twin there.

Ships with aaron and matt are kind of funny to me because about all they share is a history with drugs. That's about it. Aaron is grumpy and matt is... actually not as sunny as fandom depicts him he's a lot more chill and less bubbly in canon but eh thats not really based in anything bad besides simplifying characters for fics and fandom.

I've never read a kevaaron fic but I wouldn't be surprised if they are rushed feeling like you said.

I still have internalized homophobia lol, and I've been out for 6 years now. its not an easy thing to undo.

Again I will state fandom is inherently self indulgent, I just also think that the core messages of the canon shouldn't be ignored and that people shouldn't say x charcters doesn't even have that flaw in canon. Characters are always multi faceted and complex if they're well written. They don't always have to be likeable. That's what makes them good, makes them foxes.

Its okay to like a character who is homophobic in canon and HC what you want, i have so many ideas for seth who I love, but I also want to make sure I dont fall into the "psych he wasn't a real homophobe-he was queer the whole time!" Trope because it inherently blames gay people for the homophobia they experience by making it a inter community issue where gay people just need to learn to not hate themselves, and "hahaha wouldn't it be so funny if this homophobe was gay, that'll show him" as if being gay and hating yourself and others is... a good thing to wish on others and the gay community. The truth is some, in fact most, homophobes are straight people.

That being said I have a headcanon that kevin is bisexual, aromatic, but is with thea his whole life despite neither of them not being very happy but content enough, he never realizes hes aro or bisexual, and it follows basically Nora's EC after that. And aaron is straight and haloy with kaitlyn but sometimes wonders if he held on so tightly and married her just because he already put in all that effort and not to prove his brother right when breaking up with her, but thats only when he's depressed otherwise he's happy and chillin.

There is a very low number of openly bi men compared to openly bi women "how many men would be bisexual if we let them" is a cool quote from tumblr, and an accurate one.

My headcanon isn't a happy one but in my opinion fits with canon pretty well which is why I like it. A lot of people don't ever fully find out who they are. That's the reality, and my fandoms elf indulgences are me giving myself more realistically canon "content" in my opinion. Thats how I self indulge but not everyone has to.

People who like kevaaron or aaron and matt, do you show the same support for renesion? For dan and renee, dan allison ? If not, why? They have the same level of chemistry, if not more.

Just some questions to wonder why you ship the things you do and why the bar for mlm chemistry is so much lower than it is for wlw chemistry.

[not-poignant]

if you dont mind answering, you seem queer and well educated and I have a lgbt question. Why is being a "gold-star" gay or lesbian offensive? I'm a lesbian and only've been with girls but someone said that calling yourself a gold star lesbian is biphobic. I dont understand why. I wouldn't think worse of anyone for having been with multiple genders, bisexual or not. For me its just a two truths and a lie kind of fun fact about me. do you have any insights you'd be willing to share?

Hiya!

I am, unfortunately, familiar with this term. And tbh, I’ve only ever heard it used pretty much exclusively in ways that were actually intended to be passive aggressively (or aggressively) biphobic and transphobic. I’ve mostly heard it used by TERFs, tbh. And it didn’t occur to me anyone would use the term for literally any other reason. So I’m going to talk about the myriad ways they can be taken to be biphobic (and transphobic). I’ve literally never seen it used by men, so I’m not going to address that side of things. I have, however, literally been on the receiving end of vicious biphobia by lesbians who used terms like this.

For those who don’t know, the term usually has one of two meanings: A woman who has only ever slept with women, OR in TERF circles, a woman who has only ever slept with women and never transwomen. There’s your instant transphobia, by the way.

The first thing to point out is why make it a merit or award that draws an arbitrary line in the sand about which lesbians are worth gold stars and which ones aren’t? Why not just say ‘I’ve never slept with men’ or ‘I’ve never had experience with men and I’m not looking to’ or ‘I’ve only ever been with women’ etc.

The term itself is insidious precisely because it awards merit and therefore suggests everyone else who doesn’t meet that criteria does not deserve that merit or the metaphorical gold star. 

It is inherently, a judgemental term.

But specifics:

1. Women who’ve had sex with men and are lesbians, are still lesbians. Therefore, to imply that women who have never slept with men are somehow better or more deserving of a gold star is offensive and shitty to literally every other lesbian out there.

2. It implies a narrative where women who sleep with women are more pure, more deserving of reward or more deserving of gold stars than women who sleep with women and men. Aside from the fact that this implies really fucked up value judgements towards only ever sleeping with one gender (if you’re proud of it, fine, but don’t talk about it in a way that insinuates judgement upon others, like ‘I’ve only ever slept with women and I’m glad’ is different to ‘I’m a gold star lesbian’ which implies you’re somehow at the top of the tier and better than the others; you’re not), it also implies that any wlw who isn’t a gold star lesbian is less desirable specifically because of their sexual experiences. That’s gross.

3. Since TERF lesbians use this term to also mean ‘have literally never touched or been near any kind of penis’ it automatically excludes many trans women as well. This is transphobia. There are plenty of lesbians who have penises, and plenty of lesbians who love those women who have them. They’re still lesbians.

4. Finally, as an aside, it also makes it harder for rape victims in lesbian communities to speak up about sexual assault. The idea of the ‘gold star lesbian’ is so rooted into shitty conceptions about purity and status that a lesbian may not be willing to give up her status and reveal that she’s been assaulted by a man. You might say this is outlandish, but I have known it to happen, especially in the dark ages when the term was sadly more common. Because you know what, some people will literally say that you’ve lost your ‘status’ via sexual assault. And that’s because the term itself is inherently judgemental, and designed to create an exclusive club from which you can look down upon others and know they don’t have the same ‘gold star’ you do.

It’s far more mundane, and far healthier, to literally just say: I haven’t slept with men.’ That’s it. Done. You still get to keep your two truths/lie fun fact, and you can turf the weird judgemental gross phobic ‘gold star’ part into the bin where it belongs. Even if you never ever mean to hurt anyone else with it, you’re using a term used for more than one kind of phobia knowingly by many lesbians for a very long time.

Incidentally there are more reasons why this term is considered offensive in many parts of the queer community. I’ve just included the ones I’ve encountered, or have seen, but there are tons of articles about it.

[thespacenico]

Hi! I just saw your post about asexuality and wanted to share for a sec!! I'm a trans queer guy who happens to be ace as well. I've not thought about it much actively, but I've never really considered myself as part of the lgbt community for my asexuality mainly because it's something I could keep to myself. Being trans was obvious for a while and will always impact me visibly. If I'm in a queer relationship, that's visible. Both have brought me far more strife than my asexuality (although with what you mentioned in your post, I'm sure my situation factors into that). I guess I've always separated my identities; if I want to talk about ace stuff (which is rare, to be fair) I'd go to aspec specific spaces. Otherwise, I go to more generally queer spaces. I mean this in a fully respectful way because I'm interested, but why do you group your "aceness" with your lesbian identity? I have interacted with other ace people outside of the internet and their perspectives wildly vary. I will say anecdotally that the "het" aces I know that consider themselves lgbt for their asexuality often speak over me on queer and trans issues. Personally, I feel there exists a deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination which is part of why I don't immediately consider my asexuality as lgbt or those heteroromantic people as lgbt. In another regard, asexuality obviously is a sexuality (as you mentioned), but I've found with the way my identity blends together, it just makes more sense to talk about that specific part of it with other ace people. I think I see the ace spectrum as a separate thing to measures of the types of people I'm attracted to and the type of person I am. Levels of attraction vs. identity and types of attraction in terms of identity, ya know?? I hope this doesn't sound aggressive!! I really want to hear more about your perspective as a fellow ace person. Most ace people I do regularly speak with who see themselves as lgbt choose that community because that's where they first learned about the label. Feel free to disregard all of this because I know it's long!!!

hi! thanks for sharing! you brought up a lot of good points so i’m gonna try to acknowledge/respond to all of them best i can! for the record, i think it’s worth pointing out that we’re both ace, but since it’s a spectrum there’s a really good chance that even we don’t experience it the same way, which is why discussion amongst the actual asexual community is super meaningful compared to discussion amongst allo people who have a very limited knowledge of asexuality to start with. all that being said, here’s my perspective on things! 

I've not thought about it much actively, but I've never really considered myself as part of the lgbt community for my asexuality mainly because it's something I could keep to myself. Being trans was obvious for a while and will always impact me visibly. If I'm in a queer relationship, that's visible.

that’s fair! i agree that it’s something we can keep to ourself, but why do we have to (or choose to) keep it to ourself? the why probably differs for most aspec people. in my case, i’m pretty vocal about my asexuality (on twitter at least), but in real life where i’m surrounded by straight cishet allo people, i keep it to myself because they wouldn’t understand it in the slightest, many of them would think i’m just trying to be special, etc. not only am i assumed to be straight (i’m not), but i’m also assumed to be allosexual (i’m not).

visibility is an interesting topic too because i think that’s when we veer into conversations about things like “straight-passing,” “cis-passing,” etc. at home i’m mostly still in the closet, but my identity is still very much real. it may not always be visible, but it’s definitely there! a visibly queer relationship is just one way our identities are put on display. but even then, sometimes two lgbtq+ individuals can be in a relationship and it’s not visibly queer — for example, two (or even one) bi people in a m/f relationship. to people outside of the community especially, it doesn’t look like a queer relationship, but it very much is.

all that to say, asexuality often isn’t visible per se, but there are many other identities that also lack visibility under certain circumstances, in a sense. that’s why i don’t personally consider visibility very much!

Both have brought me far more strife than my asexuality (although with what you mentioned in your post, I'm sure my situation factors into that). I guess I've always separated my identities; if I want to talk about ace stuff (which is rare, to be fair) I'd go to aspec specific spaces. Otherwise, I go to more generally queer spaces.

i can’t speak on your trans/queer experience specifically (and i’m sorry for the trouble people have given you for them), but this is also where i would personally say that just because asexuality doesn’t cause you as much strife as your being trans/queer, doesn’t mean that it’s not important or any less valid as part of your overall identity. asexuality aside for a moment, the lgbtq+ community has been historically oppressed and discriminated against, basically even before its official inception. this may not be realistic, but let’s say that 100 years from now, we're finally free of that oppression/discrimination. we don’t suddenly lose our place in the lgbtq+ community, do we? oppression doesn’t have anything to do with the validity of our respective identities, if that makes sense. other identities aren’t more or less valid depending on how oppressed they are. that’s my opinion on that! and like you mentioned, i think our personal situations definitely do affect our experiences in general. 

when it comes to talking about ace stuff, i think the point is that lots of us within the lgbtq+ community sometimes separate our identities in different ways, even those that aren’t ace, because there are often specific spaces within the community itself. sometimes lesbians need lesbian specific spaces, sometimes bi people need bi specific spaces, sometimes trans people need trans specific spaces, etc. it’s always much easier and more validating to talk to people who share your experiences. like you said, there are also aspec specific spaces! and yet, everyone within one of those specific spaces can have very different identities. as an ace lesbian, i might engage in a lesbian specific space without ever needing to talk about my asexuality, or engage in an aspec specific space without ever needing to talk about my lesbian identity. i’m not necessarily talking about every part of my identity all the time, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there. 

I mean this in a fully respectful way because I'm interested, but why do you group your "aceness" with your lesbian identity? I have interacted with other ace people outside of the internet and their perspectives wildly vary.

i think that for me specifically, i feel like my asexuality plays a veeery big part in how i experience attraction in general. i used to id as bisexual, but after a while i realized i wasn’t attracted to men at all and so began to id as lesbian. it wasn’t until then that i realized i was also ace, and that honestly threw me for a loop because for a while it made me wonder if i was bi after all (i’m not, but i thought about it for a while!). technically speaking, there are other labels i could use to describe my attraction, such as sapphic asexual or homoromantic asexual, although i think for the latter sometimes it depends on how a person feels about the split attraction model and how it can be applied. 

either way! it’s my experience that asexuality significantly influences how a person experiences attraction compared to allosexuals. i’d say that’s the main reason i “group” my aceness with my lesbian identity, because to me they’re intertwined.  

you’re right though about how the perspectives of ace people wildly vary! it’s super interesting to hear from other ace people what their thoughts are. i think for me it comes down to the fact that some ace people may not need a space specifically for their asexuality, and that’s okay! like you’ve mentioned, they typically don’t experience the same level of discrimination, at least not in the same ways, and sometimes it wholly depends on the kind of people you’re around and whether or not you’re out. many ace people do experience discrimination though and desperately do need that space, and i don’t see why the lgbtq+ community shouldn’t be for them as well, considering. there are certainly differences between issues involving asexuality and other identities like gay, lesbian, trans, etc. but there are differences between issues involving specifically those identities as well, and certain similarities between all of them.

I will say anecdotally that the "het" aces I know that consider themselves lgbt for their asexuality often speak over me on queer and trans issues. Personally, I feel there exists a deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination which is part of why I don't immediately consider my asexuality as lgbt or those heteroromantic people as lgbt. In another regard, asexuality obviously is a sexuality (as you mentioned), but I've found with the way my identity blends together, it just makes more sense to talk about that specific part of it with other ace people.

i know how frustrating it is to have people talk over you about issues that directly impact you and not them, and i’m sorry you’ve had to deal with that. i do think however that this sort of thing happens even within the lgbtq+ community all the time. this is in no way a justification or excuse for the people who have spoken over you, but just a comparison. i’ve seen tons of conversations (usually on social media) where lesbians will speak over bi women on bi issues, non-lesbians will speak over lesbians on lesbian issues, cis people will speak over trans people on trans issues, etc. it’s frustrating in any case, and it typically has to do with the fact that there’s a certain level of ignorance for almost everyone when it comes to an identity that’s not theirs. (am i making sense??) i even see allo people speak over aspec people on ace issues all the time as well. tldr - i’m not saying there’s not a specific underlying issue with the “het” aces who have spoken over you on those issues, but you can definitely draw comparisons to certain circumstances elsewhere within the community.

i 100% agree with your point that there is a much deeper systemic issue regarding trans and queer discrimination than ace discrimination. i think my view on that pretty much goes back to what i said earlier about how i don’t think discrimination or oppression determines the validity of an identity as an lgbtq+ identity. regardless, like you said about how you feel that it makes more sense to talk about your own asexuality with other ace people, i think sometimes it just comes down to how we perceive/experience our own identities! i often feel more isolated due to my asexuality more than i feel isolated due to my being a lesbian. that may not be the case for all aspec people, but it really impacts me personally.

I think I see the ace spectrum as a separate thing to measures of the types of people I'm attracted to and the type of person I am. Levels of attraction vs. identity and types of attraction in terms of identity, ya know??

that’s also fair! i think in my mind it’s just that aceness is part of my identity/is its own independent identity regardless of who i’m romantically attracted to. my asexuality would still exist whether i’m also a lesbian or not. i just happen to personally combine my identities (aka ace lesbian) because they’re both there and they influence each other. 

Most ace people I do regularly speak with who see themselves as lgbt choose that community because that's where they first learned about the label.

i’m glad you brought this up at the very end too!! i first learned about the label from the lgbtq+ community as well, but it took forever for me to realize that it described me. in my experience, asexuality is crazy misunderstood both in and out of the community. it took me weeks to months of doing my own research on asexuality to understand what it really is, and even then that there’s a spectrum. in regards to everything about this post, i think where an ace person falls on the spectrum might be a big factor that plays into what their experience is like and whether they feel they need a space like the lgbtq+ community. either way, the fact that most people first hear about asexuality from the community and the fact that we have our own flag and everything really speaks to all this. why not choose the lgbtq+ community since it’s already here, that’s where asexuality is often talked about, and that’s where people understand what it’s like to experience attraction that differs from the norm? 

anyway those are my thoughts!! it’s nice to be talking to someone else who’s actually ace rather than feeling like i’m having to preach to allosexuals who don’t think my asexuality matters period :’)

[writingwithcolor]

Find your next diverse read! (WWC Reader Publications)

We asked you to tell us about your publications to have it featured on our page, so here we are! These are the ten (10) books submitted to us written by Writing With Color readers. Thank you for sharing your lovely diverse works. Folks who missed out on this shout-out or haven’t had their works released just yet, look out for more submit requests in the future! 

Book Titles 

The Apprentice Sorceress

Change of Address

Eight Secret Nights

Firebreed

Illusive: Need vs Want

Inspired

The Language of Flowers

Rescues and the Rhyssa

The Sleeping Seer

The Unlikely Tale of the Royal Elite Squad

Book Descriptions

Title: The Apprentice Sorceress

Author: E.D. Walker | @beth-a-saurus

Series: Yes. Stand-alone Series.

Buy: Amazon | Goodreads

Premise: A lady would never practice magic…until now. Using magic could destroy her reputation, but denying her powers could get her killed.

Themes/Elements: Orphans, nobility, fake relationship, a ball

Main Character (MC) Race/Ethnicity: Mixed Race - Black and White

Other Diversity: Trans boy love interest

Title: Change of Address

Author: Jordan Brock | @anauthorandherservicedog

Series: No

Buy: Goodreads | Amazon 

Premise: Disabled veteran Michael Baldwin retreats to his family’s vacation home with his service dog, Kaylee, intending to rebuild his life without giving in to his father’s political ambitions. On his first day there, he discovers the local bagel shop – and proprietor Josh Goldberg. Letting someone in is a tall order for two men who can’t trust themselves, but if they have any hope of a future together, that’s exactly what they’ll need to do.

Themes/Elements: Romance

MC Background: Michael (white), Josh (white, Jewish, adopted, ownvoices)

Other Diversity: Queer (gay, bisexual), Jewish family (ownvoices), mental illness (PTSD, anxiety, service dog, ownvoices; also aphasia and dyslexia), physical disability (traumatic brain injury), weight (fat character, insecurity but no fat-shaming, ownvoices)

Title: Eight Secret Nights (short story)

Author: Shoshana David | @rosefyrefyre

Series:  No

Buy: Books 2 Read

Premise: Someone’s been leaving Hanukkah presents on Mara’s doorstep.  Sweet presents – thoughtful presents.  Hopefully her secret admirer is the cute guy who moved in next door and not the creep from 7A.

Themes/Elements: Romance, Secret Admirer, Hanukkah

MC Background: Jewish, White

Title: Firebreed

Author: Aviendha Rounds | @lady-of-the-summer-court

Series: Yes

Buy: Amazon

Premise: The twins Amber and Ember find themselves thrust into a world on the brink of civil war.

Themes/Elements: Young adult, War, coming of age, super rad sword fights, fantasy and sci fi

MC Race: Filipino

Other Characters: Japanese, African American, Mexican

Other Diversity: LGBT characters, mental illness

Title: Illusive: Need vs Want (Novella)

Author: By Celeste-Marie Lyon @celeste-marie-lyon

Series: Book 1 in The Illusive Series (Book 2 is available also)

Buy: Amazon | Nook | Smashwords

Premise: Alyssa was on a well-deserved vacation when she met the lead singer of Djed. The two hit it off immediately but is there more to their attraction? Will Alyssa let down her guard and give Marcu a chance? There may be something stronger than chemistry drawing them together.

Themes/Elements: Romance, Erotica

MC Race: Black

R/E Others: White/Sicilian, Asian

Title: Inspired

Author: Danielle E. Shipley | @outlawsofavalon

Series: Yes; 2 novels, 1 flash fic, and 1 journal published, so far.

Buy: Amazon

Premise: An author’s sudden death means her characters need to find a replacement writer to be their home and tell their stories. 16-year-old Annabelle could be just what they’re looking for. …if she can put in the work to one exacting muse’s satisfaction.

Themes/Elements: The art of writing; imaginary friends; multiple planes of realty; stories within stories

MC Race: Annabelle = African American

Other Characters: Apart from Annabelle and her family, no human* races/ethnicities are specified (*fantastic races like light elemental and cat god, though present and hella awesome, don’t count)

Other Diversity: Both Annabelle and character Uri identify as asexual

Title: The Language of Flowers

Author: Christina Rose Andrews | @christinaroseandrews

Series: No

Buy: Books2Read

Premise: Afghanistan vet and new teacher, Cole Visser, never expected to find himself teaching at his old high school. Which is why when he runs into his old college girlfriend, Zara, and her cute-as-a-button daughter, Angelica, Cole’s life turns on its head. How is he going to reconcile his feelings for the one who got away while trying to build a relationship with his newly discovered daughter?

Themes/Elements: Romance, Second Chance Romance, Teachers

MC Race: White

Other Characters: Hispanic/White Bi-racial.

Other Diversity: LGBTQIA+, disability, mental illness, etc.) Main character is an amputee with PTSD, Love Interest has Depression

Title: Rescues and the Rhyssa

Author: TS Porter | @ts-porter

Series: No

Buy: Goodreads

Premise: Cadan is the king of Nidum star system’s favorite weapon, and his beloved cousin. Her sometimes-lover and main annoyance Sophi captains a smuggler ship. When the king’s children are kidnapped, Cadan knows only Sophi has the skills to help her get them back before full war breaks out.

Themes/Elements: Lesbians IN SPACE, aliens, antagonistic relationship to romance, family both found and blood, love in many permutations

MC Race: Black

Other Races: Chinese diaspora

Other Diversity: Lesbians, Trans characters, Disabled characters, Nonbinary characters, Muslim characters, Polyamorous characters

Title: The Sleeping Seer

Author: Morgan Blue Malory | @morganbluemalory

Series: Yes

Buy: Amazon

Premise: Siblings Luke and Ellie Kakiro are the last surviving members of an ancient line of seers. Armed only with their late mother’s journal to teach them control over a perilous and oftentimes forbidden gift, the two become the target of complex hidden societies and forces not entirely human. Entangled with Lilith, a complicated woman trapped in the modern world and on the run from the same enemies, and aided by Viper Insane, an all-women street-racing gang, the Kakiro siblings journey across the country—and sometimes between worlds—in search of the secrets behind their mother’s research.

Themes/Elements: modern fantasy, magic & tarot, family, the first generation experience, mental illness worsened/complicated by magic, moral dilemmas, society, girl gangs

MC Race: Mixed - Puerto Rican, White, and Middle Eastern/North African Diaspora

Other Characters: Colombian, Mixed - White, Middle Eastern/North African Diaspora

Other Diversity: Bisexual main character, LGBTQIA+ major secondary characters; mentally ill main character & major secondary character

Title: The Unlikely Tale of the Royal Elite Squad

Author: D.A. Alston | @da-alston

Series: Yes

Buy:  Amazon | Character Artwork 

Premise: It’s a coming of age tale about 4 young and very different girls who get paired together for a science fair project. Something goes wrong and they end up blowing up their school. The series follows them afterwards as they try to pick up the pieces of their lives, manage new friendships, juggle school, maneuver through family drama all while discovering new abilities.

Themes/Elements: Superhero, Friendship, Diversity, Life skills

MC Race: Cuban/Puerto Rican , African American , Caucasian , and Pakistani

Other Characters: Creole

Other Diversity: Muslim, Plus size

If you enjoy any of these books, let us know here so the author can see! Also please leave a review on goodreads, amazon, etc. 

WWC Reader Publications - Spring 2019

[star-anise]

do you have any sources on the claims you made? im always willing to change my stance if you have legitimate backing for it haha

So first, I’m sorry for blowing up at you the way that I did. I’m not proud that I reacted in such a kneejerk, aggressive fashion. Thank you for being open to hearing what I have to say. I’m sorry for mistaking you for a TERF, and I’m sorry my response has caused other people to direct their own hostility towards you.

So, here’s the thing. “You can’t call bi women femmes” is pretty intrinsically a radfem thing to say, and I am deeply opposed to letting radfems tell me what to do. I’m trying to write this during a weekend packed with childcare and work. I’ll try to hit all the high notes.

The one thing I am having trouble finding is the longass post I talked about in my reply, that was a history of butch/femme relationships in lesbian bars, which had frequent biphobic asides and talked about “the lesbophobic myth of the bi-rejecting lesbian”; the friend who reblogged it without reading it thoroughly has deleted it, and I can’t find it on any of the tags she remembers looking at around that time. If anyone can find it, I’ll put up a link.

As far as possible, I’m linking to really widely accessible sources, because you shouldn’t intrinsically trust a random post on Tumblr as secret privileged knowledge. People have talked about this at length in reputable publications that your local library either has, or can get through interlibrary loan; you can look up any of the people here, read their work, and decide for yourself. This is a narrative of perspectives, and while I obviously have a perspective, many people disagree with me. At the end of the day, the only reason I need for calling bi women femmes is that You Are Not The Boss Of Me. There is no centralized authority on LGBT+ word usage, nor do I think there should be. Hopefully this post will give you a better sense of what the arguments are, and how to evaluate peoples’ claims in the future.

I looked up “butch” and “femme” with my library’s subscription to the Oxford English Dictionary because that’s where you find the most evidence of etymology and early use, and found:

“Femme” is the French word for “woman”.  It’s been a loanword in English for about 200 years, and in the late 19th century in America it was just a slangy word for “women”, as in, “There were lots of femmes there for the boys to dance with”

“Butch” has been used in American English to mean a tough, masculine man since the late 19th century; in the 1930s and 1940s it came to apply to a short masculine haircut, and shortly thereafter, a woman who wore such a haircut. It’s still used as a nickname for masculine cis guys–my godfather’s name is Martin, but his family calls him Butch. By the 1960s in Britain, “butch” was slang for the penetrating partner of a pair of gay men.

Butch/femme as a dichotomy for women arose specifically in the American lesbian bar scene around, enh, about the 1940s, to enh, about the 1960s. Closet-keys has a pretty extensive butch/femme history reader. This scene was predominantly working-class women, and many spaces in it were predominantly for women of colour. This was a time when “lesbian” literally meant anyone who identified as a woman, and who was sexually or romantically interested in other women. A lot of the women in these spaces were closeted in the rest of their lives, and outside of their safe spaces, they had to dress normatively, were financially dependent on husbands, etc. Both modern lesbians, and modern bisexual women, can see themselves represented in this historical period.

These spaces cross-pollinated heavily with ball culture and drag culture, and were largely about working-class POC creating spaces where they could explore different gender expressions, gender as a construct and a performance, and engage in a variety of relationships. Butch/femme was a binary, but it worked as well as most binaries to do with sex and gender do, which is to say, it broke down a lot, despite the best efforts of people to enforce it. It became used by people of many different genders and orientations whose common denominator was the need for safety and discretion. “Butch” and “femme” were words with meanings, not owners.

Lesbianism as distinct from bisexuality comes from the second wave of feminism, which began in, enh, the 1960s, until about, enh, maybe the 1980s, maybe never by the way Tumblr is going. “Radical” feminism means not just that this is a new and more exciting form of feminism compared to the early 20th century suffrage movement; as one self-identified radfem professor of mine liked to tell us every single lecture, it shares an etymology with the word “root”, meaning that sex discrimination is at the root of all oppression.

Radical feminism blossomed among college-educated women, which also meant, predominantly white, middle- or upper-class women whose first sexual encounters with women happened at elite all-girls schools or universities. Most of these women broke open the field of “women’s studies” and the leading lights of radical feminism often achieved careers as prominent scholars and tenured professors.

Radical feminism established itself as counter to “The Patriarchy”, and one of the things many early radfems believed was, all men were the enemy. All men perpetuated patriarchy and were damaging to women. So the logical decision was for women to withdraw from men in all manner and circumstances–financially, legally, politically, socially, and sexually. “Political lesbianism” wasn’t united by its sexual desire for women; many of its members were asexual, or heterosexual women who decided to live celibate lives. This was because associating with men in any form was essentially aiding and abetting the enemy.

Look, I’ll just literally quote Wikipedia quoting an influential early lesbian separatist/radical feminist commune: “The Furies recommended that Lesbian Separatists relate “only (with) women who cut their ties to male privilege” and suggest that “as long as women still benefit from heterosexuality, receive its privileges and security, they will at some point have to betray their sisters, especially Lesbian sisters who do not receive those benefits”“

This cross-pollinated with the average experience of WLW undergraduates, who were attending school at a time when women weren’t expected to have academic careers; college for women was primarily seen as a place to meet eligible men to eventually marry. So there were definitely women who had relationships with other women, but then, partly due to the pressure of economic reality and heteronormativity, married men. This led to the phrase LUG, or “lesbian until graduation”, which is the kind of thing that still got flung at me in the 00s as an openly bisexual undergrad. Calling someone a LUG was basically an invitation to fight.

The assumption was that women who marry men when they’re 22, or women who don’t stay in the feminist academic sphere, end up betraying their ideals and failing to have solidarity with their sisters. Which seriously erases the many contributions of bi, het, and ace women to feminism and queer liberation. For one, I want to point to Brenda Howard, the bisexual woman who worked to turn Pride from the spontaneous riots in 1969 to the nationwide organized protests and parades that began in 1970 and continue to this day. She spent the majority of her life to a male partner, but that didn’t diminish her contribution to the LGBT+ community.

Lesbian separatists, and radical feminists, hated Butch/Femme terminology. They felt it was a replication of unnecessarily heteronormative ideals. Butch/femme existed in an LGBT+ context, where gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people understood themselves to have more in common with each other than with, say, cis feminists who just hated men more than they loved women. 

The other main stream of feminist thought at the time was Liberal Feminism, which was like, “What if we can change society without totally rejecting men?” and had prominent figures like Gloria Steinem, who ran Ms magazine. Even today, you’ll hear radfems railing against “libfems” and I’m like, my good women, liberal feminism got replaced thirty years ago. Please update your internal schema of “the enemy”

Lesbian separatism was… plagued by infighting. To maintain a “woman-only” space, they had to kick out trans women (thus, TERFs), women who slept with men (thus, biphobia), women who enjoyed kinky sex or pornography or engaged in sex work (thus, SWERFS) and they really struggled to raise their male children in a way that was… um… anti-oppressive. (I’m biased; I know people who were raised in lesbian separatist communes and did not have great childhoods.) At the same time, they had other members they very much wanted to keep, even though their behaviour deviated from the expected program, so you ended up with spectacles like Andrea Dworkin self-identifying as a lesbian despite being deeply in love with and married to a self-identified gay man for twenty years, despite beng famous for the theory that no woman could ever have consensual sex with a man, because all she could ever do was acquiesce to her own rape.

There’s a reason radical feminism stopped being a major part of the public discourse, and also a reason why it survives today: While its proponents became increasingly obsolete, they were respected scholars and tenured university professors. This meant people like Camille Paglia and Mary Daly, despite their transphobia and racism, were considered important people to read and guaranteed jobs educating young people who had probably just moved into a space where they could meet other LGBT people for the very first time. So a lot of modern LGBT people (including me) were educated by radical feminist professors or assigned radical feminist books to read in class.

The person I want to point to as a great exemplar is Alison Bechdel, a white woman who discovered she was a lesbian in college, was educated in the second-wave feminist tradition, but also identified as a butch and made art about the butch/femme dichotomy’s persistence and fluidity. You can see part of that tension in her comic; she knows the official lesbian establishment frowns on butch/femme divisions, but it’s relevant to her lived experience.

What actually replaced radical feminism was not liberal feminism, but intersectional feminism and the “Third Wave”. Black radical feminists, like Audre Lorde, bell hooks, and Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, pointed out that many white radical feminists were ignoring race as a possible cause of oppression, and failing to notice how their experiences differed from Black womens’. Which led to a proliferation of feminists talking about other oppressions they faced: Disabled feminists, Latina feminists, queer feminists, working-class feminists. It became clear that even if you eliminated the gender binary from society, there was still a lot of bad shit that you had to unlearn–and also, a lot of oppression that still happened in lesbian separatist spaces.

I’ve talked before about how working in women-only second-wave spaces really destroyed my faith in them and reinforced my belief in intersectional feminism

Meanwhile, back in the broader queer community, “queer” stuck as a label because how people identified was really fluid. Part of it is that you learn by experience, and sometimes the only way to know if something works for you is to try it out, and part of it is that, as society changed, a lot more people became able to take on new identities without as much fear. So for example, you have people like Pat Califia, who identified as a lesbian in the 70s and 80s, found far more in common with gay leather daddies than sex-negative lesbians, and these days identifies as a bisexual trans man.

Another reason radical feminists hate the word “queer”, by the way, is queer theory, which wants to go beyond the concept of men oppressing women, or straights oppressing gays, but to question this entire system we’ve built, of sex, and gender, and orientation. It talks about “queering” things to mean “to deviate from heteronormativity” more than “to be homosexual”. A man who is married to a woman, who stays at home and raises their children while she works, is viewed as “queer” inasmuch as he deviates from heteronormativity, and is discriminated against for it.

So, I love queer theory, but I will agree that it can be infuriating to hear somebody say that as a single (cis het) man he is “queer” in the same way being a trans lesbian of colour is “queer”, and get very upset and precious about being told they’re not actually the same thing. I think that actually, “queer as a slur” originated as the kind of thing you want to scream when listening to too much academic bloviating, like, “This is a slur! Don’t reclaim it if it didn’t originally apply to you! It’s like poor white people trying to call themselves the n-word!” so you should make sure you are speaking about a group actually discriminated against before calling them “queer”. On the other hand, queer theory is where the theory of “toxic masculinity” came from and we realized that we don’t have to eliminate all men from the universe to reduce gender violence; if we actually pay attention to the pressures that make men so shitty, we can reduce or reverse-engineer them and encourage them to be better, less sexist, men.

But since radfems and queer theorists are basically mortal enemies in academia, radical feminists quite welcomed the “queer as a slur” phenomenon as a way to silence and exclude people they wanted silenced and excluded, because frankly until that came along they’ve been losing the culture wars.

This is kind of bad news for lesbians who just want to float off to a happy land of only loving women and not getting sexually harrassed by men. As it turns out, you can’t just turn on your lesbianism and opt out of living in society. Society will follow you wherever you go. If you want to end men saying gross things to lesbians, you can’t just defend lesbianism as meaning “don’t hit on me”; you have to end men saying gross things to all women, including bi and other queer women.  And if you do want a lesbian-only space, you either have to accept that you will have to exclude and discriminate against some people, including members of your community whose identities or partners change in the future, or accept that the cost of not being a TERF and a biphobe is putting up with people in your space whose desires don’t always resemble yours.

Good god, this got extensive and I’ve been writing for two hours.

So here’s the other thing.

My girlfriend is a femme bi woman. She’s married to a man.

She’s also married to two women.

And dating a man.

And dating me (a woman).

When you throw monogamy out the window, it becomes EVEN MORE obvious that “being married to a man” does not exclude a woman from participation in the queer community as a queer woman, a woman whose presentation is relevant in WLW contexts. Like, this woman is in more relationships with women at the moment than some lesbians on this site have been in for their entire lives.

You can start out with really clear-cut ideas about “THIS is what my life is gonna be like” but then your best friend’s sexual orientation changes, or your lover starts to transition, and things in real life are so much messier than they look when you’re planning your future. It’s easy to be cruel, exclusionary, or dismissive to people you don’t know; it’s a lot harder when it’s people you have real relationships with.

And my married-to-a-man girlfriend? Uses “butch” and “femme” for reasons very relevant to her queerness and often fairly unique to femme bi women, like, “I was out with my husband and looking pretty femme, so I guess they didn’t clock me as a queer” or “I was the least butch person there, so they didn’t expect me to be the only one who uses power tools.” Being a femme bi woman is a lot about invisibility, which is worth talking about as a queer experience instead of being assumed to exclude us from the queer community.

[itcameuponamidnightqueer]

2019 is over and i have feelings

it’s the end of the year and this is mostly filled with rambling half-thoughts, but that’s what you do at the end of the year—you reflect and ramble until it almost turns into something. this is under a read more only because i don’t like clogging up people’s dashes with really long posts, so you know, skip or read at your own leisure.

i don’t really ever do any kind of reflecting that doesn’t come out in the form of fanfiction. i have some feelings, i write a few thousand words about them, i throw them out into the world, and that’s it. i’ll reread my own stuff but i never really think again about what prompted me to write them because it’s over. the feelings are done but the words are memories and that’s all i need, usually.

but 2019 was a tough year in ways that i can’t express in fic, so i’ll just throw out a few thousand personal words and be done with it.

in september of 2018, my sister was diagnosed with breast cancer and i don’t think i’ve really been happy since. most of it isn’t being sad about the diagnosis—maybe a lot of it is and i just need a whole heap of therapy to unpack that—but rather how much the cancer changed. it was very advanced when they caught it and she’s made almost a complete recovery in just over a year, and given how shitty everything was to start, this is the best way a bad situation could have ended. not that it’s over, but you know.

it shifted our family completely. i don’t think it brought us closer, maybe my sister or my parents feel differently, but i don’t. morgie turned inward for maybe the first time in her life and kept us at arm’s length in the beginning. she told us very clearly that she didn’t want the cancer to take over her whole life—she wanted us to act normal and talk about normal things as if this was just a temporary snag.

i’ve had epilepsy since i was fifteen months old. i know what it feels like to do that same thing, to minimize and downplay the experience of a chronic condition. because my epilepsy has, gratefully, been very manageable. i can count on one hand the number of seizures i remember having. i have an annual checkup with a neurologist, she confirms the dosage of my meds, and i say goodbye. that’s it, no problem, see you next year.

(it could be so much worse, they say. you’re very lucky, you hear for twenty nine years.

i am not lucky.)

morgan’s cancer kind of opened the flood gates, i think, and a whole heap of shit came spilling out. you know how you see those posts on here about ADHD or autism and a few captions down the line someone is always like, “wait, you mean not everyone [is like this] or [does that]?” i feel like i’m just coming to realize that about my childhood.

not everyone takes days off of school to go to the children’s hospital—for an EEG, or an MRI, or to get blood drawn, etc. “normal” seven-year-olds probably aren’t managing their own prescriptions. my condition is less severe than many others’ but that doesn’t mean it’s normal. it’s certainly not. i’ve always understood “it’s manageable” to mean “it’s not traumatic”, and only now am i realizing that the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

and all of a sudden, this thing that i’ve been living with for so long, that i thought i had under control, is rearing back with a vengeance. and because i have been taught to be grateful for the “best” of a bad situation, because its mildness has turned it into something we don’t talk about, i draw inward and it festers and rots into shame. i’ve been operating like this since i was a kid and i think maybe i’ve finally hit capacity.

on top of that, i’ve been going through a bit of an identity crisis. i seem to do that every few years—five years ago as ace, four years ago as nonbinary—and i guess it’s time for another one. tbh it’s kind of been scraping at the back of my brain ever since i realized i was nonbinary, because even that didn’t feel like enough, but i didn’t know what would. 

i’ve said it in a few posts over the years (probably somewhere in both of the linked ones), but i personally really like labels. i spend so much of my time with myself (physically, sure, but i mean emotionally) and very rarely ever share things out loud, so how can i know who i am if i don’t find the right words? gay was good to start. ace fit in later, and then eventually it was just queer. and it will probably stay queer, but there are different parts of my queerness that i haven’t named yet, and the ambiguity is making me itch.

i’ve had this post sitting in my likes for about a week now—i identify with it too much to ignore, but it scares me too much to reblog it, and also i don’t want to until i can explain my feelings and fears. transness feels like something i’ve been hiding from for a while—not in a repulsive way. more like that “i’m in this photo and i don’t like it” meme. that thread encapsulates a lot of what i’ve been thinking about and struggling with for a few months: that i don’t feel trans ~enough, but i also don’t feel not-trans. 

everything i’ve been thinking about feels like i’m quibbling with myself over something really small, like how much of a difference would it really make to think of myself as trans...instead of? along with? being nonbinary; why is this a detail i’ve been obsessing over. everything i said in the nb post is still true, except my concept of gender has changed a little since i wrote it. i don’t feel like a woman and i don’t feel like a man, except i also don’t think gender means anything, even when presented as two binary options, so what do i really know? how do i know i’m not a man if i think “man” means nothing?

and i really am thinking about it in the smallest of terms—headcanon-ing characters as trans, feeling drawn to the trans flag over any others. it’s really dumb, that this is what’s triggering a bit of gay panic. what does it matter, i keep asking myself. i’ve seen posts over the years breaking down the stripes of each flag, pointing out that nb/genderqueer identities are already represented, and i wish that were enough but it’s not. it’s so dumb, i keep thinking, to see myself in the whole of the trans flag when i don’t think i belong to the whole transgender experience. and even that sounds dumb, when i hear it—of course there isn’t one whole transgender experience. i hear it, but i haven’t yet listened.

anyway. all of this and a lot of other things have been broiling and rotting inside of me for my whole life probably. i’ve literally never said any of this out loud, to friends or family or strangers. i’ve worn that like a badge since high school—isn’t it admirable, how i can talk and laugh and live without dumping my problems on anyone else. isn’t it better to be accommodating, to keep your burdens from weighing other people down? only you don’t realize until later how tiresome it is to be heavy. 

now that i have all of my fics moved over to AO3, i’ve been thinking about all that i’ve written over the years. it’s just shy of 730k. that’s more than the first five harry potter novels combined, and i’ve never told anyone in my life about it. that’s twelve years and so much of me to keep to myself. but i’ve done it because that’s kind of what i learned to do—my epilepsy was my first and most guarded secret and along the way i guess i learned to do that with everything. it doesn’t help that so many of my interests have been things that are either solitary or a source of “shame”. most of my friends i know through various social media sites. i’ve had this tumblr for nine years and the only people who know about it are other tumblr users.  there is so much more of me than a few hundred thousand words hanging around this garbage dump. 

i don’t know if there are any conclusions here. 2019 was rough, for even more reasons than i’ve barfed into this post. i’m not sure if i’ve learned anything from it; i don’t feel wiser or anything. i feel tired and mostly sad. i wish i could snap my fingers and resolve everything, but if i could do that, i’d already have done it. on top of everything, these are probably my last few months in chicago for a while, but that’s a whole other mountain of feelings to unpack.

anyway, i’m going into 2020 determined to get over myself, maybe find a therapist and a good masseuse.  

happy new year.

[theexistentiallyqueer]

Okay so I’ve been thinking about that really bad Hot Take that’s been circulating about fanfiction. And it’s been kind of simmering in me. The root of the problem with it isn’t so much that it diminishes the quality of fanfiction so much as the way it characterizes two completely different genres of media.

Preface: at no point is this ever, ever, ever a diatribe or condemnation against fanart or the work fanartists put into their work. This is about the value that is ascribed to visual art vs the value ascribed to literary art. I am trying to talk specifically about the denigration of literary art in fandom spaces and the way it’s been recently, in a very popular tumblr post, martyred at the expense of queer and disabled writers and writers of color.

Fanart (as a collective genre, according to that post) - Good, artistically-driven, pure, wholesome. Fanartists draw for the sake of becoming better artists, and every work a fanartist draws or creates is made with the goal of becoming a better artist. Fanartists never draw anything that is base, silly, shippy, or smutty; if there is pornographic art, it isn’t pornographic but Erotica. There is no such thing as low- or middling-quality art, because all artists are striving to sharpen their skills and become better artists, and there are no fanartists who draw just for fun or shits and giggles. Fanartists achieve fame purely on the merit of their own artistic ability. There’s no room to criticize fanartists who attempt to cis-wash trans (or trans pesenting) characters, or fanartists who blatantly, frequently, and with frankly no impunity (as their art is reblogged, and reblogged, and reblogged) whitewash characters of color.

Fanfiction (as a collective genre, according to that post) - Smutty, ship-fodder, audience-pleasing trash. Fanfic writers write for the sake of expressing their inner boners or enacting their internal fantasies. No fanfic writers seek a sense of growth in their writing or work to improve their writing in any way. The only reason any works of fanfiction are popular is because they cater to the readership’s base instincts, and the True Authors, the Really Daring authors who write Real Literary Content, are cast the wayside.

It’s such a two-dimensional view of the situation--and it doesn’t even take into account edited content, such as gifsets, which makes up a huge portion of fandom content and has been a type of content, along with fanart, that fanfic writers have long voiced their (our) upset about getting more active & polarized attention than written works. It presents this dichotic view of fanart good/fanfiction bad. Which is also incredibly ugly and disturbing when you consider the fact that fanfiction is the earliest form of curated fan content, and fanfiction itself is inherently transformative in a way that fanart and edits are not, because fanwork in general, and and fanfiction in particular, is inherently in and of itself the public (fans) themselves overriding the corporate-owned landscape with their subversive interpretations.

Like, I have seen not-good fanart. I have seen bland, unimpressive, generic fanart. There is fanart from artists who don’t have their own unique sense of style. Fanart from artists who are just starting out and haven’t developed their skills yet. Fanart from artists who draw as a hobby, and damn they may be good, but they don’t give a fuck about contributing to The Body of Artistry because they have bills to pay and career interests outside of art, and damn, they’d really rather draw these two characters making out, or blushing at each other, or straight-up fucking, than they would create something of Great Artistic Importance. That art gets so many notes. It is liked and reblogged and shared.

And that’s all valid, because art ISN’T A COMPETITIVE SPORT. I embrace fanartists who draw just because they want to, because they don’t care about quality or artistic ideals or whatever, and just want to draw someone being happy, or sad, or angry, or getting dicked down, or whatever!!! It doesn’t matter. Draw because you want to draw. Because your art is an expression of yourself that speaks of your experiences and transgresses the definitions of the world you’ve been told to adhere to. You make art for yourself, to say fuck the system!!!! We’re just the lucky souls who get to appreciate it afterwards.

The complaints that come from fanfic writers--and yes!!! I am one, so proceed with the accusations of butthurt--are that fanart and edits get more social media attention (in the forms of likes, reblogs, retweets, shares, etc.) than fanfic does.

And it’s a valid complaint! It isn’t rooted in some alien reality that fanfiction is inherently more base and less artistic than fanart. I’ve seen some pretty aesthetically displeasing fanart get a high reblog count. And I’ve seen some incredible works of literary attention get no recs, no likes, no comments. I’ve seen works of middling writers who have a lot of fucking talent and show it in their work, and yeah maybe they write porn, but their prose SINGS, and no one comments, no one shares it, no one makes their love of it public the same way they do the fanart, the same way they do the edits and the gifsets.

It’s rooted in two things:

1. Literature (which fanfiction is a subgenre of) takes time to appreciate. You can look at a piece of art and reblog it without thinking about it. It could be a work on par with the Mona Lisa, and you could still look at it without any aesthetic or artistic sense and say, “Hey, that looks pretty.” But you can’t read without thinking; reading is an active mental pursuit you have to engage with. (If you try to pull out Twilight on this point to fight me, I’ll fight you back. I’ve actively read Twilight. Even reading awful literature takes effort; arguably it takes more effort than reading something good).

2. Literature is hard to market with words, because when you’re trying to encourage other people to read it, you have to use even more words. You have to use words to convince someone to read even more words! Some fanartists draw comics or fanart inspired by fanfiction--I love those artists and they do more for us than they could possibly know--but for the most part, you can’t use visuals to show someone why they should invest their time in reading a thing. And unlike fanart--when it’s a tribute, when it’s a showcase of the character’s or characters’ canonical attributes--fanfiction can’t be green-stamped by creators, because fanfiction is inherently built in narrative, and canon-compliant or not, that opens the legal owners of the property up to legal disputes.

So much easier, then, to focus on fanart, which distribution and publishing companies love because they see free advertising in sharing it, to complain that fanfiction is a dispirited genre of unartistic creators who just want to read the queer version of a bodice-ripper.

And then we get to the question of: why is the bodice ripper so bad? Are you willing to critique Jack Kerouac and Charles Bukowski with the same derision you have for queer writers? Are you going to hold the wish-fulfillment fantasies and introspective examinations of sexuality in relation to gender, race, class, and physical ability written by writers expressing their own experiences as inherently debauched and debased because pornographic fanfiction is popular, but not hold George R R Martin to the same standard? Are you going to criticize the prejudices and disparities and biases in publishing that prevent marginalized writers from being able to break into the industry? 

Are you ready to combat the enduring popularity of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is overwhelmingly a series of heroism tales about shitty and mediocre white men?

Are you going to take aim at HBO for taking a fantasy series that, while still written by a sexist author who has a disturbing fixation on female sexuality has uplifted its female characters as heroes in their own right, and then drove it into the dirt to end on a note with the male “hero” murdering his female lover, an abuse survivor, after engaging her in an intimate kiss?

Did you take issue with the streaming blockbuster Stranger Things only confirming a character as canonically gay--after planning to have her be a straight romantic option for a major character--because the actress is the one who repeatedly badgered the showrunners about how she didn’t feel her character fit that role?

Are you invested in the fact that video games continue to be majority white, majority male, majority able-bodied, and majority inaccessible to disabled gamers?

You want to complain about fanfiction having too much porn and somehow that deligitimizes fanfiction as a genre as a whole?

Fuck off. There are hundreds, thousands even more likely, of other authors of equal skill to you or greater, who are struggling to have their works recognized in fandoms that don’t want to put the effort in to reading them, the effort into sharing and appreciating them. It’s harder to make someone care about a fanfic. You can reblog a fanart, and your followers will see the art itself right away. If you reblog fanfic, they have to make the conscious choice to engage with it. And none of that is your fault, because you can’t control how other people engage with fan content, but you can advocate, vocally, for the fair and equal respect for fanfiction and fan-written content. You can remind people, again and again, how fanfic writers do so much for so little.

But you want to come into my house and compare fanart to fanficton and claim one is inherently better? You’re the Banksy to my Catherynne L Valente, to my N.K. Jemisin, to my Seanan McGuire.

Start understanding the system is built against us all and start understanding why your battle is uphill. What’s oppressing your creative success is a white, straight, cis monopoly on what the good story, what the correct story is, limiting your options, tying you to a narrative you don’t belong to. Queerness and marginalization exist beyond what’s depicted in mainstream media, and fans expressing that through their own written content?

That’s us taking back the corporate-owned narrative for ourselves. It’s self-liberation through the written word. And yeah, some of it is porn.

It’s porn when it’s a drawing too.

[pumpumdemsugah]

NO REBLOGS

You lot just put words together, conflate ideas and instances of abuse together to support a well intended goal by misapplying ideas, historical events and concepts to use in very odd ways stripped of any real context to make it it authoritative

I get its not popular but there has never really been a period in history when people that are trans or have similar experiences generally didn't find community with people that were ...for a lack of better word the same sex as them or also trans. I'm sure there are cases but none of you will be able to name names cause you don't read so leave it out . Given that, why would there be many instances of trail blazers of people in communities that historically they very rarely had a presence in? Other communities, yes! But the way you lot describe it...not common. Vague platitudes doesn't count

What do you lot get from inventing history ???

There's a history of trans men and people who might be understood that way in lesbian bi communities and there's a history of trans women and people who might be understood that way in gay men and bi communities, doing important work, forming connections etc and existing in numbers and some trans specific groups but it's rare to find many historical examples of people that could be understood as trans men in gay men's group and vice versa in any real big numbers, let alone leadership cause they existed elsewhere

There's one white trans woman I can think of that was kinda trying to do shit in one lesbian community in the US but that was not common at all so why imply otherwise?

It's like if people from history didn't live their lives and find community and love in the way that's convenient to whatever arguement you lot are having online you'll literally just make shit up. It's fanfiction at this point and I don't get how that helps

It's literally just not the case and I don't get hanging onto a history that never happened while ignoring all that other shit that did because somebody somewhere might think of people in whatever way like those people will do that regardless

LGBT people of the past and in non-western countries did things and still do things in a way that doesn't neatly fit in with modern gay and queer communities understanding and usage of the idea of gender identity, it doesn't matter how many times you say colonial that doesn't change. Most won't even get regional with which pre-colonial culture they mean because those people don't matter in any real way to them. The non-western people share a single culture they all take turns. Mondays are when all indigenous Asian cultures control the gender

Sexuality has everything to do with sex characteristics 🤷🏾‍♀️ it's not the only thing but saying it's a matter of definition and inclusion is peak stupidity. It's dumber and STINKS of being self serving when the people that say this are licking out the same pussy that way has nothing to do with sexuality🤔😒. Dick and pussy is the way 99% of people understand theirs, experience it and define it. There's lots of room to root out demonisation etc but women that only like pussy will still like pussy if we live in a world without stigmatising people's embodiment because sexuality isn't a measure of inclusion you bollards

This is literally just a bunch of words with lots of different arguements and idea frankensteinly attached together to give MASSIVE amounts of leverage to the the very weak and or incoherent parts of this dribble with things that have with roots in reality