#once again everything is queer

[philiponmycracker]

A study in expressions Tom Hulce edition: Double trouble? Part IV as the latest installment of the Quintessential Tom series featuring some more cute little "parallels"

(Part I) (Part II) (Part III)

[historicallyaccuratecheese]

i’m never getting over how shovel knight decided to make a love story about a socially anxious mad scientist plague doctor bird guy trying to impress a hot goth girl by crafting a potion of unlimited power and then it ended up being the greatest romance ever conceived.

please play these games.

[thelaurenshippen]

and the final member of the original Phantom Pulse:

Cal, "hottest bass player in town", as Bremmer wrote they/them born June 21st, 1974

Music: Bass Actual job: Works at the local recording studio as a low-level engineer. Power: Traps spirits and holds them still with their bass lines.

[wingsofhcpe]

also "teehee we made you think the black heart was for Agatha and Rio but it's actually about Billy and Eddie, fooled ya 🤪" I WILL throttle the writers of this show with my bare sapphic hands

[newtscamandersbf]

im gonna be honest i hate when people use 'which could mean nothing' for a straight couple … like no !!! dont yall already have enough !!! this is for the queers and the queers only the only exception i will make is percabeth !!!

[clowndensation]

wait explain to me the destiel hatred i’m curious what abt it angers u that doesn’t apply to the other two ships

great question! the answer would unfortunately require 3 hours and a powerpoint presentation, so i will try to do a brief summary:

a ship sucking only ever has about 25% to do with the ship itself. destiel is bad in the sense that i think dean winchester is an annoying character that gets treated with kiddie gloves by the narrative, which makes him irritating to see on screen, because i personally dislike it when "men are angry and abusive because they just love too strongly, and don't know how to express it :(" is played straight as a character's primary internal conflict. especially over 15 seasons. it's boring, he's boring, and 35 year old men shouldn't be going to colleges trying to figure out which freshman girls are legal or not. hate him.

however the real sin of destiel, beyond the fact that dean winchester and i have beef that will only ever resolve when i get to reincarnate as the rusty nail that kills him, is that the fans are so so so fucking annoying. like yes the narrative frames dean as a golden boy who can either do no wrong, or "well, i guess he did wrong there, but what about how tortured he is :(" but good god. at least the show isn't trying to convince me that destiel is some groundbreaking lifechanging love story, complete with "omg this moment" montages where they romanticize scenes that feature dean either insulting, threatening, or humiliating cas. like this entire show (post season 5) is dean chronically either infantillizing and attempting to keep cas under his control, or holding him up as the only person he can rely on, thus giving cas expectations that are impossible to fulfill.

and don't get me wrong! people can like a shitty person and a fucked up ship. that's basically everything i enjoy on here. but at least like. acknowledge it. aldfkjalka. and if you're gonna like a shitty person and a fucked up ship, at least write about it in an interesting way. 90% of fic and posts written about destiel aren't even about destiel as presented in canon, they're about two generic men with generic personalities who suffer from the world's most generic tropey problems. cookie cutter ass basic relationship. the high school au of ships. boring.

[moe-broey]

Moe initially going by a direct masculization of its feminine deadname, plus a neutral shortening, hopping between the three depending on presentation for the day. Switching up pronouns as it does. Until finally deciding it needs to shed All Of That and try something completely different, that doesn't have any connection to those names at all. This, too, is a Brunoism. To me. Moe 🤝 Bruno -- men of many names

[billygaysanguine]

im havgin really cool transgender writing ideas like re-writing parts of tlsodm and tdotl to be less transphobic maybe but unfortunately i have no time at all to write any of this and also the schizo symptoms. are preventing me from my notes app

[wikipedie]

I am sincerely considering whether I might be somewhere on the ace/aromantic spectrum, except I don't know where or what

There's multiple people who have told me that they feel the acute lack of a romantic relationship and they really want it. And while I get wanting a romantic relationship, there are times when I do too, whenever they tell me they feel its lack in their life for me it's like... Cannot compute. Literally. For me love is love, and I'm not trying to say it in a condescending manner, but I feel all love so deeply, I genuinely sometimes feel like I might be in love with all of my friends. Like what is there to lack if love is everywhere? Sure there's sex but like...I also don't particularly feel like I need sex. I like sex and sex stuff, but I don't need it desperately in my life.

[theninaproject]

actually i think itd be sweet if elmike still kiss but in a platonic way lol

[selamat-linting]

[aspecbuddie]

trying to fall asleep but so so tempted to write a fic about eddie reading throam when it first came out and remembering it when chris connects to the bluetooth and puts on pretty. odd.

[aughtpunk]

That Time a Published Author Told Me to Un-Queer My Novel

So, I don't think I ever shared this story on Tumblr before.

As you may know I've spent the past ten years turning my old Welcome to Night Vale fanfic into a stand alone novel called Echo of the Larkspur. Now, I haven't been working on it ten years straight. I'd pick it up, do a bunch of editing and rewriting, submit it to agents/publishers, get turned down, put the book away, wait 2-3 years, dust off the book, re-edit and rewrite, etc etc. A cycle that repeated itself far too many times that I would like.

Well, during one of these cycles when I was in the 'get rejected by every agent and publisher I submit to' stage I asked the writing group I was in what I was doing wrong. Because at this point I had reached a hundred total rejections and I was starting to suspect that the issue was with me.

One of the members of this writing group, a male author who was traditionally published, offered to read my first chapter and give his advice on how to fix it. This was, in retrospect, a mistake. But I was desperate. I sent him the first chapter and waited for his response.

Folks. The email he sent me changed my life.

First he said that agents wouldn't publish my novel because it was Sci-fi with hardcore gay erotica in it. This is curious because while the book certainly is queer, at no point in the conversation with this man did I say it was hardcore erotica. Nor did the first chapter feature any. It's almost as if he assumed that just because something was gay, it had to be hardcore erotica. Interesting.

He went on to say that a Human/Robot pairing was weird and that there was "No Way" my story could seriously address the issues of a relationship like that. Once again, he only read the first chapter. He just...assumed I wouldn't think of that? And that my book wouldn't cover it?

The author then said “I also felt that the LGBTQ inclusion really seems to cloud things.” Direct Quote.

And then this is when he said my favorite quote of them all:

The idea of a book being a sci-fi with romance AND a mystery is a Modern Art Marzipan Owl. It's just too confusing! No one can handle a story that is a mystery in a sci-fi enviroment AND has a romantic subplot! THEIR BRAINS WOULD LITERALLY EXPLODE!

Thankfully he had a solution to my book problem. His answer? Turn the book into an Action Spy Thriller and turn S.A.G.E., a robot that identies as a gay man, into a sexy lady robot who needs a MAN to teach her what it means to be human.

(I assume the male lead will teach the 'confused' female robot how to be human via his penis.)

Now my favorite part about this advice is that at no point did he outright say "Remove the gay part". No, instead he sneakily changed the robot love interest into a female robot as if I wouldn't notice. Just sort of swept away the gay bits as something totally unneeded and just mucking up the narrative. Also that's not the plot of my story, I have no idea where this virus thing came from.

(Also note that the female robot can't be robotic-like at all. Must preserve the average straight-man sex drive at all costs I guess)

He then finished his email basically saying that I should remove everything that 'traditional publishers' don't like (aka the queer parts) and make it easier for 'your average reader' to digest and my book will be good as published!

When I said this email changed my life I meant it. Because it made me realize I'd rather be self published and unknown than traditionally publish milquetoast trash like he suggested. Like holy fuck. If I removed all of the "Difficult" to digest stories out of Echo of the Larkspur then there wouldn't be a book left!

So here I am. Self publishing my Marzipan Modern Art Owl of a book. I know it'll never see the inside of a bookstore or top the charts on Goodreads but hey, I'd rather it speak to one person than have a thousand people get excited for the part where the male lead teaches the lady robot how to be human (via his penis).

If a Queer Sci-fi/Romance/Mystery novel sounds like your jam then consider preordering it!

Looking for something to read now? Can't afford the book? Willing to read in exchange for an honest review? You can join my ARC book readers here!

[ghoulishbuck]

Anyone else break their book buying ban? It lasted just over a week before I broke mine but now it’s back on until February… unless y’know gift cards.

[cathodic-clairvoyant]

I don't have super well formed thoughts on this but one thing that strikes me about transfems (specifically transfem lesbians i feel) being told to "educate themselves on queer history" (often implicitly US queer history!) is it really sort of betrays a viewing of transfems as basically "ex straight guys who are now women" and sort of places conditions on our "queerness" and frames it as lesser or newer.

Like I think the most charitable viewing of the statement is that the user implicitly believes that these transfems who need to "educate" ourselves must have a newer or younger identity than theirs. Which only really makes sense if you view us as ex straight guys or you think all of these transfems are younger/more recently out than you (which is to say you're infantilizing them)

And like the other interpretation i feel is that the user is trying to suggest that /their/ queer identity is based in historical context (whether that be personal or greater) and these transfems' identities are not. But like once again that statement really only makes sense if either A. You view transfems as ex straight guys who lack any previous personal connection to queerness or B. You view these transfems as not knowledgeable about queer history and thus our queerness is less than yours

And as time and time again proves it's much easier to discount a transfem's "queerness" and paint her as an outside antagonistic force than to accept that maybe her opinion has merit.

[makingqueerhistory]

":')))))))) you realise that gen AI is available to everyone though right??? Queer creators can use it just as much as anyone else??? I just don't understand this post... It really feels like a cheap way to get on the 'AI Bad's bandwagon, and coming from such a thoughtful and insightful creator that's incredibly disappointing... It's okay to not comment on subjects you're not an expert in y'know...?"

Y'all know the drill, I am replying to this publicly but that is not an invitation to send any negative messages to the person I am replying to.

Anyways, let me start by saying that the original context of the post you're replying to is discussing an event where a queer org used generative AI to steal an interview with Keri Hulme. So let's start there. To be clear I don't even know if the original interviewer was queer so let's put the identities of stealer and stolen from to the side. I want to explain the harm done in this example specifically and I hope this is illustrative of what harm generative AI can (and does) do.

The original place I saw generative AI was a queer org that explicitly says they are using generative AI "for good", and as a way to bring more queer history to light. So let's take them at their word, and assume they are not out to cause harm. This is the best example of generative AI that I can imagine, so I hope that makes it clear that I am not coming at this issue from bad faith in any way.

Here is the harm they are causing:

Decontextualizing and rephrasing an interview: I am not going to pretend that I am an expert in academic best practices, but I do believe one thing, if a person is speaking on their own identity and lived experience, it is always much better to directly quote than it is to rephrase. As I read this source, I initially didn't know that it was AI, and I was already upset. An interview that is widely available on the internet with no pay wall, was poorly sourced and made more vague than it was in the initial text. By creating one degree of seperation between the original words of A WRITER (whose literal job was largely based in choosing the right words to describe experiences they had) harm is already done. It makes vague what was once clear, and removes Keri Hulme's voice from her own narrative.

The original interviewer is not paid, or given proper recognition: I get it, sometimes just copy pasting an interview doesn't feel transformative enough, but something that one would learn if they worked in the queer history field and weren't a literal robot rehashing what has already been said, is that not everything needs to be transformed. In those cases, we give credit to the person who said the original words (in this case Keri Hulme), and the interviewer who facillitated the conversation (in this case Shelley Bridgeman). This case (again a best case scenario), takes the attention and byline away from the original interviewer and gives it to an AI.

The original publisher of this story is deinsentivised from paying interviewers in the future: The original publisher of this interview has ads on their website. As a person who also has ads on their website, taking an article like this and rephrasing it for no good reason (the orginal word count was not prohibitive and the rephrasing did not make it more readable), takes money from the publisher. It's pennies, but it's also removing numbers could have been used to justify further interviews with asexual people and archiving of asexual stories. The org that stole from this publication does not interview people themselves so the money and numbers that could have gone to continue to preserve asexual stories goes to stealing them instead.

These are just the active harms that I saw in this specific case. As you said, I am not an expert in generative AI, and will not be speaking as if I am. But I will say that asking me not to speak out on active harm that is being caused in queer history spaces, is disrespectful to my many years in this field.

To illustrate this even clearer: if you were a patron, you would know I recently took down an old article. I have been rereading and editing our backlist of articles, and I found one that no longer fit my standards of sourcing. My standards had recently raised due to a video made by HBomberguy about someone in the queer history space who was stealing from other creators. I watched this video not as a work project, but because I watch most of HBomberguys videos, and this one made me think more critically about sourcing. An AI can't do that. All an AI has is what has been inputted, and it is right now impossible to input every available peice of information about ethics into an AI and get a coherent ethical basis on which it will function.

It is a distinctly human trait to absorb information and change in that way. AI can rephrase information that already exists, steal it, recontextualize it even, but it cannot create something altogether new.

Do I believe that there one day might be an ethical use for Generative AI? Maybe. Do I believe that coming into a queer history space, stealing the words of a Maori asexual author, rephrasing them, and giving the original interviewer and publication no form of compensation for their work, is accomplishing that? No.

On a more personal note: I am coming at this issue with a bias. As a queer history creator, I do not want AI in my space, because it is literally damaging to my financial prospects. It has been like pulling teeth to try and get patrons in the current state of the global economy. I don't blame anyone from that, but I feel very disrespected that I am being asked to compete with a machine now. Not only that, but I am being asked to shut up and be fine with it? No, absolutely not. I cannot and will not stay quiet as space that I have fought tooth and nail to create in mainstream discussions is taken and given to AI.

AI was not supporting me when I was sent gore to try and scare me off of discussing queer history. A person did that. AI was not there to tell me I had written too many sad stories, and I needed some happy endings to remind myself of the good in the world. A person did that. AI was not there when I was being harrassed for supporting and including asexual stories on my website. A person did that.

And after all that, I am being asked to lie down and take it when my ability to pay the people who supported me in those ways, is being threatened. Nope. Not going to happen.

An AI doesn't have to make rent. An AI doesn't understand what it feels like to have to stop holding their wife's hand in public. An AI didn't get calls from people needing comfort in reaction to the election. Pay me for my work, and get this AI nonsense out of my face.