#reminder that i use the word queer as a community term

[uncanny-tranny]

Hi 💛 I wanted to ask you something, it's been bothering me lately: I've always known that I'm attracted to people regardless of gender. At 15 I called it bisexual. At 17 I started using the label pansexual. Came out as a trans man at 23. I'm now 26 and I'm not sure if bi or pan work for me anymore. I know that I'm still attracted to people regardless of gender, but my experiences as a man in society have made the label gay resonate a lot more with me. Is that okay? What does this mean? Confused

It means whatever you want it to mean. People all across the queer community have used "gay" as shorthand for decades now (maybe including queer people you love). If you just don't vibe with bi/pan on their own, then you don't have to have them on their own. There's nothing wrong with being bi or pan, but there's also nothing wrong with feeling like that doesn't quite encapsulate your relationship with your queerness.

Basically:

[anistarrose]

I just saw a post with a very dangerous conflation of terminology going around (and on International Asexuality Day, no less!) so as a polite but firm, and apparently much-needed reminder:

Sex repulsed/averse, sex indifferent, and sex favorable are terms used by the asexual spectrum community to describe individual feelings and interest levels towards sex. You don't have to identify with any of these terms (all of the time, or any of the time) to be ace-spec, but lots of ace-specs consider them useful vocabulary — since we do, after all, exist on a wide spectrum.

These terms are not the same thing as being sex negative or sex positive, and they should not be used interchangeably! Sex negativity and sex positivity refer to attitudes towards sex in a societal setting, and the associated regressive, queerness-punishing societal norm (sex negativity) or movement to fix/overthrow that societal norm (sex positivity).

Calling sex repulsed asexuals "sex negative" conflates ace people's individual feelings about sex with societal sex negativity and cultural conservatism. Maybe not to you using that term, knowing what you mean, but to potential readers. And that doesn't mean you're consciously aphobic or anything, but it's still a vital misconception to address — because implying, accidentally or otherwise, that ace people are invariably sex negative or even responsible for sex negativity is pretty fucked up!

It encourages acephobia in queer communities (especially online ones), drives wedges between people who would otherwise be among each other's closest allies in the fight for queer liberation... and even neglects the fact that even sex repulsed asexuals suffer harm from sex negativity, too! Sex negative culture doesn't let you talk about asexuality without being accused of "oversharing," or "corrupting the youth!" That's, like, one of the aphobe talking points, even though it's just recycled homophobia and transphobia, and it proves the need to truly understand asexuality and sex positivity as forces that are by no means inherently opposed!

TL;DR: Please don't conflate sex negativity with sex repulsion or aversion — it feeds misconceptions that in turn feed aphobic discourse. This sex positive, sex averse ace, and many others in the same boat or similar boats, will all thank you for using the right wording!

[nicollodangelo]

IMOQUEER

Imoqueer is a queer stance that focuses mainly on welcoming people who are typically harassed by moralists. The main idea is to question social constructs and discuss whether everything that is considered wrong by the majority is, in fact, wrong as they say. Imoqueer people should analyze reality from a material rather than a moral perspective and, in this way, have their own conclusions about the world and how it works, positioning themselves in relation to the rules and expectations that have been imposed on us.

Imoqueer also uses a lot of sympathy, trying to understand how others feel and supporting them and offering support so that they can improve, regardless of how bad it seems. welcoming many fragile people who are usually excluded and left aside due to their disorders and coping mechanisms.

Note that being immoral does not mean being anti-moral. The idea behind this queer stance is to question morality and sometimes oppose it in certain aspects, not to be completely against it. This queer stance may or may not engage in discourse for whatever reason. They are not obliged to argue with anyone they deem not worth discussing.

Idea for an identifying emoji: 📚🌈

pro

"controversial" identities such as lesboy gaygirl

ANY type of hetero and cisdissidence (includes mono mspec, multiorientation, cistrans, iso…)

non-monogamy and open relationships

transbodies and extreme body modifications

alterhumans

paraphilias, paraphilic disorders and fetishes (taboo or not)

CONSENSUAL paraphiliac contacts

sh and suicide as artistic performance (may include public suicide)

euthanasia, assisted suicide and others

autonomy over one's own body (includes abortion)

consensual c☆nnib☆lism

mad pride and anti-asylum, anti-sanism and anti-psychiatry movements

self-diagnosis / self-identification and any type of systems

destigmatization of unhealthy coping mechanisms such as romanticization of trauma

toxic, obsessive, ab_sive consensual and/or mutual relationships (conabuse)

proship and pro fiction / anti censorship

furry and other harmless communities

communism and anarchism

ACAB

feminism

paganism, neoreligions and fults

legalization of all dr_gs

blm and other racialized people's movements

RAISE in the age of consent (actually this one depends, because I wrote this thinking about the age of consent in my country which is 14)

sex workers

inc2st (consang or not)

encouragement of veganism

all transIDs

claiming and redefining slurs and offensive terms

MIK

shtwt and edtwt

MUDs

anti

contact of any paraphilia that is done in a non-consensual way

CSEM / CSAM

LSDqueer, basedqueer, kandiqueer, xenosatanism and similar

fatspo and any type of bodyshaming that is not consensual

bullying and harassment

conservatives, right-wingers, especially Nazis and fascists

terf, radgay, genitalists, transphobes, exorsexists, binarists…

religious bigots

more information below (if interested)

FUN FACT: where did the idea for the name imoqueer come from?

All the bullshit on my old twitter account (nicogoscared) started in a post where I criticized anti-para people and called them moralists - I have to admit that, partially, that word reminds me a lot of that BSD scene of the agency against the guild where Tanizaki protects Naomi - and even after months I still refer to these people that way. It ended up taking more than expected and, basically, it's common sense in my bubble to call people who are against the things I defend moralists.

Come to think of it, if they are the moral ones, then logically we must be the immoral ones, right? and I believe we should claim that label with pride, embrace immorality as part of our identity and struggle.

Creator of the term: Nicollo Miriel (me)

Date: I don't have an official coining post, but it was coined around July 10th, 2024

Flag: made by bambi (I don't know his current username) on July 21st, 2024

Original docs

[genderkoolaid]

on the note of how the definition of "transgender" has shifted, i was also intrigued by this line from transgender warriors:

Although it's important to mark the broad boundaries of "lesbian, gay, and bi" in order to fight the oppression and build community, what happens to the borders of these categories for the trans community when the dunes of sex and gender shift? When a masculine female-to-male cross-dresser is married to a bisexual drag queen, is this a heterosexual relationship? The trans population is a reminder that not everyone who is heterosexual is straight!

I know "straight" has been used as the antithesis to "queer," but I had never seen anyone say specifically that you can be heterosexual and non-straight

I know there are transhet people who have an attachment to straight as a label & I love them for their pride in their sexuality, but I do kind of wish we could bring back this understanding of straight as not equally heterosexual (which I imagine is only associated with sexuality because it's the only way the trans-ignorant gay movement thought of queerness) but as non-queer, normative in terms of both sexuality AND gender, because I think its useful to have a word for that in the same way it's useful to have queer

[alexandraisyes]

Hey guys, here's a reminder that if queer people are allowed to reclaim slurs against them and POC people are allowed to reclaim slurs about them then so are people with ASPD.

We are allowed to reclaim the terms sociopath and psychopath because we are the people those terms are targeted against. If you don't have ASPD? You don't get to have an opinion.

Everyone I've met and conversed with who also had ASPD are comfortable with the terms sociopath and psychopath being used to describe clinical ASPD.

Saying that we are not allowed to reclaim the term because you personally don't agree with it? Good for you, but you're not the one being stigmatized against. You don't get to have an opinion about this because you are not the one being affected by it. Stop being offended for other people who are trying to make the world a kinder place for themselves.

Empowerment and Ownership: Reclaiming a term can be a way for individuals to take control of a label that has been used to stigmatize or dehumanize them. By owning the term, they can redefine it on their own terms, reducing its power to harm.

Challenging Stigma: The terms "sociopath" and "psychopath" are often used in a derogatory manner and can contribute to the stigma around mental health disorders. Reclaiming these words can be a way to challenge and change the narrative, promoting a more accurate and compassionate understanding of ASPD.

Creating Community: Reclaiming a term can foster a sense of solidarity and community among those who share similar experiences. It can help individuals with ASPD connect with each other and advocate for their needs and rights.

Promoting Awareness and Understanding: By reclaiming and redefining these terms, people with ASPD can raise awareness about the disorder and its complexities. This can lead to greater empathy and understanding from the public and professionals.

Rejecting Misuse: Reclaiming terms can be a way to reject the misuse of these words in ways that are harmful or incorrect. It can help ensure that the terms are used in a manner that is respectful and informed.

Affirming Identity: For some, reclaiming these terms may be a way to affirm their identity and experiences. It can be a way to express pride in who they are, despite societal prejudices.

If POC and LGBTQ+ people get to reclaim terms used to stigmatize them then so do we. Denying us of that because you don't personally agree with it is rude, and calloused, and I'm going to fucking say it, borderline ableist. These words are not for you, they are for us.

And I choose to have pride in who I am instead of letting people ridicule and demonize me for it. I'm a clinical sociopath, I have ASPD, and people who don't have ASPD are going to have to fucking accept that because they are not me and they do not get a say in this.

[bonefall]

hi! just discovered this blog from your hearing loss post, which i ADORE. throughout it you mentioned pawspeak, and i was wondering if you had any sources/posts about it, or could describe its fundamentals very simply? sorry if youve already answered this!!! youre very cool

There's not too many fundamentals to share, really! Pawspeak is just the fandom term for a Clan cat sign language. Most people have their own takes on it.

Some people like to make it use two paws, other like to do a single paw in tandem with ear flicks and tail movements, some have omitted paw movements entirely and just use ear and tail signs. Most people aren't my queer ass who worked with a friend to ACTUALLY create a full Clan cat language with its own grammatical structure; so likewise, they're just making a cat approximation of a sign language.

So there's no rules! Do as you please! You can just adapt ASL or BSL for cat paws if you want, the same way no one bats an eye when people animate the cats lipsynching to English.

I would just try to remind you, and recommend, that your sign languages evolve from deaf people.

It's both a misconception, and insultingly common for media to show hearing people inventing sign language for the benefit of their deaf friends and family, when that's not how that happens. Deaf people have agency, theyre not just waiting for an abled person to bestow language on them. Deaf communities, and communities with high rates of hearing impaired people, come up with unique sign languages if they don't already have one!

These languages are often studied by linguists as examples of "isolate" language families, which mean they evolved without ANY genetic 'relation' to another language. Nicaraguan Sign Language is a neat example of that!

(The "hearing people invent sign" thing is perpetuated by the myth that Francosign, the language family containing ASL, was invented by one really nice philanthropist. It wasn't. The man took a bunch of words from an existing deaf community in Paris, which was likely a language under the BANZSL family, didn't care to record or learn what they were ALREADY speaking, and made up his own clunky system called "methodical signs" to make a "signed version" of French. This was practically useless for casual use. Actual deaf people mixed this with the languages they were ALREADY using to talk to each other to make new ones; one famous example of this is actually ASL.)

For BB I actually plan to show Pawspeak evolving as an isolate language after the Clan's move to the Lake. It's going to be born out of Gatherings and Aftergatherings-- while Clan cooperation has actually lead to a period so peaceful that it's allowed a proper community to form. Now with a stable population of hearing-impaired cats of all Clans, each of them bringing new signs and phrases home, it can standardize into a true language around the lake.

So then I can show how most of the signs come from RiverClan, mix with the signals WindClan uses to communicate across the moor, show how violent signs tend to be tail-based because they come from battle commands, etc.

It fits the themes of BB, and gives me a chance to show how fascinating sign languages really are. Even though it'd make sense for them to already have one, tbh, I think it's worth it. (Or maybe have Lake Pawspeak basically be a language that combined the several 'pawspeaks' of the various clans.)

[tieflingkisser]

Lily Gladstone Is Not Two-Spirit. They Just Use Rolling Pronouns

“Two-Spirit” refers to specific cultural roles within Native communities; it is not the same as being Indigenous and nonbinary.

Under the Bridge star Lily Gladstone took to X on Thursday to clarify and educate people about the intersection of their indigeneity and queerness. Gladstone, who is Blackfeet and Nimíipuu, told People during a December 2023 interview they use she/they pronouns. Some people online took that to mean the actor is Two-Spirit, which she is not. “As a Two-Spirit person, where and when did Lily Gladstone say they were part of our community?,” Yuè Begay, a Diné Two-Spirit organizer and advocate, wrote on X. “Y’all took some words they said and 🏳️ academic’d it to mean Two Spirit.” “She’s absolutely right. I wasn’t aware of this but I found what she’s talking about and it bothers me too,” Gladstone wrote, resharing Begay’s post. “Two Spirit is not a catch all term for 🌈; it’s way more specific […] I’m not Two Spirit: I use nonbinary pronouns.” For those who are unfamiliar, Two-Spirit is not a term that is interchangeable with nonbinary. It is an umbrella term that specifically refers to Indigenous gender variant people who hold specific roles in their communities across Turtle Island (North America) and Abya Yala (South America).

[...]

Just because Gladstone is Indigenous and uses rolling pronouns does not mean they are Two-Spirit. That Gladstone had to correct this to the public is an important reminder to never assume someone’s identity.

[passerkirbius]

There are many times when I have to constantly remind myself that the queer generational gap is absolutely about which battles the previous generation won, thus opening the gates for the next generation's battles, and I do wish that younger queers recognised this too?

Like, I 100% acknowledge that, recently turning 40, that I'm constantly fighting the impulse to trivialise some of the current queer identity battles. The terminology is strange to me, I wasn't raised in the current queer discourse and I don't have the free time to keep up. And this is even with my socio-linguist training, that gives me the understanding that the evolution of queer language is as least partially about each new norm of acceptance being fertile ground for us recognising new ways we may be harming others, and renegotiating how we talk to minimise those harms.

I know that I have internalized a lot of compromises our generation made, compromises that by definition aren't truly just. What is normal and acceptable to me is a straightjacket to those who were not a party to those compromises - fighting these norms is both natural and good.

But just as the new generation will be, I am defined by the battles I have fought. Every word I use to define myself was hard-won, seared into place by my fight against the world around me. I can't simply erase these words from my me and insert your words instead.

I always try to engage with the identity people offer to me on their terms. That's the point of an identity: it's the interface between ourselves and the world around us, how we process who we are and communicate that to those around us.

I'd appreciate it if younger folk offered me the same courtesy, even if the identity I offer uses words you'd never use for yourself, even if you think I clearly belong to whatever identity you've adopted. I've fought for my identity, just as you fight for yours, please don't insist that I throw it all away for your comfort.

[rainbowninja00]

so I read the post by @/xpecially (they wrote the why cross isnt trans post) and I have some thoughts... I will put them under keep reading so if you dont want to read it you dont have to! remember you are all valid and we love you <3

Imma do this shit in order and NOT post the images they used in the post cause I do not wish to upset this person. REMINDER!!! DO NOT HARASS THIS PERSON THEY ARE LITERALLY A CHILD NO FUCKIN NOT

my first gripe is with the wording on the first image "why the trans coding of cross sucks" sucks???? wdym my gamer?

these head-canons are not farfetched, they aren't as farfetched as one in particular they mentioned later on which I will touch on. also this seems like a super bad faith take???

Here's a fun PSA for everone: DO NOT use an artists art without their permission! this person used @/dustcrumbs art without permission in their post and you can see in the replies that dustcrumbs asks for them to take their art out of the post.

also its not that he doesnt want to "admit" he's a sans, its that he doesnt feel like a sans anymore, he has become an outcode, an other, he has been cast out by his family and friends because of his actions, which is also something trans people can relate with when it comes to unaccepting family members and friends.

queer, and in particular, trans people are the ones making these headcanons in the first place, this is not people stereotyping cross, this is them finding familiarity in his story and assigning him a label that he at least somewhat fits in with. Also, anyone who has read anything UTMV related on AO3 knows that cross is often trans or trans coded in peoples works.

I SHALL NOT BE EXPLAINING MY THOUGHTS ON FLUTTERSHY BECAUSE I DONT WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW HOW CRINGEFAIL I AM ABOUT MLP:FIM

putting a little doodle that says KYS on a little essay about why cross isnt trans feels kinda icky but okay gamer. I agree that some labels can kind of deconstruct the history of characters and their stories, but it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things! cause people will tell them hey! this is kinda ooc, and usually people will make their own version of the character/au/etc or fix it up a bit to be more in character.

the next take quite literally justifies the trans cross headcanon but alr. just because it isnt directly gender related doesnt mean people cant draw from it and add that in, since we never see all of cross' formative years so we'll never know if he is actually trans... what if in his first timeline he was made as a girl hm? that seems pretty trans to me.

making cross trans doesn't DESTROY his current history or anything like that, if anything it provides greater context for his suffering and adds another thing for him to be traumatised by. (yippee angst authors rise up

I... only trans people have deadnames right??? im not crazy right??? I vividly remember discussions like this on tiktok about cis people changing their names and them asking if that is now their dead name and trans people responded saying it wasn't a dead name because it wasnt dead to them or stuff like that (it was a couple years ago i dont remember it exactly) but specifically, the term deadname is for trans people I THINK!

Time to get onto this persons own diagnosis on cross, SOMEONE TELL ME WHERE IT IS CANON THAT CROSS HAS DID??? I have never once seen that it is canon that he has DID, which makes this a headcanon if this person, and if you ask me DID headcanons can be FAR more harmful within their community than trans ones. DID is already so terribly stigmatised, and when you describe cross theyway they do with extreme agression, "going crazy about the past", no control over emotions expecially anger, and willing to do anything to get what he wants, these are all pretty HARMFUL STEREOTYPES buddy pal chum friendo. Cross being trans seems much less harmful and damaging of the integrity of the character/their story than this persons own personal diagnosis.

"jakei is doing weird and incomprehensible things again..." what like making a character trans/trans-coded? in the queer fandom??? how odd, how strange, how absolutely peculiar. Jakei did that because Jakei is based af and cares about their community. She cares about the people consuming underverse and supports the trans head-canons cause she knows they are just headcanons and arent going to ruin the story she is working on telling.

Once more I shall state DO NOT HARASS this person, especially because they are a minor.

overall, cross being trans is just a headcanon that the community likes a whole lot cause we are all gay af, at least most of us. this headcanon does not ruin the story, the character, or anything like that, its just for funsies like most headcanons and people need to get their heads outta their asses about it istg. you are in the gay fandom, what do you expect???

[mareastrorum]

personally I will never forgive Roux for putting the words "degenerate freak" into Molly's mouth. He Would Not Fucking Say That (derogatorily).

There was a blessed couple of months that I legitimately forgot she had added that to The Nine Eyes of Lucien, but then the Internet occurred and reminded me, and I seethed about it for a while all over again. Given that this might be a niche area of information for some, time for exposition!

Degenerate is not a very consistently defined term, but the connotation is consistent among all definitions: biological degradation. Every use of the term refers to the idea that some level of regression, failure, or corruption has occurred on a biological level.

Social degeneracy is a social theory that arose alongside social theories of evolution. In short, while some groups of humans evolved, others devolved. Meaning some humans became inferior at the same time that others grew in superiority. Degeneracy is an inherently racist theory because evolution as a biological theory doesn’t include regression or similar occurrences as inherently inferior or bad. It’s just not what evolution is bout. The imposition of a moral tint is what social degeneracy is about.

Art history and music history buffs know a lot about social degeneracy theory because it rose to prominence in the Nazi party and was brought into common discourse through targeted criticism of art and music. Ironically (or is it?), the outcry against degenerate art was initially popularized by a Zionist who included some particularly vitriolic criticism of Oscar Wilde, an infamous poet who was ostracized and imprisoned for homosexuality. However, anti-semites soon decided it was a good way to alienate Jews and any other undesirables. Honestly, there’s nothing inherently anti-Semitic about the degenerate art theory, it’s just particularly useful for fascists and xenophobes to be able to claim that something they dislike is a red flag for racial corruption. Nazis used it for modern art and new hybrid forms of music, especially those popular among Jews and Blacks, and it was done with complete understanding of the word and the social pressure it would exert.

“Degenerate” is a loaded term and should not be used lightly. It has always been tied to an idea of biological degradation, and there is no reason to use it outside of that context. To do so is either intentionally invoking those ideas or demonstrates profound ignorance and laziness.

In the context of Critical Role, it has been used exactly once. Ashly Burke used it in the context of her character catching what many believed to be a “degenerate’s disease.” That phrasing was meant to convey the idea that there was a powerful social stigma associated with the disease and that those who suffered from it also faced discrimination. This was a great use of the term because it succinctly communicated the type of bullshit people endured in that setting for simply getting sick.

In TNEOL, Madeleine Roux decided that Mollymauk Tealeaf, a CR fandom darling among non-cis queers for being the first genderfluid PC, would call Lucien a “degenerate freak.”

Why use that phrase here? What possible reason does Molly, who shares a soul and body with Lucien, have for invoking the idea of biological degradation here? There is no in-character explanation for it except ignorance, and let’s be real, Molly isn’t going to hear someone else call him a “degenerate freak” and then use it against someone else without the joy of learning what it means so that he can make sure it hurts. Especially given that Molly also experienced racist bullshit in the short time he was on screen. I’ll admit, I’m assuming that Molly has a minimum amount of brain cells to be used for the purpose of artful insults, but I feel comfortable in that assumption because it was one of the past times he enjoyed indulging on the stream.

Alternatively, Madeleine Roux just wanted to call Lucien a degenerate freak and Molly was a convenient mouthpiece.

Up until that point in the novel, I was not sure how much input any of the CR cast had on the book. After reading that line, I felt safe in the conclusion that they had absolutely no input whatsoever. I cannot find it in myself to believe that Taliesin or Matt would have agreed that was something Molly would say. It is possible, but I simply cannot believe that it would actually be true.

I’m so grateful that I don’t listen to audio books, because that means I never had to listen to that phrase spoken with Molly’s voice. It doesn’t exist in my head because I can’t even imagine what it would sound like. Thank fuck for the written word.

Roux can go fuck herself.

[sitp-recs]

Sitp Essentials - Fandomversary Edition: Writcraft

June marks the 12th (!!!) fandomversary of this incredibly talented and generous author, whose work has brought me so much joy and healing over the years. What an accomplishment, my friend! I know I’m not only speaking for myself when I say that we are so very grateful for your presence and immense contributions to the HP fandom. I’m a bit wary of taking on long-term projects these days but I really wanted to do something to celebrate this milestone so I’ve decided that, during the month of June (and there was no better month to celebrate in! 🏳️‍🌈) I’ll be posting single recs for 12 of my favourite fics by @writcraft. Some are older recs, written in the blog’s early days, some are brand new, highlighting rare pairs, hidden gems and recent works. I won’t have a rigid schedule because I don’t wanna set myself up for failure so the rec posts will be a surprise even for me 🤣 I hope you guys enjoy them just as much!

Anyone who knows me well is aware that I’m very shy around my fandom heroes and will rarely initiate any kind of conversation with them. I was so anxious about being perceived that I wouldn't even tag them when I created the blog. Writ holds even more power in my imaginary fandom altar because they’ve written one of my all-time favorite fics. I found Little Compton Street aka the “Life on Mars Love Story Told in 3 Acts” at a difficult time of my life when I was almost leaving fandom for good. But getting to read LCS and to fall in love with those magical London spots and captivating characters was a beautiful transformative experience that altered me completely. This fic not only had a profound impact on my ever changing self-awareness as a queer person, it checked my many fic reading boxes, and pulled at my heartstrings in all the right ways. I've learned so much from LCS; it is an ode to queer history, a love letter to all of those who came and fought before us, and to all of those who were killed, erased and forgotten in the process. It is is a story filled with hope and a compassionate reminder urging us to always resist, and never forget.

*at a loss of words*

(…)

As you can see, I always get immersed in my feels when I think about LCS and I know it will always have a special place in my heart. This feeling of profound gratitude and joy for Writ’s formative works is what inspired me to do this humble homage. Am I a bit nervous about not having enough fuel to see this through? Hell yes. But I’m opening myself to the possibility of failure because I know this is for someone who’s unfailingly kind and compassionate. Writ, I admire you deeply as a writer and even more so as a person. Your contributions to the HP fandom through fics, fests and meta over the years have been immense, and I know your RL contributions to the queer community and its memory have been just as impactful. Happy 12th Fandomversary, my friend! For someone who’s been reading your words since 2012, it feels incredibly special to finally get to share this space with you. 🏳️‍🌈💜

[obaewankenope]

Ableist Language and Why It Matters

I've talked about ableism, disability, and ableist language before in the past and thanks to @nencheese for reminding me to write a list for modding purposes, I'm now writing this. 

Lydia Brown has created a Glossary of Ableist Language and even provided alternative terms that can be employed instead of ableist ones. It is not a full compendium of ableist language nor does it provide the history of the terms listed but for an initial starting point for learning to recognise how language can be used and why it matters what words we use, I recommend it.

Here is the link.

I firmly believe that how we use language is one of the most important things to consider, especially online. This is because all words have a history, sometimes short and simple, other times long and complex. Some words we use everyday are innocent, with no murkiness to their origins, whilst others are more shadowed. A hundred years ago using racial slurs was a normal affair (and still is in some places) but nowadays their use is vastly different. The same holds true for queer slurs, misogynistic slurs and, yes, ableist language.

Some words, I imagine, make sense to people when they come across them like "retard" or "spazz", whilst others may be more confusing like "dumb" and "loony". Afterall, how can "loony" be ableist when there is a whole Warners Bros. show literally called The Loony Tunes? But the origins of these words are rooted in ableism and just because they've been used so much that it seems normal to say/use them doesn't mean they are not still ableist.

You might think that some of these words are rather ridiculous to include here but consider the history of "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" and their use in psychology to describe individuals with IQs lower than 70. Nowadays we use "specific learning difficulty" for this but in the 20th century a "moron" scored between 51 and 70, an "imbecile" between 26 and 51, and an "idiot" 25 or lower. Depending on where you scored, you either were able to do basic things but never able to be very 'useful' except for manual labour, considered to never be able to pass the mental age of six, and/or not even able to provide any use of yourself for even manual labour. Thus the terms were used to determine the worth and usefulness of individuals, so even with their being replaced in the 1970s with degrees by "retardation" (again determining worth, usefulness, and economic value) the history remains that using "idiot", "moron", and "imbecile" to describe yourself or others is playing into the narrative of determining how 'useful' someone is.

We grow up in our societies, our cultures, and with adults informing us of how to act and react. Those adults experienced the same as children and so on, a repeating cycle of generational experiences and knowledge always informed by what came before. Language evolves the same, just like traditions and social mores. So it is no surprise that words used to separate, segregate, exclude and include come into being. Words based in determining worth and value to a community, a culture, a society, are words that become ableist. Because oftentimes a person is valued not for just being a person but rather for what use they are. And thus we have the value of able-bodied and able-minded established and the lack of value of disability and impairment.

Whilst I believe in the reclaiming of words used to dehumanise, other, and oppress, I am cognizant of the fact that ableist language is for more insidious than, for example, queerphobic language because ableist language has a long history of being used to prop up and further other forms of discrimination and exclusion.

Ableist terms are used in regular conversation because it is normalised. Just as racist terms were once normalised. Normativism does not mean something is okay or harmless. 

Many ableist terms tend to centre on intellectual ability or capacity. This is because the value of a person often was equated to how intelligent they were (which was tied into genetic heritage and the concept that poor, ill-bred individuals naturally lacked the intellectual capacity of the 'well-bred' upper classes) and as such utilised to segregate, sterilise and kill those who were not compatible with the norms of society. 

The Nazi's justified the Aktion T4 programme by arguing that disabled individuals were an unworthy waste of resources that were better spent on the productive members of society.

According to the historian Plutarch, it was customary in Sparta to leave disabled babies, more specifically babies with clear physical 'deformities', in exposed locations to die from the elements. Whilst this may have been an exaggeration by Plutarch, other examples exist of similar acts in antiquity.

In Ancient Rome, the Twelve Tables were the foundations of Roman Law. The fourth table centres on the Rights of Familial Heads which included permitting deformed children to be killed and that children born with physical or mental disabilities were to be killed by their father.

Eugenics and forced sterilisation of 'undesirable' individuals has a long history also. From Plato to the modern day, selective breeding, sterilisation and even pressuring prospective mothers to abort if disabilities are found during ultrasounds all play into the conception of an ideal human. 

When we use words that have negative connotations for ourselves and others, we put them and ourselves down. When we call ourselves stupid, we play into a narrative where the worth of a person lies in how intelligent they are (how useful to society and the capitalist economy because lacking any ability or skills meant you were of no use to the capitalist system) we are using terms that mark us as lesser. 

Regardless of whether it is true, that is what using these terms does. Because, unlike queer terms and racial terms, ableist terms have been the base of near enough all forms of discrimination and exclusion. Queer individuals are "mentally ill" and therefore dangers. Non-white individuals are "intellectually inferior" because of their "smaller brains" and therefore are happy to be slaves. Women who wanted the right to vote, to work, to have freedom, were diagnosed with "hysteria". Of course, this doesn't mean that the history of racism and queerphobia and sexism and misogyny are somehow lesser than ableist history, because they're not. That ableism and disability are part of these forms of discrimination merely reinforces the fact that it matters what words you use and when. 

This is why ableism and ableist terms are such an issue and why it matters when and how they are used. The history of oppression lies in these words that are so normal for people to use they don't realise they are advocating a system that separates and segegrates people based on their physical and mental ability to be useful to a capitalist system. 

[vaspider]

Tbh, everyone I see trying to come up with alternative words for Culturally Christian keeps reminding me of when white people got really upset about the term White Privilege. Maybe the term SHOULD make people uncomfortable. Maybe we shouldn't have to take the complaints of others about a term we created to describe our experiences as more important than our needs. As well-meaning as some folks have been, it's been so frustrating to feel like that aspect isn't being seen. We created this term to discuss our oppression and others keep coming to us about their feelings about it, their discomfort. We didn't get rid of the term White Privilege just because it upset a bunch of white people. Why do we have to get rid of the term Culturally Christian because it upsets people it describes?

I'm trying to be compassionate too but it's hard for me to be when it feels like most of the criticisms of the term have been in bad faith and that the criticism is centered around OTHER people's feelings rather than our need to describe our oppression. Idk it doesn't feel fair I guess.

I didn't really expect you of all people to react like this to me having a compassionate conversation with someone who isn't Christian, wasn't raised Christian, and was abused by Christians for not being a Christian, about that person not wanting to be labeled as being inextricably tainted by a religion that abused them for their whole life. That's not something I expected from you. Maybe you missed that part of the conversation, or maybe you read a good faith conversation as if it was in bad faith, idk, but this seems rather unkind for you.

I understand your frustration. I also think it that if I'm actually dedicated to tikkun olam, if someone also being hurt in this situation respectfully talks with me about how I'm hurting them with splash damage from these discussions, I really should hear them out. And if, in the course of that discussion, we talk through how to not only be more accurate with what we're talking about but how to be less hurtful to other victims of Evangelical Christianity, I think that's pretty good, actually.

The person you're talking about isn't Christian and never was, so your analogy doesn't really hold. That person didn't hold any particular privilege and was never part of the dominant group in the first place. Like... that's the whole point. They're also a survivor of religious violence. You assigning privilege to that person which they never received is part of the problem we were addressing in the first place.

Plus, like, isn't the desired outcome that people who are carrying ideas and mindsets which come from Christian hegemony work on shedding those ideas and mindsets? Labeling people - especially people who aren't Christian and doubly especially those who never were - rather than ideas means those people are labeled regardless of what ideas they hold. That seems counterproductive to me, and, again, hurtful to fellow victims to label them with an identity they don't hold. It's like someone calling a bi person a Spicy Straight because they don't look queer enough or whatever - they're assigning an identity that someone else doesn't have because it makes it easier for them to speak their pain, and ignoring the damage that does.

The best part of the conversation is that by the end of it, someone pointed out that there's already an academic term -- Christian hegemony -- which has been in use for a really long time, well before "cultural Xianity" came into use. It looks like it goes back at least 50 years. So because I was patient and compassionate with someone else who was victimized like I was victimized, I got to learn something which will make it easier to communicate in the future, since that term is widely established and it's easy to point to PDFs that define it, or articles with Jewish educators explaining it.*

Sounds like a win to me - I get to avoid accidentally hurting others who were hurt like I was hurt, I learned something, and now I have a better, clearer term and can speak more clearly.

I'm sorry it frustrates you. I don't think your analogy works, though, and I'm happy with using "Christian hegemony" to describe ideas and not labeling people. I certainly wouldn't like it if someone insisted on calling me Christian, because I'm not, so forcing that label on others who also are not Christian seems hypocritical and unkind. Someone can hold ideas they learned from Christian hegemony without being Christian, and saying it that way doesn't hurt me, so it's no great burden to me to use a more established, more accurate, less hurtful means of addressing my own hurt.

* I don't agree 100% with everything in these links, please don't send me asks or reblog this with nitpicks of the links, I'm not interested bc that's not the point of including them.

[vincent-marie]

Hot Take: "Equal Fights" Predicted Online Faketivism

In some ways "Equal Fights" hasn't aged well in its effort to teach about feminism, that the execution wasn't handled as well as it could have been & that it wound up painting the feminists as straw men stereotypes. Rumor has it that even Lauren Faust, who did storyboards on the episode, isn't a fan of it in hindsight.

However this episode feels a lot more relevant to me now in our current age of online purity culture.

We live in an age of social media where young people, who had little to no power before, now have a tool at their fingertips to signal boost for those who need help the most. Teenagers can be everyday heroes in their own right. Frankly I respect you kids for being motivated in your sense of kindness & nobility.

However the problem is that unfortunately what good that can actually be done gets drowned out by a lot of harassment & bullying in the name of social justice. Especially if these young people's sources are very dubious & self-serving.

That's basically what Femme Fatale is as a character. She's a grifter who uses a progressive movement, feminism in this case, as her means for her own gain. Namely, robbing banks.

It's understandable that every super villain has a gimmick. Two-Face has the Number 2 & duality, FF could've just been a devious collector of currency with women imprinted on them. (I myself wish they would discontinue the bulky, useless penny & bring back the Sacagawea dollar.) But beyond that, she uses it as an excuse to get out of getting arrested, to claim that what she's doing is good for society at large, & above all to manipulate & influence the young & impressionable Powerpuff Girls.

The girls, being literal children, take her words to heart & implement them in ways that do more harm than good. From bullying boys in the schoolyard to letting Femme Fatale get away with her crimes.

Reminds me an awful lot of kids & young people on Tumblr & Twitter who get riled up by the words of self-proclaimed progressives who turn out to be TERFs, grifters, or members of the Leopards Eating My Face Party. Namely, the people who use progressivism & online activism to their own end.

And it's not just the Youtubers with the large subscriber base. It's also the individuals who reblog, retweet & bully even on a small scale to make themselves look good or feel like they're making a difference. Not to mention the burner & bot accounts being used to fan the flames of discord within progressive circles.

But what I find the most telling is that FF claims to be a feminist, she collects Susan B. Anthony coins, but she doesn't even know who Susan B. even was & why she was so important to American history.

Reminds me an awful lot of certain gay or trans Youtubers who would try to have you believe that "queer" is a slur, when in reality we not only reclaimed it as an umbrella term to include bisexual, trans, intersex, asexual, etc. people, but is an important part of our very history.

The slogan chanted demanding our basic human rights:

"We're here, we're queer

Get used to it."

It makes me sick that there are multiple generations of people who don't understand our own history. That there are people within our community who would promote & capitalize on that ignorance.

That's who Femme Fatale is. Willingly ignorant herself, selfish, manipulative, & would promote such lack of values to the next generation for her own gain.

And that's why she deserves to serve time in prison, while online faketivist grifters deserve to lose followers, go broke, & disappear into obscurity so they can't do any more damage.

[ladydragonkiller]

Alright I started this train of thought in the notes in a different post and it hasn’t left me alone, so here I am.

My brain is drawing parallels between the symbolism Night Vale holds for queerness and how the different methods of scientific understanding that have been attempted interact with that. 

Dr. Lubelle wants to put everything into a neat, tidy little box that fits with her current view of the world. She defines and explains, and in doing so misses what makes Night Vale and the entities within it special. The things she says about Sarah Sultan and the Glow Cloud are, in her eyes and perhaps even objectively, true, but in laying it out so clearly she kills them. 

I’m reminded by this of arguments within and around queer communities about labels. Any word for gender or sexuality means a thousand different things to a thousand different people. Even for being straight or cis, and especially for any number of identities or in-betweens out there. While some people may feel comforted by a definition for these terms, no one explanation is going to fit everyone who uses that label. Trying to separate these out is pointless, messy, and only liable to hurt the people involved.

And that’s okay! That’s great! I love that we can find a home in the gaps left unfilled, because it’s very rare that life is 100% black and white. Not everything can be fully explained, and learning to appreciate the beauty of that is so much more productive than trying anyways.

Just like Carlos’s perspective on Night Vale. When he first came to the town, he was definitely interested in trying to understand it. This desire is now, above all else, tempered with a huge amount of love for the town. He’s investigating in an effort to understand better, yes, but not at the detriment of the town or its’ citizens.

Above all else, he isn’t trying to force Night Vale to be something it isn’t, or trying to take away what it is. He’s letting it be, appreciating it in all it’s beauty, and learning not for knowledge and pride’s sake, but with enthusiasm and respect. He accepts he isn’t going to know more about the inhabitants than they do themselves.

There might be a whole separate idea in here about the town waiting so long to accept Carlos as a citizen (and the as of yet unknown of how he’s reacted to that), but my brain needs to percolate a bit before I can say anything intelligent about that.

[deathspeaker]

My Queer Thoughts

It's completely valid to hate the word queer, to consider it a slur (especially if you grew up in an era when it WAS a violent slur.) or not like it.

What bothers me is when people want to blanketly fight against it's use, especially when they're young and very online.

I grew up in the era of 'That's so gay' being the most common thing to fall out of teen and young men's mouths for anything bad or that they didn't like.

Any word we could use to describe ourselves can and will be turned into a slur. I love dyke, but I've also received threats with that word used in it.

Without the word 'queer' it would not only take a LOT of words I would then have to explain all those different terms. Sure someone in the community or in the know would get it right away, but to anyone on the outside it becomes this exhausting experience. I've watched as people's eyes glaze over and can feel the disrespect oozing off of them.

Also I kind of enjoy telling someone 'I'm queer' and watching as they try to figure out what that means and making up their idea of what it means. I rather be a source of confusion.

I also like 'queer' because it has a use outside of LGBTQ+ folks. Faggot is heavily censored, and a lot of people in the community view it as less hateful than queer, but one can be said openly on youtube, and the other can't (without risk of demonization or shadow banning the video).

We're a diverse community, largely interconnected purely because we are seen as 'different' and 'abnormal'. So of course a cis-lesbian is going to have different feelings around things than a trans-lesbian. Different lived experiences. And intersex people are often lumped in (that's a complicated issue and just shows how fucked up the binary can be)

I'm not cis. I'm not straight. My partner is in a queer relationship even if he is cis-straight (I'm his second trans partner, I love this man he's never questioned his sexuality or felt insecure about dating two different trans people!).

It's fine if you don't like the word queer, block it! That's cool! That's fine! Especially if you have trauma attached to it! Protect yourself from things that make you feel uncomfortable, unhappy, and especially traumatic shit.

But also respect that other people have a different lived experience. It is impossible for the great diversity of people to avoid saying, saying, or existing in a way that doesn't cause issues with others. Ranging from being annoying to being reminders of trauma. That's just a fucking fact of life.