#there are so many reasons someone might not want to label themselves or might not be comfortable publicly coming out

[air--so--sweet]

There's a conversation to be had about straight actors in queer roles (though I definitely feel like it's far more complex than the yes or no question a lot of people act like it is), but can we stop treating actors like straight until proven otherwise? Because I'm seeing a lot of conversations about whether its okay for Paul Mescal and Josh O'Connor to play queer men, yet neither has ever publicly called themselves straight.

In fact on a red carpet when asked about straight actors in queer roles Paul Mescal said 'Assumptions are dangerous, that's all I'll say on that front.' And whether he's referring to himself or speaking in general terms, he's correct. Assumptions are incredibly dangerous and do lead to people being outed or feeling like they have to come out regardless of what they want. Like did we learn nothing about what happened Kit Connor?!

People doing a job that puts them in the public eye does not mean they have no right to a personal life. They do not owe you anything, and you aren't entitled to knowing their identity. I mean fuck, they might not know their own identity yet.

Billie Eilish talked about this after she mentioned being attracted to girls in a Variety magazine interview and had it treated as a coming out.

'Who fucking cares? The whole world suddenly decided who I was, and I didn’t get to say anything or control any of it. Nobody should be pressured into being one thing or the other, and I think that there’s a lot of wanting labels all over the place. Dude, I’ve known people that don’t know their sexuality, or feel comfortable with it, until they’re in their forties, fifties, sixties. It takes a while to find yourself, and I think it’s really unfair, the way that the internet bullies you into talking about who you are and what you are. [...] I know everybody’s been thinking this about me for years and years, but I’m only figuring out myself now.'

So, yes, there's a conversation to be had about straight actors in queer roles but maybe, before you have it, you should check if the actor you're talking about has ever publicly identified as straight.

Edit: Also while I'm here, someone who is bi or pan or otherwise labelled and attracted to multiple genders is no less valid and no less queer if they predominantly date people of another gender or marry someone of another gender. I saw it suggested Billie Joe Armstrong is an ally rather than a member of the queer community because he's been married to his wife for almost 20 years. No, he is bisexual, he continues to be bisexual regardless who he's married to and for how long.

[valeriehalla]

Hello! I was reminded of your webcomic Goodbye To Halos recently and wanted to let you know it had a pretty big impact on me. I read it during my teenage years and I think it really helped me to contextualize and make sense of some feelings I was going through about - well, teenage stuff. Change, I guess, mostly. Changing bodies, changing genders, changing role in society, changing relationships with others - your comic helped me process a lot of my fears about those things.

Your comic was probably my first exposure to nudity that was neither sexual nor comedic. It really stuck with me how your comic has characters in states of undress fairly casually. Not like "walking down the street" casual, they're always in a safe place like a bedroom or a bathroom or something, but still. As someone who was raised Catholic it was really powerful to see nudity portrayed as so... not-shameful. Nudity is just a state the characters pass in and out of; they're nude after taking off their clothes like they would be wet after taking a shower. There's no shame in it. And that's really the way it ought to be, right? We were all born nude, it shouldn't be such a Thing as society makes it out to be.

That's just my little input on what impact your art has had on me. It was a good thing that I read it when I did. I wish you luck on all your future endeavors.

that's extremely kind of you, and very well-said, and thank you, and also that's absolutely wild for me to read.

i actually had to remind myself just now that there was in fact a sequence of (counting) eight pages where enae had her tits out. i didn't think a ton about it at the time. i do remember debating mentally whether to slap a "warning this page has boobs in it" label on the social media posts: i chafed at the idea, and i think i didn't do it? or only did it for some of them? i didn't want to because to even put such a warning immediately prompts the reader to think "oh something Sexualle is going on here," putting them on high alert and making it into a whole Thing. and it was not a Thing.

i always thought that some day, if ever i found the right moment, i wanted to have a page where fenic was fully nude. my idea of the "right moment" for that was that it would have to be at a juncture in the story where it made sense for her to be nude, and also where it would feel to the reader like there was absolutely no "point" to her nudity. the one page in the comic where fenic is topless was sort of a prelude to that idea: that might have been the moment, if there had been any reason at all to include her lower body in those panels, which there wasn't, so i didn't.

it's a fine line to walk. i think it's fairly obvious that there were many panels in that comic where the reader absolutely was meant to think "wow this character's attractive" (if they could get past my art back then lmao). i peppered those in liberally, sometimes because it was personally fun for me to draw, but always because it just seemed, i don't know, honest? for this story about young queer adults who are sort of omnidirectionally horny for one another to have a gaze reflecting that--for the reader to feel like they're "in on it" too, not in a leering sort of way, but as if they're just, like, sharing in it with the characters themselves. but then to have that, and then to also have full-on nudity, and for that nudity to feel at home with that sensation, but also purely incidental, and not in and of itself sexual, is a lot of objects to juggle, especially if one indeed (like me) wants it to not feel like there is a "Point" being made. so, it's cool to hear that it worked for at least one person. sorry for writing 999 words about this

[raven-at-the-writing-desk]

Do you think it's okay for me to write for TWST even though I don't play the game?

Personally, I don’t think anyone ever “needs” to play a game in order to enjoy it and create for it. Sometimes you can just observe art from a distance and appreciate it, or you like hearing about how it brings joy to people you know. Maybe you like the aesthetic of it but can’t really see yourself getting heavily involved with it. Perhaps you don’t like gacha games so you can’t be motivated to engage with the mechanics. There are many possible avenues.

In the case of a game like Twisted Wonderland, there may be accessibility reasons why you don’t play since the game is only in English and Japanese—and even then, maybe your country doesn’t have a server to host it. In fact, I know there are many people who are TWST fans yet only read translations or watch videos about it without having played the game themselves. Maybe they found the manga or the light novel first. Whenever the anime comes out, people might discover TWST through that. We have to consider these aspects and be more open-minded about what constitutes as a “fan” rather than gatekeeping the label of “fan” to only those who play tie game for no discernible reason. What defines someone as a fan or not isn’t the labels other people put on you—you are the one that decides what you want to label yourself, and whether you are a fan or not.

I believe that also extends to content creation in fandom spaces. No one’s stopping you from making fan art or writing fanfic (or whatever it may be) just because you don’t play the game, and nor should you need anyone’s thumbs-up to do so. When you think that you do, you’re only imposing an arbitrary limit and holding yourself back. You have to be confident in deciding what you want to make without worrying how others might perceive you for it.

Now, that being said 💦 I don’t mean to scold anyone for asking me questions, but I feel that I again need to stress this: I am an internet stranger. My opinion or approval/disapproval shouldn’t hold any more weight than the next person’s. You should not put too much value in the advice of an internet stranger either. You shouldn’t care whether or not I think something is okay for you to do. The only person who can give you “permission” is you!

I understand that maybe people may feel uncertain about themselves or are looking for reassurance from a third party, but I do not feel I am the right place to go to for these kinds of things. Even though I answer in earnest, questions of this nature make me feel like I’m being put on the spot and pressured to provide timely comfort.

I don’t feel comfortable continuously being asked for very personalized advice like this; asks like this push on the boundary and start getting into uncomfortable territory for me. I’m here to talk about Disney anime pretty boys. I’m not here to be a fandom counselor 😅 Does that make sense?

This isn’t the only time I’ve received asks of this nature, nor is it the only time I’ve had to give a public warning about this. Please be mindful and respect the boundaries I have set.

[fixing-bad-posts]

Heya, I really really hope this doesn't come off as particularly rude, but I was wondering, why would bisexual women be considered lesbians sometimes and I think you also brought up transgender men and genderqueer ppl? For bisexual women, I just am kinda confused, they can be in lesbian relationships and lesbian spaces, but just describing them as lesbians seems kinda confusing because lesbian denotes specifically sapphic attraction at least from where I've always heard it, so wouldn't it be kinda confusing. And for the genderqueer folks or trans folks, wouldn't that just bring their genders closer to feminine and at least from what I've heard from some pple I know, they don't like non binary being seen as more womanly (I've heard it being described as woman-lite before annoying) and instead seen as a more inbetween which it sometimes isn't, because of bigotry and other things since nbs can be both fem or masc or androgynous, but wouldn't non woman lesbians kinda push it to be seen as kinda more fem or that person as more fem? I don't know and frankly I'm just kinda confused. I'm really really sorry that this probably comes off as super rude and I hope you forgive me. I frankly just want to learn a little more and have been reading up but wanted to know what you thought. And I just realized how long this was, so so sorry

hello anon! these days, i usually don’t answer asks like these because i’ve already done so several times, but you seem very well-meaning and confused, so i’ll do my best to help. first of all, please check my faq for resources and links about mspec labels and bi lesbians.

second of all—generally—here is my advice for when you encounter a queer label that confuses you:

1) literally just ignore it until you...

2) meet someone in your life who uses that label, at which point you might (respectfully) ask them what using that label means to them specifically, and why it’s important. i’ve done this in real life. the script is something like,

“it’s really cool to get to talk to someone in real life about this stuff—if i may ask, what does identifying as [insert label] mean to you, personally?”

you might also say,

“i’ve never met someone who identifies with [their label] before. would you mind giving me some pointers on the important things to keep in mind in order to respect your identity/make sure you feel respected by me?”

i’ve also never asked anyone to correct me if i mess up and say something rude, but i’m working on the confidence and charisma to be able to say that, because i owe that to others.

all of that said, i wanted to respond to some of your specific questions, and clarify a couple of things below the cut. to clarify:

1. “describing [bisexual women] as lesbians seems kinda confusing because lesbian denotes specifically sapphic attraction”. to be clear i am not the one describing bisexual women as lesbians, in this hypothetical situation. when i post about bi-lesbians, i am posting in support of people who—for whatever reason—chose that label for themselves. what i am not doing: advocating to redefine the classically understood definition of lesbian for the entire populous.

2. “wouldn’t it be kinda confusing”? yes! i understand it can be confusing, and i commend you for expressing your confusion instead of reacting in disgust or anger. there are so many things in the queer community that are confusing, even to me, and you don’t need to feel guilty for asking questions as long as you come from a place of genuine curiosity. being confused isn’t bad, and defining yourself in a way that confuses others is, likewise, no transgression.

3. “for the genderqueer folks or trans folks, wouldn’t [identifying as a lesbian] just bring their genders closer to feminine […] wouldn’t non woman lesbians […] be seen as kinda more fem”? the answer is: sort of. it depends entirely on how and why the person using this label came to these words. you wrote, “i’ve heard from some pple i know, they don’t like non binary being seen as more womanly”, and i have definitely also heard that! so, for people who feel that way, they probably wouldn’t want a label that evokes womanhood and/or aligns them with femininity assigned to them. but every person is different—so for some nonbinary people, they absolutely do not want to be seen as “woman-lite”, whereas for other nonbinary people, they might want to be seen closer to femme than masc, while still nonbinary. this goes back to what i said at the beginning: best practice is to ask the people in your life how they want you to respect them.

closing thoughts: i hope this clarified some things, but i understand that the topic may still be confusing—feel free to message me if you want a non-judgmental queer to talk things through with. i promise i’ll take you in good faith <3

[parachutingkitten]

Why is Pixane So Queer?

Some thoughts on Asexual Romance.

[warning, long post below the cut]

The Ninjago fandom had a very potent reaction to The Quest for the Lost Powers repeatedly describing Pixal and Zane as being 'very close friends'. This seemed quite contradictory to many who assumed the confession of undying love at the end of the last season might have been a small hint at a romantic relationship of some kind. However, after closer examination, it turns out Pixal and Zane don’t ever actually refer to themselves as a couple, and the show has never once referred to them being in an active relationship.

But there’s something here, right? Sure, it’s not explicitly stated, but you are lying to yourself if you can watch them and tell me there is zero romantic subtext going on here. A lot of people got very defensive that the children’s book stated they were friends, especially when it also seemingly confirmed that the much straighter straight boy ship, Kailor, was apparently canon, despite being only implied as a possible future for ages now. But I find this backlash to be a bit strange. Sure, Zane and Pix aren’t exactly ‘just friends’ but, what do you want them to say? That they’re boyfriend and girlfriend? You want these two to say they’re ‘going out’ with each other? You think these two robots are ‘dating’ each other, like they’re just susin’ out the partner pool. Are those the words that fit this relationship to you?

I found myself feeling weirdly offended at everyone, and I think the reason was that these two love-droids haven’t chosen to define their relationship in traditional terms, and so everyone’s insistence that they should be boxed into some sort of traditional term seems inherently strange. It’s like when two elderly people are dating, it feels weird when they say “this is my girlfriend” because despite it being factually true, there’s so much baggage that comes with the word, part of that implication being youth, which is directly at odds with the immediate situation. It’s the correctness of the word paired with the incorrectness of the societal implications which forces you to assess if those societal implications should exist. And that- that is what makes this relationship feel queer. That’s why there’s this undeniably different kinda energy radiating off of it. It’s that rejection of the traditional labels, the refusal to be put into a box, which forces it to be a-typical. But, why? Why does Pixane have this rejection of labels radiating off of it? Their ages, while being literally whack, are presented as being your typical teenage to young adult age romance. Their genders present as a typical hetero pairing. And it’s not like they don’t follow your typical cliche love at first sight plot. I mean, Pixal was pretty explicitly created as a generic love interest character. So, what is it? Why is this queer? Spoiler alert: It’s because they’re asexual.

So, what is asexuality? Strictly defined, it is a community of people who experience little to no sexual attraction to anyone. This is distinct from aromanticism, which is a lack of romantic attraction, and sexual engagement or urges which are their own separate boat, but often have overlap with asexuality. However, for our purposes, we are focused on just the sexual attraction part. You can think of it as the difference between finding someone hot and finding someone cute. That’s the distinction that made it click for me anyway.

Now, as a disclaimer, I am not going to be considering other queer interpretations of this relationship. Not to invalidate them, because of course they’re valid, but specifically because I feel there isn’t precedent for them in the text, and I feel there is for asexuality. This deep dive is particularly about validating asexuality as being queer, and so to do that we have to eliminate any other outstanding factors. People are extremely quick to pin asexual queerness to something else, and that in itself can feel invalidating, even if it’s only attempting to validate other communities as well. Asexual romance is so easily read as straight romance, that any queer undertones have to have an alternate explanation, because asexuality doesn’t seem like enough to cross the barrier. Yes, enby interpretations of Pixane are great, and fantastic, and I would die for your right to follow those headcanons, but to pin the in text queer vibes on the fact that they technically don’t have biological gender, despite having very clear presenting and unwavering genders in text seems like a real easy way to dismiss the asexual coding which is staring me in the face. While things like non-binary or aromantic readings validate communities who have immense oppression and are continually called fake or confused, which is insanely important, asexuality, especially as it stands apart from aromanticism, is often confused as not being a difference at all. You’re just pure! You’re just wholesome! You’re just so sweet and innocent! And yes… yes, I am, but also, it’s more than that. It’s fundamentally something different about the way my brain is wired, and I feel a need to defend the fact that it, specifically, is queer. And in no way am I trying to say that the aces are the most oppressed actually, I don’t want to start the oppression Olympics here, and if we were to, I would probably argue quite the opposite, but I am saying that there is oppression, and it comes from outside and inside of the community, and it is a thing. It’s a different flavor of thing that’s maybe not as severe, but also sits differently. Maybe it’s not as much a pressing thing as other things, but… it’s my thing. It’s what I feel. It’s something I can speak on. So, I’m going to speak on it.

Perhaps one of the largest factors asexuality has to offer is the necessary separation of romance and sex. The packaging of sexual attraction and romantic attraction is so ubiquitous that the term ace is often assumed to be referring to aro/ace people, despite there being a term for that… aro/ace! Asexuality is not an easy queerness to explain, precisely because of this deeply held integration. It’s not a difference of experience necessarily, it’s a lack of a certain experience. I’m not saying this is something you can’t understand, because, unless you’re aromantic, I know you understand it! You are going to be able to like and relate to and feel seen by asexual romances, because the main component it requires is that you have romantic attraction- which is most people. And so many people get confused when you point to an asexual thing and go “I get that! This! This is me!” Because they just respond with “You’re not special, I get that too. Is this supposed to be different?” And, yes, it is, primarily because everything else includes this giant other thing as well, which is sexuality.

When vegans get excited about finding a meal which is especially delicious and also meets their food restrictions, they get particularly excited. That doesn’t mean you can’t enjoy that same vegan meal- no doubt it probably tastes incredibly delicious to you as well. But you likely won’t get that same feeling of excitement, because you don’t live under the same restrictions as vegans do. That’s the same thing I feel when I see an asexually coded romance. I can enjoy the full meal without having to pick things out or ignore vital parts. I have no doubt that others can thoroughly enjoy asexual romances, but you’re going to have to look at it in context of all the dominant romance stories in the world to understand why it’s so different and special to me.

Now, have I cracked the code on asexual romance in media? No. I only have my own experience with asexuality to lean on, and the very limited discourse on the topic I’ve come across while discovering my identity. All of this is simply a theory based on my own thoughts and observations, but these are some explanations as to what might possibly be included in a framework for an asexually coded romance, at least to me.

So, what makes romance asexual? It’s not simply a lack of sexual suggestiveness. Any number of romances aren’t sexually suggestive, but still glaringly heteronormative- especially in children’s television. And it’s also not a lack of initial attraction, as that would throw Pixane out of the running for sure. Well, I have a few things which I feel may contribute to asexual coding of a romantic relationship, and wouldn’t you know, Pixane is a great example of all of them.

Asexual romance may, as many have remarked, come off as more innocent. When you shove all of the focus of characters onto the romantic, emotional connection, rather than any underlying sexual tension, things end up feeling extremely innocent to the layperson. You get the sort of old married couple effect. Two people deeply in love, who just sort of stare at each other in awe, and that others can comment on how cute they are. Again, asexuals don’t necessarily find anything hot. Cuteness is the main operative factor motivating their attraction, so it follows that their interactions would radiate that factor back at observers. The characters might in fact be very touchy, have sex, enjoy that physical touch, but that’s not at the forefront of anyone’s mind in the story. This is an aspect of Pixane that can be read very clearly. Their romance is quite easily described as pure and wholesome by all who have the pleasure of observing them. The way they interact with each other is extremely gentle and supportive, and their level of old married couple vibes is by far the highest of any pairings in the show (aside from perhaps the actual old married couple of Ed and Edna).

Asexual romance, I find to often be less conflict driven. Take the classic enemies to lovers plotline- it’s built on a tension between an innate irrational attraction, and a perceived logical personality conflict. While romantic attraction is certainly not always rational, from my understanding, sexual attraction is often rooted in factors that aren’t at all related to logical compatibility or personality. This means the enemies to lovers plot is primed to work much better when sexually charged, because it presents a clear path to create the hate/love conflict. Not to say that asexual enemies to lovers is impossible, or that asexual partners don’t have conflict between them, but that it is less of an obvious threat to incorporate into asexual romance.  Because there are less factors and layers of attraction to get involved in, there’s less room for conflict and contradiction between them. It is much easier to get tangled up in a situation with more strings. Pixane is a relationship which certainly doesn’t hold much internal conflict. The one disagreement they did have is solved quite neatly with basic communication skills in the middle of season 8. Most of their conflict comes from external factors which separate them or cause misunderstanding, rather than conflict from within the characters themselves.

Asexual romance also has the obvious potential to challenge traditional dating norms. Because there is no impulse to escalate things physically, it makes sense that the progression of an asexual romance would differ from traditional relationships where that escalation is expected. Your asexual romance is bound to get emotionally intense with each other quicker, or at least have it be the focus of their story, because there is no other facet to deal with. Asexuals don’t commonly have sexual fantasies for themselves, but rather romantic fantasies. Not to say that most people don’t have romantic fantasies, but… that’s all we’ve got. And when your impulse is ‘let’s get married, and then maybe I guess we can kiss’, it might seem like things are progressing out of order to the average person. While asexuals don't all hate physical contact or even sexual connection, it isn't an attractive or motivating factor in the same way it is in most romances, so even on a base level, the level of physical contact is likely going to be less than average. Pixane progresses ridiculously out of order. Zane is willing to split his soul for her- it’s only at this point that they romantically hold hands for the first time. It’s the emotional connection between the two that comes first, and all classic tangible symbols of affection and romance that are secondary. The most pronounced physical contact we’ve seen is a cheek kiss, and their most common type of physical contact is enthusiastic hugging (which I’ll dive more into later).

Additionally, because physical affection is more of an afterthought, it would also make sense for labels to come slowly. If you have an incredibly close personal, soulful connection, but you haven’t kissed yet, it makes sense for people around you to assume you’re just really close friends, or perhaps just crushing on each other still. Terms like “girlfriend” and “boyfriend” invoke rather physical tactile images, and so to attempt to apply them to an asexual romance isn’t necessarily wrong but may feel a bit off putting because of this dissonance. Again, it’s this dissonance between the romantic meaning of the word, and the sexual undertones which forces discomfort onto the viewer. Pixal and Zane have yet to kiss each other after years of dancing around each other’s obvious romantic feelings. It remains unclear if they even are in an active romantic relationship at all, or are still mutually pinning, as no labels have been given to their relationship in show. I have no doubt part of this is the lack of planned dates or physical affection which are common outward signals of a traditional established relationship.

A lot of the saucy flirting which accompanies many classic heteronormative romances can seem rather pointless to asexuals. I would venture to say that asexuals are likely more direct and up front with their emotional vulnerability and feelings, because that’s the connection which they are seeking to make. To dance around it with innuendo and mind games is rather unproductive in achieving the end goal. There is less of a pressure to “perform” romance, and instead just be honestly romantic, because the romance isn’t a prelude to sex, or physical affection, it’s the end goal in and of itself. To only pretend to do it is entirely pointless. All of this is likely going to result in a romance which puts less focus on the “game of dating”. I mean, can you imagine Pixane ending up in a Jaya style love triangle? It’s almost an absurd pitch to make, right? There is no performativity to the Pixane relationship, it is exactly as it appears at first glance. And when Zane attempts more traditional, cheesy flirting tactics like in Ninjago Confidential, Pixal is nothing but confused and annoyed by his attempts.

The most prominent example which I feel exemplifies the inherently asexual coding of Pixane applies to many robotic romances- and it’s the characters’ relationship with skin. A lot of sexual suggestion and tension is based on skin. The revealing nature of skin exposure, the feeling of skin on skin being a sexual touchpoint, skin is essential to the sexual experience in most instances. This is part of the reason I love writing romance but have yet to write a kiss between anyone. The sexuality of a kiss is inherently uncomfortable to write for me because you’re encouraged to lean into the physical feeling of the touch of skin. Robots bring to the forefront the idea of this physical contact because their skin is often not exactly skin, and that in itself gives a sort of de facto distance from sexuality. There’s a moment which happens repeatedly with Pixane, and shows up in other robotic romances, like Wall-E and Eve, which I feel highlights this essential separation from the skin of sexuality. Pixane and Wall-Eve both have the ‘clink’ moment, in which intimate physical contact is made, (in Pixane’s case, all of their many hugs) and accentuated by the sound of their metal skin meeting with a loud clink. This sound not only highlights their lack of skin but serves to suck any sexual energy out of the interaction immediately and leaves it purely with the romance intended by the action. It’s not uncommon for people to find the sound humorous, precisely because of how desexualizing it is. It highlights the couples’ incapability of indulging in sexual skin on skin contact, and instead the closeness and companionship the act of touching provides.

And this is why I feel robots are in fact a decent candidate for asexual characters if done properly. Robots being coded as asexual can be a very negative stereotype, particularly when their asexuality is explicitly linked to their lack of emotion and feeling- but media about robots has been trending more positively recently. In fact, robots, if used correctly, may actually validate asexuality explicitly. Robotic characters are often used to explore the idea of what makes humanity human. If we give these robots human-like enough traits, when do they become human? Are they perhaps the most human? And it seems like fictional consensus agrees that sexuality is not required to achieve human status. Stripping away the excess human emotions may be part of what makes robots asexual (or aromatic, if your robot is also incapable of romantic love). The medium of robot literalizes the disconnect that asexuals have with their physical bodies, most notably their skin, and serves to put additional distance between the character and sexual contact, at least in the traditional sense. I mean, think about it, if you want your robot to be sexual, you need to go out of your way to establish that it has sexual capability, because no one is going to simply assume that your fictional robot was designed with that capability in mind. Why would it be, unless that was its explicit purpose? In a way, robots are sort of de facto asexual.

Pixane is queer because it’s asexual, and it’s asexual because they distill down only the purely romantic parts of a romantic relationship. They’re able to do this, in part because of their individual characterization, but also because of their robotic bodies, which make the separation between romance and sexuality just that much easier. They highlight the necessity to separate romance from all of the convoluted sexual layers which often accompany it, and so come out feeling distinctly untraditional and subversive.

That's the theory, again, all hyper based on my own personal experience with asexuality, which is of course not all encompassing. I'd love to hear your thoughts :)

[intersex-questions]

"Can I identify as intersex if I have no intersex traits?"

"I want to be intersex but I'm not."

"Can I transition to be intersex?"

Questions and feelings like these aren't uncommon. The short answer is, well, no, you can't identify as or transition to be intersex. And, reasonably, many intersex people get frustrated and tired of perisex (non-intersex) people asking them this. But wondering these things, especially if you are experiencing distress or dysphoria over them, is completely okay. I would just like to say that I, as an individual, am okay with any questions of the sort and encourage them, but please do not go around asking any intersex person you find these sorts of questions.

Being intersex is an experience that one is born with or develops over time due to their own natural body and not by the influence of things like being on HRT for trans+ reasons. Some examples include being born with different genitalia than what's acceptable in the widely-spread understood (but false) binary model of biological sex, or experiencing different levels of hormones that are commonly associated with only one of the binary sex.

A lot of people, before realizing they're intersex and have intersex variations in their body, want to be intersex without fully understanding why. I used to be like this. I use to desperately wish that I could be intersex, as it would explain why my body was the way it was, and explain the experiences that I had had for so many years. It turned out I was intersex, and this explained why my body was different from other's!

However, if that isn't you, that's okay. Still, you can't label as intersex. Intersex is more of an experience than it is a label you can simply choose or not choose to be. Although, yes, people who fall under being intersex do not have to call themselves that if they don't wish, much of society at large will still consider them intersex. It is an important term for many to have as it allows them to find community, resources, and explanations to their lived experiences in bodies that are naturally out of what many consider "the norm".

However! The good news is there ARE labels and communities for individuals who "want" to be intersex. (Although avoiding the phrasing wanting to be intersex is important as one cannot become intersex, thus the phrase is generally accepted as offensive.)

Let me introduce you to the term altersex.

Altersex is an umbrella term that can be defined in a few different ways, although I'll be using a personal definition, as many definitions online are unreliable.

Altersex - An umbrella term to describe having or wanting primary or secondary sex traits/characteristics that do not align with the binary sex model that a significant portion of society has adopted. It is primarily used by those who are not intersex and are trans+ and wish to or transition specifically to have a body that does not fit the aforementioned sex model. It can also be applied to fictional characters whose sex is not intersex but still doesn't match the binary sex model and/or human binary sex model.

The term absolutely is open to individuals who wish to use it to explain how their body has changed due to trans+ transitioning or due to being intersex! It's simply not as common, but anyone can use it. An example of someone who might use it in that way could be a trans+ person who has been on testosterone HRT and experienced clitoromegaly because of it, and wishes to have a label/term/community that explains and expresses how they no longer fit binary sex standards.

Some common examples, feelings, or reasons as to why someone would label as or fall under the altersex umbrella includes:

Someone who was born with a vulva/vagina, but wishes to have mixed sex characteristics and wants a vulva as well as a penis

Someone who desires to remove all external genitalia of theirs (gender nullification)

Someone who wants to have genitalia that is nonhuman, such as fantasy genitalia like alien genitalia

Someone who wants to have breasts but have a penis

There is an infinite number of ways to be altersex! Again, it's an umbrella term. Some common queer identities that might align with altersex experiences though include:

Being bigender

Being genderqueer

Being cisgender but desiring to physically transition (significantly seen with femme gay men/achilleans and butch lesbians/sapphics)

Being xenogender

Being nonbinary

Being gendernull

Being genderfluid

Being multigender

Being genderfucked

Being both transmasc and transfem or FTMTF or MTFTM

Of course, that isn't exhaustive! Moving on from that, here are some labels underneath the altersex label.

Salmacian. Salmacian is a label I see most commonly and I think is most relevant to this post. Salmacian refers to one who desires to have mixed sex characteristics. People with salmacian or salmacian-adjacent experiences often do ask if they can transition to be intersex, as there is not much awareness around the label and community. Salmacian is one of the most common altersex experiences. Aphrodisian is an alternate but less commonly used term. Salmacian is also incredibly common of an experience amongst bigenders, and vice versa. Other more common alternate terms for it are bigenital, bisex, or ambisex. Here is a link to some salmacian resources!

Xenogenital. I think xenogenital is what I see most next to salmacian. Xenogenital is a broad term that refers to anyone who desires to have nonhuman sex characteristics or traits. This is very common among those who are xenic/xenogender and those who are otherkin. Some examples include:

Wanting alien genitalia

Wanting animal genitalia (often referred to as faunagenital)

Wanting plant genitalia (often referred to as floragenital)

Wanting genitalia that can change, morph, and/or retract (often referred to as morphisex)

Wanting cyber/digital genitalia or mechanical/robotic genitalia (often referred to as cyberex and machinex respectively)

In conclusion...

Although, no, if you are not intersex, you cannot become or transition to become intersex. Some people wish or desire to be intersex because it explains their intersex experience without them realizing, but for many people, this isn't case. And that's okay! Altersex is a label/term/community that embraces anyone who wishes to have or currently has genitalia and sex traits/characteristics that don't fit the commonly used binary sex model. Altersex has labels/terms underneath it, such as salmacian/bigenital and xenogenital, which are most common.

Additional notes

Some people claim being altersex is inherently intersex. This is completely wrong! Wanting to have a body that fits how you feel and makes you happy in it is not wrong. The only thing that is intersexist is if you phrase or frame being altersex as "desiring to become intersex", as intersex is a lived experience and something you cannot become. If you realize that you are altersex, and people try to give you a hard time for it, ignore it. If it's online, simply block them.

You also never owe anyone information about your body, regardless of what they try to tell you. You do not owe strangers information on if you are intersex or perisex. On if you are altersex or not. Even people you know are not owed this information. Just like how you never have to explain your queer identity to someone, even if they feel like you owe it to them, and even if you know them, you don't. You are you, and what parts of you you share with others are up to you!

I believe that the intersex and altersex community have a lot in common and many shared experiences. I think that, not only do the two communities relate to each other, but, in some cases, people will be both intersex and altersex at the same time.

If anyone has any questions, sees any errors with this post, etc., please let me know! I'm always happy to correct or edit wrong information/typos, and I'm always welcome to any questions that are in good faith. I am not open to discourse about debating the validity of any labels, identities, or experiences. I am not open to debating intersex experiences. My blog is primarily for intersex people, but it's absolutely welcome to anyone with any questions, especially to intersex-adjacent experiences.

[inevitably-johnlocked]

I’m so sorry if this question is ignorant or stupid I really just want to understand so I can become educated. When someone is asexual would they still gain something from reading explicit fic scenes? Again sorry if I’m ignorant

Hey Nonny *HUGS*

SO SORRY it took so long to reply to this one... Kind of started and then it got forgotten, and I am sorry for that. No better time than Ace Awareness Week to help you understand!!

So, short answer to your question, is YES, SOME aces do, whether to facilitate in self-pleasure, or because seeing their faves happy, or as placeholders because some aces take pleasure-by-proxy, or a variety of other reasons, it just simply makes some of us happy. You'd be surprised how many of those smutty authors are actually ace themselves. It's one of those funny misconceptions that aces are all woobie-uwu-innocent-pure-thoughts-only magical creatures, and I'm here to shatter that illusion... Aces are some of the smuttiest-minded people you will ever meet. Why, I have no idea, maybe it's because we don't fantasize about sex the same way allos do that we can come up with increasingly hornier ideas? LOL No idea.

The thing about asexuality is that it's a HUGE spectrum, and no one ace is exactly the same. A sex-negative ace might get something out of reading smut because it's not involving them. Or they might not at all. Same with sex-positive/neutral aces. It's ALL a matter of what makes us tick.

BUT here's where I go into my LONG answer, and get you REALLY into the Ace Lore™.

I want to introduce you to the microlabel of Aegosexuality (formerly autochorisexuality), which is a term that loosely translates to "sexuality with oneself". The expanded definition, from the Sexuality Wiki, bolding is mine:

It is [...] a disconnect between oneself and a sexual target/object of arousal; may involve sexual fantasies or arousal in response to erotica or pornography, but lacks desire to be an actual participant in the sexual activities therein.

Aegosexuals are known to:

Become aroused by sexual content (at times) without wanting to personally engage in sexual activities.

Masturbate, but feel neutral or repulsed by the idea of having sex with another person.

Fantasize about sex (with varying frequency), but envision people other than themselves, and/or view it in third person, as if watching it on TV, instead of imagining it in the first person, through their own eyes.

Predominantly—or exclusively—fantasize about fictional characters or celebrities in place of people they know personally.

Identify as asexual, feeling little-to-no sexual attraction to people though enjoy masturbating (with varying frequency), are aroused by sexually explicit content, and/or fantasizing of such.

[/end quote]

====

Basically, smut turns them on, but some aces don't want to engage in the smut for-reals. This microlabel makes it ESPECIALLY confusing for newly-figured-out-aces because there hasn't been a lot of information about asexuality's huge spectrum until recently. Aegosexuals can initially believe that they AREN'T ace, BECAUSE they get turned on by porn or smutty stories, but then they're SUPER confused because the idea of having sex themselves is appalling or undesirable. It's a bizarre contradiction, understandably, to outsiders, but it makes COMPLETE sense once an ace figures this out, I promise you.

This is the microlabel I myself fall under. It's not from any trauma or past problems or medical issues. It's just me. That's it. And because of the confusion that this sexuality can bring, it often takes us a LOT longer to have ourselves figured out. For me, it was an accidental stumbling upon the "autochorisexual" label (before it became Aegosexual) and reading up on it that EVERYTHING fell into place. Before that, I thought I was maybe demisexual. After learning about it, I felt okay FINALLY calling myself ace, that I finally found the "right fit" for me. It was the piece of the puzzle that I was missing. I felt really liberated of my self-doubt after that.

And, of course, aros have their version as well called Aegoromantic, which is exactly the same but in a romantic sense.

Here are some more resources for Aegosexuality, if you'd like to learn more about this lesser-known branch on the spectrum:

What Does It Mean to Be Aegosexual? (Cosmopolitan US || November 24, 2022)

WHAT IS AEGOSEXUAL? MEANING, HISTORY, AND USAGE. (Gayety.co ||July 11, 2022)

History of Aegosexuality (The Michigan Gayly || February 1, 2021)

EVERYTHING YOU NEED TOO KNOW ABOUT AEGOSEXUALITY (Live Love LGBTQ+ Blog || October 27, 2017)

VIDEO: 5 Signs You Might Be Aegosexual (Lynn Saga, YouTube || August 6, 2022 || 6m20s)

VIDEO: What is Aegosexuality? | Aspec 101 (Slice Of Ace, YouTube || July 15, 2022 || 3m54s)

VIDEO: Asexual Identities: Aegosexuality (Ace Dad Advice, YouTube || May 22, 2022 || 12m27s)

====

AGAIN, I'm SO sorry I put this ask off for SO long, but I'm glad that I did, so that I could educate you guys on my brand of Asexuality during Ace Awareness Week!

And, finally, no offence taken at ALL! I LOVE educating y'all about stuff I learned through my journey, and you were very respectful in your ask :)

Hope you are well, Nonny, and hope you're still here to see this 🖤💜

[interstellarsystem]

Endogenic Systems and Experiences in the Neurodivergent Community

We tend to stay mostly on the fringes of syscourse nowadays without directly interacting with it too often but I'm going to post this more broadly and less focused on our specific instance of this because community-wise I think it's important to talk about.

Endogenic and other non-traumagenic systems are so commonly excluded from so many neurodivergent-safe spaces where they would otherwise be able to gain knowledge about the disorders they might have, share experiences and coping strategies with peers, or at least have a sense of community that is so commonly valuable to disabled and/or neurodivergent people. In a lot of cases, even people who only support non-traumagenic systems get shoved out.

[Continued under the readmore as it's long.]

This obviously harms non-traumagenic systems, but I have to point out that when people sit there and say "we care about REAL disabled people!", I have to say.... Do you? Because if you did care about those with mental illness, physical disability or neurodivergence, you in my mind wouldn't exclude them based on something unrelated to the topic itself which might even be something as small as holding an opinion that other people get to be the judge of their own experiences. You can say that you care about "real" disabled people, but what about when a traumagenic DID system also has a tulpa that they consider just as valid and real as their alters? What about when a system labels themselves as quoigenic because in reality, you owe no one the knowledge that you are vulnerable and traumatised? What about when a system starts out as endogenic but gains so much trauma later on that they develop dissociative symptoms?

We're quoigenic because while yes we are diagnosed with DID:

DID does not have trauma in the diagnostic criteria so our diagnosis doesn't mean anything by way of origin. Nontraumagenic is not the same as nondisordered the same way that traumagenic isn't the same as disordered.

We cannot remember a time before we were plural so we cannot say with accuracy what our actual origin was.

We have headmates we consider to be from both traumagenic and endogenic origins and it feels unfair to pick one.

We don't owe anyone a quick little "hey, we have trauma!" flag on our pinned post which can easily paint us as a target. This is the exact reason we don't share our triggers online--it's not safe.

You don't owe anyone personal medical information including your diagnostic history, your trauma history or lack thereof, your current medications or how many times you've been in a hospital. That is your business and yours alone to decide who you share it with. It's downright dangerous to share some of it, especially so publically. So who is anyone online that clearly isn't your specific medical practitioner to decide whether your experiences are real enough to allow you into spaces meant for a usually completely unrelated thing? Why would someone holding the opinion that endogenic systems get to decide what labels they use be denied access to spaces just because they support people with differing beliefs and/or experiences?

If we as a system with multiple disabilities want to go into a space for people who are schizoaffective because we need others who won't immediately jump on the ableism train when discussing something we're diagnosed with that has so much stigma, should we be denied that just because we don't label our origin with a clear-cut "we are traumatized!!" label? Should we be denied access to spaces because we don't want to sit around and smile while parts of our system and other members of our community are called fake and evil and whatever else they come up with? It's so common in spaces for people with disabilities to be exclusive to traumagenic systems and people with an anti-endogenic mindset that people don't realise they're not only hurting the endogenic community, but literal chunks of their own community itself.

I can't even begin to understand the reason why.

Endogenic systems by just existing do not cause harm. They're not like a transphobe you would not be safe around by default of having a label. Not every nontraumagenic system is a saint but if you took any communtiy and called everyone in it the equivalent of an unproblematic holy angel, you'd be lying. People are bad in every community, some worse than others, but the nontraumagenic system community literally just wants to exist--and yes, sometimes a nontraumagenic system (or supporter of such) does have dissociative symptoms, or maybe they have autism, or maybe they're physically disabled. Should they be not allowed access just because of the way they chose to label their system, or their opinion of people picking their own labels for their personal identity?

What exactly is the reason they're so excluded everywhere? I'd try to assume that this level of exclusion (to the point of endos being on DNIs next to transphobes and racists) would mean there's some real harm being done on a community-wide scale, but even when looking for it there isn't any explanation we've been able to find. "They're fake" is all we seem to see which has no actual backing whatsoever. "They're harmful" is another but.. How? We might be looking in the wrong places, but we have never seen an actual explanation for how nontraumagenic systems cause harm as a community just by being themselves.

At this point, I have to wonder how many people who say "we care about real disabled people!" are just covering up their "we care about socially acceptable disabled people who I understand and/or do not find cringey" sentiment instead. Being neurodivergent should never be about fitting into tight little boxes--it's part of the whole point of having a community like this. You're not the majority, and that's okay. So why are we dividing the disabled community into boxes too?

Of course, this doesn't only apply to ND spaces. LGBT+ spaces are similar and even more divided from the concept of being a system that it makes even less sense to block nontraumagenic systems from entering the space. How does their system origin relate to their LGBT+ identity? Sometimes it can, but should a trans person be excluded from a trans space because they have a friend who is an endogenic system and they support them fully?

Overall, the main point is that it makes no sense whatsoever to be anti-endo in general, let alone so violently anti-endogenic system to the point where you hurt members of your own community due to it. Sometimes from something as simple as them supporting endogenics alone. Your safe spaces aren't actually safe if you exclude a nonharmful group who also belong in that space due to having a personal identity or opinion different to yours. If you want somewhere to be a safe, inclusive space, it should include everyone as long as letting those people in won't cause harm. People who are seeking to cause harm (racists, transphobes, etc) obviously do not belong in a safe space because they seek to harm others, thus making the space unsafe. But people who just want to be themselves without harming anyone should be included in your space if they fall under whatever it may be topic-wise. Even the "cringey" ones. Even the ones who don't quite make sense to you or have "contradicting" labels. Even the ones who use labels completely differently to the way you do. And even the ones who are uninformed or misinformed but trying their best to learn. Your safe space is not safe if it excludes those who do not follow your every single mindset and thought without any deviation.

[ponett]

with the fallout of bandai namco's idiotic "it's up to interpretation" bs, do you think that it's possible to enjoy queer media made in a corporate environment in addition to independent works? is it even worthwhile to attempt making queer media in a corporate environment? i find it special how well the g-witch production team managed to tell the story they wanted even with the challenges and pressures they faced, but i have to admit that independent works like slarpg are always going to more completely tell queer stories. as someone who has resonated with both slarpg and g-witch, i was curious to know your perspective.

i'm probably less cynical about this than a lot of my peers are - not that i can blame anyone for feeling cynical about queer rep from corporate-owned media. (we've been through so many First Ever Gay Disney Characters at this point, and lord knows blizzard loves to tease that another overwatch character might be gay every year or so as a PR move.) unfortunately it's just extremely hard to get something like a full season of an animated series funded and produced independently, so the artists looking to enter these fields and pour their hearts and souls into meaningful queer stories as a full-time job don't have many options

going indie gives you theoretically endless creative freedom to tell your stories without corporate censorship, but it's also a massive gamble. only an extreme minority of indie creatives in any medium are actually able to make a living. the fact that i came out the other side of slarpg's development with enough money that i can keep being a full-time indie instead of being in massive debt makes me one of the lucky ones. and even with my modest success, i sure as hell don't have the money to hire a whole team, which limits the scope of what i can make. so i can't turn my nose up at the queer people writing disney channel cartoons where they can't say the word "gay" out loud. they have health insurance, i don't. for most people, what i do is simply not an option

with the corporate-produced Queer Stories i enjoy, i'm often able to squint and see what the creatives were trying to do, wishing that they could have done more while understanding that they probably had to fight tooth and nail for what's there

in the realm of children's animation in particular, i'm thankful that the people working at these studios ARE fighting for more, because it means that kids today have so many more positive queer stories to relate with. i didn't have a single gay character i felt i could relate to until i read scott pilgrim at age 16 and saw wallace wells. before that, i felt so alone in the world. i denied who i was for years because it felt like there would be no place for me. i didn't know anyone openly gay in real life, growing up in the south, and in fiction gay people either existed as the butt of a joke or not at all. the fact that queer kids are now able to see people like themselves in so many shows means something, even if we still have a long way to go and the big studios continue to be a major obstacle

on the subject of g-witch, i'm honestly unfazed by the statement from bandai-namco. i guess i wish they could've let suletta and miorine kiss, but like... the text of the show is extremely blunt about them being a couple by the end. it's not up for debate. and it's not like a gundam series having a meaningful story in spite of the wishes of the toy-producing overlords is anything new, this is just our latest example

all that being said, i do think people should branch out more and explore more weird indie shit if they want more wholeheartedly, openly queer stories. people gotta suck it up and embrace more outsider art instead of only valuing things with studio-level production values. start looking at ren'py visual novels, rpg maker games, obscure webcomics, zines drawn in sharpie, artists on bandcamp who aren't signed to a label, all that jazz. maybe part of the reason why i'm not more fazed by the state of affairs with corporate-funded fiction is that i'm constantly surrounded by furry artists who are telling their own little gay stories

[glisten-inthedark]

Ngl I’m so torn between gay Mike and bi Mike for a few reasons

I want good bi rep with Mike and internalized biphobia is as real and important to represent as internalized homophobia, so I think it would be so awful for the Duffers to write that into the story

Also I almost think it would be more “palatable” to the general audience because I think a lot of people would be upset if they thought Mike was “”””””leading El on”””””” (as if he’s not just a confused teenager in the ‘80s who’s scared of being labeled a slur) and would be more accepting of a narrative where Mike fell out of love/romantic feelings for El

Tho considering all the biphobia that surrounded Bridgerton recently;;; ugh

But on the other hand, I feel like gay Mike makes a ton of sense narratively, the idea that it’s always been performative heteronormativity would make sense especially since in season 1, Eleven looks like a boy and is mistaken as a boy by multiple people including my aunt who despite being told she’s a girl over and over kept calling her “him” 🫥, it makes it feel like Mike subconsciously felt she was someone acceptable to crush on because she looked like a boy but was a girl so it was “safe”

It’s honestly really hard for me to put into words why gay Mike feels like it fits so well but yeah I want bi Mike pretty bad too

Hi!!! How are you doing?

I actually agree with all of this, and I am also torn between Mike being bisexual or being gay.

Honestly, the whole matter of how the audience is going to deal with all of this is something that I've been going over in my head. I realized that regardless of how they go about it, it will be complicated for people to digest, and I don't even think that it will be for lack of trying (not for the non-homophobic/biphobic asshats anyway).

Unfortunately, many people are unaware of things like internalized homophobia/biphobia, especially if they aren't queer themselves, or are at least in touch with the community, so yes, I think Mike being bisexual might be a little more "palatable" as you so aptly put it, rather than him being gay, because I also think there might be a lot of misconception about him and El, so yes, there might be people getting upset because they would think he "led El".

There's so little bisexual representation in this day and age that it'd be awesome to see it in such a big TV show.

However, as you mentioned as well, there's a lot of biphobia going around as well, literally people dismissing it outright or acting as if it's not real, so it's like we say in Brazil: "Se correr o bicho pega, se ficar o bicho come" which roughly translates to "Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't" kind of situation.

So I'd be happy with both outcomes, although I also think him being gay makes a lot of sense from a narrative perspective, I'd be happy with either scenario.

Thanks for the ask and I hope you drop by again (:

[sparklemaia]

Dear Maia, I just saw your substack comic about your growing disconnect from your body and journey to getting top surgery, and I found it deeply touching. As someone who doesn't feel the need to apply firm labels to themselves and their gender identity, there was something very comforting about seeing your journey, seeing you come out on top and feel at home in your body even if it means not having a simple answer. I feel as though nowadays young queers are expected to have perfectly defined answers about their identity and not stray from the chosen label (sometimes even ironically). Gender and sexuality aren't shameful or taboo topics, but must I wear it on my sleeve? Must it be obvious, neatly arranged for consumption? Isn't it enough to feel at peace with my body, whatever that might mean for me? Though I might be entirely wrong, I feel like I don't see enough stories of self discovery where the newly discovered territory can't be easily mapped for others to read. And that doesn't mean the place itself is any less alive and beautiful! I wish you the best of luck & a quick recovery from your top surgery. 💕

Right! Like, I know I don't neatly fit into any of the boxes we've got, and "nonbinary" as a catchall for "everything that doesn't fit in Box A or Box B" can sometimes feel restrictive too! So I'm just vibing I guess 😜. But oh wow my relationship with my body now that I'm tit-free is so much better, regardless of what gender terms it might suggest or elicit.

I'm very supportive of the right to bodily autonomy for *everyone*, without people needing to fit a script or follow the rules✌️ Babes if you have a body that developed breasts and you want top surgery for any goddamn reason, you deserve it. Full stop. (Actual access is another whole barrel of monkeys, but if you're asking yourself if you're *worthy* the answer is unequivocally yes.)

I also don't see many stories like mine, that stray from the more common binary transition experience (valid! important! but not mine!) which is one of the reasons I choose to share my journal comics. I hope they help others feel less alone ❤️

[bi-lesbian]

heres the thing with how queer labels work: not everyone uses them the same way. and maybe the following might be a bit obtuse of an explanation, but sometimes i work better with analogies so i hope it makes sense to others 😅

lets say youre boxing up some stuff. its mostly clothes, but also some toys and a few miscellaneous items were added in as well. (if its unclear, these "contents" are the substitution of "the specifics of someones identity" for this analogy).

the what: some people would label the box just "clothes." they know whats all in there, its not just clothing, but they just want something simple to note the majority of it. or maybe some of the other items are rather personal, and theyre not comfortable with just anyone seeing the box knowing of its existence.

some others might go more specific so its more clear whats all inside, labeling it "clothes + toys." or may even go into more specifics so its completely clear whats inside, "shirts, ties, stuffed animals, and aunties knickknacks."

some may instead just leave the box unlabeled, because it doesnt particularly matter to them to have its contents noted. or theyre not even entirely sure what one of these weird knickknacks even is, and dont feel like trying to pin it down for a label.

the where: theres also some that would rather label the box by what room it belongs in, so theyd put "bedroom" on it rather than describing whats inside.

the who: then it also comes down to if someone is labeling the box for themselves, or to let someone else know what it contains because theyre giving it away. someone would decide then if they want to go into more specifics, leave it as something simple for easy communication, or go without labeling and only maybe divulge its contents once someone specific has shown interest.

basically, labels can have different purposes.

sometimes someones identity labels are just meant for themselves, as a way to express themselves or trying to understand more of themselves and their feelings.

or maybe their labels are more about the community that they surround themself with, where they find their home.

or the labels could specifically be for communicating to someone else what they are, for if theyre looking for a potential partner.

there could even be a multitude of other ways not specified here that people may use labels for.

and, all of this was a convoluted nap-fueled thought to explain to others why some people use labels like "lesboy." boy and lesbian are just the labels on the box, a shorthand for all the various contents inside. theres quite likely more stuff going on in that gender box of theirs, like multigender stuff, genderfluidity, nonbinaryness, using terms like boy bc theyre gnc/butch, or otherwise, but boy is the prominent part the person whats to label.

i hope this can also put into perspective some reasons why people use some mspec lesbian terms, because some use both bi and lesbian as labels for their communities, or lesbian is their main label they use when telling others what theyre interested in, even if it may not encompass all of their attraction, and many many other reasons. its all about how they try to understand themselves and/or what they want to communicate!

[ilynpilled]

also, in her converation with Ned, cersei outright TELLS him that Jaime would kill Robert if he knew how Robert abused her (fuck robert i hope he's rotting). and Robert knew it too which is why all his bruises were generally weren't on her face where people, specifically including Jaime, could see.

This is her exact quote: "Jaime would have killed him (Robert), even if it meant his own life"

that's probably one of the reasons why she doesn't tell him. she was in an awful, awful situation and it reflects the situation of so many other abuse victims across the world. it's not fair that she should have to keep this from her own family and worry about what her brother would do, but if he DIDN'T do anything...what kind of a person would he be? just look at Aemon the Dragonknight as a prime example

regarding this post: link

yeah thats the quote they refused to take at face value when almost everything about his characterization indicates that it would be the case.

i think when it comes to the discussions of much of this the dissonance comes from not confronting that this society refuses to acknowledge marital rape as rape. i do not have the quote at hand (@/georgescitadel might have it) but george himself has expressed that marital rape as a concept doesnt exist in medieval society. that is why it makes sense that while jaime is aware that robert “claimed his rights”, he does not recklessly murder him for it in rage unless cersei gives the word (again, we already know he is ready to do it after he sees that robert is disrespecting her by cheating on her and proceeds to ask her if she wants him dead for it. but like you pointed out, cersei understands that if he saw evidence of physical abuse he likely would not ask for permission and potentially get himself killed.) this is because arranged marriages are treated as a norm in which conjugal rape and a man claiming his rights is not really acknowledged or understood (more like confronted tbh) as rape. this is an integral aspect of the patriarchal domination thats present in westerosi society, its woven into its very fabric. women are placed into a role of subordination, again, it is robert’s “right.” and jaime too is unable to conceptualize it as sexual abuse on the level of rape. hence we get quotes like this:

like we know and understand that cersei was repeatedly raped by robert. we know she didnt make anyone kill her. we know what jaime is saying and thinking here is inconsistent and makes little sense if he believes that she was raped.

that other passage suggests that jaime does not fully grasp or know this. and in general society doesn’t for the most part, including most of the victims themselves. “claiming his rights��� is not referred to as rape. robert also knows that what he is doing is wrong, especially the part where he is hurting her (theres also the layer of the code of chivalry being completely contradicted), but he refuses to confront it in multiple ways, and i dont think even he fully acknowledges it as rape either even though i refuse to believe that he is not aware of it. cersei’s right to label him a coward. same with ned in that very conversation, he even sees and knows that robert physically hit her, heard her say that she can scarcely bear him touching her, and yet he asks: “a thousand other women might have loved him with all their hearts. what did he do to make you hate him so?”, and cersei also doesn’t give the answer: “he repeatedly raped me.” jaime understands rape as terrible, he shows concern towards brienne, and risks personal harm (and gets it too since he is kicked unconscious because of it) saving her from it, and it is an act driven by empathy, and he even ironically acknowledges that rape can leave someone broken in a way that does not show on the outside. he executes pia’s rapist too, sets a precedent among his father’s men, and recognizes that she’s “scarred” where it does not show: “That’s all she is, a little girl in a woman’s body, scarred and scared.”

and re the present: while i have a sympathy for jaime in the sense that the betrayal that he was confronted with shatters the delusion that he made immense sacrifices for and defined most of his life atp, and the fact that it makes him feel that he was not actually loved by her as well as recontextualizing his most horrible decisions, he should be showing more consideration and empathy (and i am not saying that he is obligated to die for her either. he isnt) and put in the effort to actually place himself in cersei’s shoes and navigate these blindspots that he has (he has the capacity to, again: “they will leave her a cripple too, but inside, where it does not show”). right now, he is extremely bitter, violently even, and can be selfish and misogynistic as hell about it, and i obviously believe that that is something that has to be recognized by readers for what it is.

but still, regarding the rest, i also think ppl dont acknowledge that because of how medieval society operates there is a very skewed perspective and understanding of certain things and how that affects characters. even with rhaella, jaime is disturbed by the physical abuse:

like he doesnt use the word rape like he does with brienne and the bloody mummers, but he obviously hears and sees that the abuse thats happening to rhaella is horrid and hurts her, and feels a need/obligation to protect her. this is why it is not inconsistent at all that jaime would recklessly murder robert without “permission” even if it meant his own life if he saw evidence of physical abuse, but does not do the same for the marital rape/him claiming his rights. in this society it is not viewed as a violation of rights because women do not really have these rights in these circumstances. their purpose is to marry and bear children. rape is mostly understood and recognized as “low born criminals violently raping women”, “knights and soldiers violently raping women when their blood is up” etc, not “nobles in marriages raping their wives when they claim their rights”, or “coerced rape occurring every time nobles use brothels” etc.

and, as you may have noticed, there’s a strong “you’re hurting me” motif with all of this, because no matter what westerosi society normalizes to maintain patriarchal hegemony, it is obviously all an utter violation of human rights that deals immense harm and trauma to women.

[frooogscream]

And stop calling Con queer he’s just a white gay men from an extremely colonialist country who never bothered to check his privileges! There’s nothing queer about him!

To pre-phrase this: You don’t need to bother sending more of these unhinged messages, at this point it’s pretty clear that you’ve completely lost the plot and I’m not gonna answer to further asks on this topic.

We do not know if Con is gay (hence using the broader term of queer is extremely appropriate here), we only know from himself that he is part of the queer community and from a ("I just look straight") T-shirt he wore that this is in regards to his sexuality not his gender identity.

Gay and queer are not mutually exclusive terms like you are pretending here, there are a lot of gay men who consider themselves queer. If we use the commonly used queer as a more inclusive way to say LGBT+ then that by definition includes all gay men (unless they specifically say they don’t want to be labelled as such). If we use the more political and/or queer as in ‘at odds with cis heteronormative society’ then there are as well many many gay men who fit into that category.

Con personally also does fit the "political" definition of queer, since he is very openly and loudly supportive of trans people, calls out shitty anti social and racist politics in his home country, (as much as you guys love to completely ignore all of this and comment about the one single time he liked a post by a Zionist four years ago when the topic of the post wasn’t Palsatine/Israel instead) has posted ONLY in support of Palestine, directed the talk towards queer right and what we can do to keep them on convention panels etc. etc.

A person being privileged in one area dosnt erase their belonging to a marginalised community or that they have potentially experienced discrimination in other areas. And yeah him being a middle aged white gay/bi/pan/whatever man in the UK might mean that he has a relatively "easy" life compared to other parts of the community NOW. Do you know what else it means? It means that in his early twenties he witnessed the hateful crusade of Thatchers government against queer people, section 28 (that wouldn’t have directly impacted Con anymore at that age) didn’t happen in a vacuum, it was born from years of political fear mongering that framed gay men as dangerous and perverted! It means that Con was about 15 when the AIDS epidemic devastated the queer community and in its wake didn’t only brought death and the loss of you loved ones but also a giant wave of homophobia! I’m not even taking into consideration personal experiences of homophobia (and let me tell you as someone who has friends in the UK, 40 years ago people were beaten up with baseball bats for "looking gay") that Con maybe has. There probably is a reason that he only publicly came out at age 56! I HATE nothing more than young queers (because if you’re cisstraight dear anon, then fuck off so much, this would make it so much worse) policing the "right way to be queer" for older people in the community or invalidating their experiences. Frankly the only reason I’m publishing this ask is that I hope even the last clown sees how incredibly ignorant the "Con does queerness wrong"/"Con being kink positive/having dirty humour/showing his body is predatory" -people sound.

[genderqueerdykes]

if you don't mind answering, could you explain what mtftm/ftmtf means? asking bc i'm someone who is afab, possibly intersex, and once i started testosterone i've started feeling like i'm transfem and am transitioning to being a butch enby. does that make sense aldjsks

anyway if those terms mean what i think then i think ftmtf might fit my situation?

sure! it sounds like you have a multitransitional identity, i've met a lot of people who have followed transition paths similar to this.

MtFtM is male to female to male, and FtMtF is female to male to female! i've met afab, amab, and intersex people who identify with these terms. i've made friends with a couple other MtFtM folks lately who identify with it for different reasons than me! the folks ive met who use it aren't intersex but for their own personal reasons, whether it be that transitioning to female was not for them, or that they feel as though they want or need to transition into manhood, some identify so strongly with the feelings and experiences that transmascs and men have that they adopt the label, or even that transitioning to female gave them a greater appreciation for manhood. there are many other reasons, but these are a few that i've heard from personal friends!

i identify with the term because i'm intersex and was born AMAB, forced to switch to AFAB after birth and forced on to estrogen HRT as a teen, then i realized whatever they were doing wasn't right for me and was making me feel even more dysphoric and uncomfortable, so i switched gears to transition back into masculinity. the tF part of my transition was not consensual, but it is still a vital part of my life's timeline because it changed a LOT of things about my body against my will. i likely would not have anywhere near as much breast tissue as i do now if it were not for forced transition

now, on the less dramatic side of things, there are maaaaaanyyyyy folks ive met out there who consider themselves multitransitional. ive noticed a very cool phenomenon where someone begins transition and then it helps them gain appreciation for another gender they may have previously felt ambivalent or even dysphoric about. i think sometimes in transition when we change certain things about ourselves we find uncomfortable, it opens the doors to being more open minded about other identities.

if for whatever reason you feel as though you are transitioning in that direction, that's more than an appropriate term to use for yourself! after HRT, a lot of things can change. i think your transition path makes perfect sense to me. sometimes someone's transition has multiple stops along the way, and that's okay. your transition doesn't have to follow a conventional path, as long as you are going in the direction you want to go in, you're doing the right thing for yourself.

there are also the terms transfemasc or transmascfem to describe multitransitional paths as well!

feel free to ask any other questions you may have! i'm happy to help!

[sevenrs]

been seeing interest crop up for a plural interpretation of grey wind/chasing wind, or making plural iterator ocs. this is great! as a system myself, i would like to offer some guiding questions and tips to non-systems to help out in their endeavors. please remember that i am one system and plurality varies VERY HEAVILY among people. other systems are free to comment and add their own tips. just dont turn this post into syscourse

i will use gw/cw as the most prevalent examples but this applies to any oc as well!

- alters are their own people in a lot of cases, not just "personalities". ask yourself, how does gw differ from cw? when presented with the same situation, how do each of them react? do they agree with each other or not? either way, what are their reasons?

- systems are rarely comprised of just two alters. it is not impossible, but very rare. most people notice plural symptoms at around 3 alters and people will on average have between 8-15 alters (but more is very much not unheard of!). think about how many alters gw/cw would have on top of each other

- alters may have different pronouns, sexuality, and ways they want to present themselves from each other. how do gw/cw and other alters differ from each other in this way, if at all?

- if gw/cw's physical body changes to represent who is fronting, was this an ability they had before realizing their plurality? in our world, we cannot change how we look outside of clothes and makeup. if gw/cw do not possess the ability to change physically, do either of them or any other alter feel uncomfortable or even dysphoric looking at their physical body?

- alters' relationships may vary heavily on the same person. how do gw/cw feel about a specific person? how are they the same or different? is one alter in a whole different kind of relationship with someone than another?

- how comfortable is gw/cw with telling others about their plurality? do only they know? their close friends? local group? anyone they come across? plurality is often personal, and is not a singular decision for any one alter in a system to make to tell others. it can be difficult for non-systems to understand what plurality is like (and in our world, cause mockery) so they may think it is easier to stay quiet about it

- plurality happens because of several different conditions. there is did, but there are also ospd-1a and 1b. i would highly recommend doing your own research on these different types of plurality. they each have different effects on memories, emotional state, even how defined the alters themselves. again, look into it

- if gw/cw have memory problems, do they have a way to get around it? private broadcasts? pearls? scratching on the walls? how do they talk to alters not co-concious with them?

- some systems may use role labels to identify themselves as having particular jobs to help/protect the system. these are roles such as host, caretaker, guardian, traumaholder, etc. do your research on this one. do any of these roles apply? or do gw/cw forgo these labels? (personally, we only use the term "host")

- headspace is a place in the mind where alters "live" (it's not a real residence, but it feels that way) headspace may be small, only representing co-conciousness, or very large, giving every alter a more "tangible" place to stay if not fronting. or headspace might not exist at all! (this is most common in systems who just found out about their plurality). what does headspace look like to them? keep in mind, headspace can really look like anything. for me at least, it looks mostly consistent. a few things may change about it or it may expand, but it's not like imagination where anything happens if you think about it

as a disclaimer i am not going to go in depth about trauma or sources in this post. it can get very personal very quickly. a general way i can put it is think of a long term source of stress and/or abuse that may be present in your iterator's life. handle the subject with care.

the best way to learn about the experiences of plurality is to ask people who are systems. as long as you are given consent, come in with genuine curiosity, and be as reasonable as you can, most systems will be okay with questions! it is like any other identity

a side: other ways to make plural iterators?

iterators do not share human anatomy or physiology. they will never perfectly be able to represent plurality like we have it in our world

but the unique characteristics of iterators can lend way into creative ideas that are similar to plurality! (but never, i want to stress, NEVER the same)

notably, several puppets in one can. if you remember that the body of the iterator is the structure, and the puppets are like the face, then you have several faces, personalities, people, in one body. my immunerators play around with this idea and i am sure there are other ways to get creative!